The Aaron Rodgers performance thread

[HardRightEdge]

Roll your eyes if you must. You say it's a myth. But I've heard ex-NFL players say Brady has taken less. Who am I supposed to believe? I'm not saying you're wrong necessarily, but I haven't seen any conclusive evidence. To some extent I suppose it's a judgement call. Like Rodgers, it depends to some extent what you think Brady's value is.

But this article says Brady agreed to below market deals in 2013 and 2016. There is no shortage of articles that say Brady has taken less. If it's a myth, it's a well perpetuated one:

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2018/8...t-2018-serious-bargain-blake-bortles-ahahahah

However, the way things are going Bortles is not going to see that money. If he manages to stick this season with only $4.3 mil in cap savings he probably won't make it 2020. And if he makes it to 2020 he's not likely to earn the $12.5 mil in incentives in this deal.

Cousins' 3 year, $84 mil deal is the better example. With $31 mil in dead cap and no cap savings in year 3 (that year is fully guaranteed), he's pretty much a sure bet to be playing that season. The peculiarity of this contract is if next season the Vikings are convinced he is their franchise QB, that $31 mil will be renegotiated into a long term contract with a signing bonus reducing the cap hit in that season whereas if he is still in "prove it" mode or they want to move on, they will pay that $31 mil and then see what happens because they will not have a choice.

Either way, if Brady gets another year added at some point for 2020, it's pretty much a lock that Cousins will have put more cash in his pocket over the 2018-2020 period than Brady.

Throw Garoppolo's deal into the mix, but he's not secure past 2019 where his 2020 dead cap drops to $4.2 mil and the cap savings jumps to $22.4 mil. But all of these kinds of competing deals with high levels of speculation and projection are a recent development. Captain's point is valid that when you add up cash-in-pocket over the years Brady is at the top of the heap. It's his 2016 two-year extension for 2018-2019 that looks cheap relative to Cousins' deal.

Before these recent developments, I think security was being confused with the actual cash paid over time. Brady's been signing shortish extenstions and a series of renegotiations where the end point of his current deal has not been so far in the future which goes to less security. I could be wrong, but that 2016 extension putting him under contract for 4 years at that point was his longest in a decade. In the final analysis, he may not have been the highest paid in terms of average over the length of the contract, but shortish extensions keep him fairly current while long term contracts like Rodgers' in 2013 started to slip behind the curve.

But when you look at deals like Cousins' deal, fully guaranteed, there's not much doubt he'll be making more than Brady over a 3 year period. What happens for him after that is anybody's guess.

 

[gbgary]

anyone who listened-to/remembers the presser knows how rodgers characterized his deal. it's not team friendly as it bumped up "market value" ($28-30m) by 3.5+%. the "market value" thing is kinda stupid too. he should've been slotted with the other old guys (ben, brady, brees...$25-26) and probably would have been had the Packers waited and had any brains. they had ALL the leverage too. $33.5m! it was a horrible miscalculation. it's like they forgot his age, recent injuries, diva-ness, and they'd have seen him coming off a throwing-arm injury. the cap situation would be much better. the difference is enough to add/afford another good player.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

anyone who listened-to/remembers the presser knows how rodgers characterized his deal. it's not team friendly as it bumped up "market value" ($28-30m) by 3.5+%. the "market value" thing is kinda stupid too. he should've been slotted with the other old guys (ben, brady, brees...$25-26) and probably would have been had the Packers waited and had any brains. they had ALL the leverage too. $33.5m! it was a horrible miscalculation. it's like they forgot his age, recent injuries, diva-ness, and they'd have seen him coming off a throwing-arm injury. the cap situation would be much better. the difference is enough to add/afford another good player.

or enough to **** off your best player

While I agree with you and said it many times before the contract was done, I would have preferred waiting to extend Rodgers until after the 2019 season. However, Rodgers didn't seem excited about that, nor did the Packers want to risk pissing off their best player.

So here we sit, we have the highest paid player in the NFL, coming off a very mediocre season and an almost completely new coaching staff. We can say "would have, should have, could have", but none of that changes the fact that it is what it is and Gute just needs to figure out how to build around #12.

 

[OldSchool101]

Ahhh. The old “Market Price” thing.

I will never forget ordering the Fish special at “Market Price” about 20 years ago at a particular restaurant. It came with standard rice n a vegetable.
They charged us $40 a plate!

It’s a HOAX I’m telling you it’s a HOAX!

Remind me to tell you all the story about how these teenagers ran over my prime rib and I chased them on my bike for about 3 miles! (Absolutely true story)

 

[rmontro]

Brady's been signing shortish extenstions and a series of renegotiations where the end point of his current deal has not been so far in the future which goes to less security

I think you might have solved the mystery about why there is disagreement over this. Brady signs a contract for slightly less than market value. But it's only a short term contract, so by signing multiple short term contracts his pay stays more current with the inflation of player salaries. That way he saves the team money in the short term, but ends up still making a lot of money in the long term.

The short term stuff may not be all Brady's idea either. It wouldn't surprise me if Belichick liked the short term contracts so he could get rid of Brady sooner if the opportunity arose (except Kraft stopped him). That could work with any other player, for that matter. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that the contracts Belichick gives out are shorter than average. That way he doesn't get "stuck" with overpaid, underperforming players (like Matthews, say).

Of course, Belichick has the advantage that there are always players wanting to come to New England to get a ring. The Packers are much more likely to need to "lock in" their stars.

 

[Packer Fan in SD]

I may have no idea of how to figure this out, but going by Spotrac, in the last 10 years, Rodgers has cash earnings of $184,929,000
Brady has cash earnings of $146,000,000 in the same time.

Going off of the last 8 years Spotrac shows
Rodgers at $169,829,000
Brady at $121,500,000
If I am off, than I stand corrected. But if not, there is a huge disparity. Huge.

And that is cash earnings.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

anyone who listened-to/remembers the presser knows how rodgers characterized his deal.

Yet you haven't been able to post a link to it or another poster has confirmed what you're talking about.

I may have no idea of how to figure this out, but going by Spotrac, in the last 10 years, Rodgers has cash earnings of $184,929,000
Brady has cash earnings of $146,000,000 in the same time.

Going off of the last 8 years Spotrac shows
Rodgers at $169,829,000
Brady at $121,500,000
If I am off, than I stand corrected. But if not, there is a huge disparity. Huge.

And that is cash earnings.

The combined cap hit over that period is way more important though.

 

[Half Empty]

How much of a cap hit can a player deposit?

 

[Patriotplayer90]

anyone who listened-to/remembers the presser knows how rodgers characterized his deal. it's not team friendly as it bumped up "market value" ($28-30m) by 3.5+%. the "market value" thing is kinda stupid too. he should've been slotted with the other old guys (ben, brady, brees...$25-26) and probably would have been had the Packers waited and had any brains. they had ALL the leverage too. $33.5m! it was a horrible miscalculation. it's like they forgot his age, recent injuries, diva-ness, and they'd have seen him coming off a throwing-arm injury. the cap situation would be much better. the difference is enough to add/afford another good player.

He's also the only reason they've had any success at all in recent years. He was paid well below his worth for several years. He knows this, we all do. And we would all be frustrated if we had so much on our plates because of the surrounding incompetence. And he surely has absolutely no trust that the extra money he's receiving would be well-spent elsewhere, judging by these bad contracts and our track record in FA.

This old-school mentality regarding football players is ridiculous. These guys are successful millionaires, not high school kids. If your organization is a mess and you want to convince a star pupil to stay, you are going to have to pay. A completely different situation than in NE, the most well-run organization in all of sports, and the perks which come with that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

He's also the only reason they've had any success at all in recent years. He was paid well below his worth for several years. He knows this, we all do. And we would all be frustrated if we had so much on our plates because of the surrounding incompetence. And he surely has absolutely no trust that the extra money he's receiving would be well-spent elsewhere, judging by these bad contracts and our track record in FA.

This old-school mentality regarding football players is ridiculous. These guys are successful millionaires, not high school kids. If your organization is a mess and you want to convince a star pupil to stay, you are going to have to pay. A completely different situation than in NE, the most well-run organization in all of sports, and the perks which come with that.

Excellent point and it is this part of NFL contracts that drives me nuts. Players contracts are made based on projections involving many things, with past performance being a big part of it. Money is guaranteed, Cap hits are taken, yet not one play has been executed by the player on that new contract. In the end, the team can benefit by an underpaying contract and an over performing player on that contract or vice versa.

Rodgers may not have earned his money last season and because it is such a huge contract, it stands out to some people. However, you could go down the entire roster and find players who definitely underplayed their contracts by a higher percentage than #12.

This will continue to happen as long as contracts continue to just be a guess as to what a players future value will be.

 

[HardRightEdge]

I may have no idea of how to figure this out, but going by Spotrac, in the last 10 years, Rodgers has cash earnings of $184,929,000
Brady has cash earnings of $146,000,000 in the same time.

Going off of the last 8 years Spotrac shows
Rodgers at $169,829,000
Brady at $121,500,000
If I am off, than I stand corrected. But if not, there is a huge disparity. Huge.

And that is cash earnings.

Those numbers are seriously skewed by Rodgers' 2018 signing bonus whereby his cash pay in 2018 was $67 mil compared to Brady's $15 mil.

Using spotrac numbers, if instead we look at the 7 year period of 2011 - 2017, Rodgers is at $103 mil cash vs. Brady at $106 mil cash. Roethlisberger is at $112 mil, E. Manning at $118 mil and Brees at $132 mil.

Or if we look at the 9 year period of 2009 - 2017, dating from Rodgers first Pro Bowl season, Rodgers is at $118 mil cash vs. Brady at $131 mil cash. Roethlisberger is at $126 mil, Brees at $151 mil. and E. Manning at $172 mil.

It's clevery fashionable in some parts these days to complain about Rodgers in one way or another, but in the argument of whether he was overpaid relative to Brady (or any of the other usual suspects) on a cash basis through 2017, it's a case of barking up the wrong tree (or howling at the moon if one prefers). It's either a case of Brady and Rodgers being underpaid or the others overpaid. Manning being the cash king over the 9 year period is a case of being overpaid in the more recent years. Two Super Bowl wins in New York has its price, I suppose, including a whopping $54 mil paid way back in 2009-2010.

There is little question the landscape changed significantly with the 2018 contracts, particularly Cousins guaranteed $84 mil for 2018-2020 with cash for 2018-2019 of $54 mil compared to Brady's cash for 2018-2019 of $25 mil including a $5 mil "misc" or "other" amount which looks like an incentive provision. Brady's 2019 number is pending another renegotiation.

 

[HardRightEdge]

The combined cap hit over that period is way more important though.

All cash paid eventually counts against the cap sooner or later. Given the numbers I posted above, and how little cash is in Brady's last year of his current contract in 2019, there is little doubt Brady has been underpaid on a cash or cap basis relative to the usual suspects over the last decade, just not Rodgers, through 2017 in any case.

So, I amend my earlier statement that Brady's issue is one of security not cash. That statement was true relative to Rodgers up through 2017, just not the others.

What happens going forward with Rodgers and the salary cap, and how we view this most current contract (and any subsequent renegotiation) come the conclusion of 2023, remains to be seen.

 

[HardRightEdge]

A completely different situation than in NE, the most well-run organization in all of sports, and the perks which come with that.

You cannot overlook what NE has done on the defensive side of the ball. 31 DCs, or at least the ones who play the Rams next year, are going to be poring over that SB game tape to figure out what the f*ck Belichick did to shut down the robo-QB and his handler. In other seasons, NE's defensive play has built through the season and through the playoffs. Against Atlanta there was the mid-game adjustments and shutdown. The goal line pick against Seattle.

And it sure helps when you get a break like the "tuck rule" call for one check mark on the resume.

 

[gbgary]

Yet you haven't been able to post a link to it or another poster has confirmed what you're talking about.

because the Packers own the content and it's no longer available. geesh

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Given the numbers I posted above, and how little cash is in Brady's last year of his current contract in 2019, there is little doubt Brady has been underpaid on a cash or cap basis relative to the usual suspects over the last decade, just not Rodgers, through 2017 in any case.

Brady will still be paid $15 million in cash in 2019 counting a total of $27 million against the cap. Both numbers are slightly higher than Rodgers'.

because the Packers own the content and it's no longer available. geesh

Lame excuse.

 

[rmontro]

Players contracts are made based on projections involving many things, with past performance being a big part of it.

Or if we look at the 9 year period of 2009 - 2017, dating from Rodgers first Pro Bowl season, Rodgers is at $118 mil cash vs. Brady at $131 mil cash. Roethlisberger is at $126 mil, Brees at $151 mil. and E. Manning at $172 mil.

Bearing in mind Pokerbrat's quote above, since Brady has been around longer than Rodgers (and has been successful at an unprecedented level during that time), you would expect Brady to have made more money during that time. He's been established longer.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Bearing in mind Pokerbrat's quote above, since Brady has been around longer than Rodgers (and has been successful at an unprecedented level during that time), you would expect Brady to have made more money during that time. He's been established longer.

You have to realize that Brady is six years older and Rodgers was the most efficient quarterback in the league over the period though.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You have to realize that Brady is six years older and Rodgers was the most efficient quarterback in the league over the period though.

Add to that the continued rise and escalations in salaries. What was the going rate for a QB of his caliber when Brady signed each of his contracts? Timing can play a role and we saw that with Rodgers jumping on the QB pay train at a very opportune time for himself.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Bearing in mind Pokerbrat's quote above, since Brady has been around longer than Rodgers (and has been successful at an unprecedented level during that time), you would expect Brady to have made more money during that time. He's been established longer.

And yet you quoted my passage where I showed that Brady had made more cash money that Rodgers over the 9 year period through 2017.

9 years is a long time, most of which was after Rodgers was well established as an elite QB. His second contract had nothing to do with "projections" if by that we mean more upside.

It's worth noting, even if this concept goes nowhere in this thread, that there is more to winning championships than just the QB, this most recent instance writ large. QB value judged solely on championships overlooks so many factors as to be highly flawed.

 

[gbgary]

Add to that the continued rise and escalations in salaries. What was the going rate for a QB of his caliber when Brady signed each of his contracts? Timing can play a role and we saw that with Rodgers jumping on the QB pay train at a very opportune time for himself.

i blame the Packers here. they didn't have to go along with it. they had the leverage. 33.5 was a huge leap. this league is going to have to realize the qb can't eat up that much of the cap. mlb is just now learning with long-term contracts. with other position's salaries starting to come up it leaves even less to build a team. la, dal, kc, phi, etc better figure this out. they're qb's are still on rookie deals. keeping qb caps under 30 is going to be mandatory pretty soon. and there the Packers will be in 2020 with a 37 year old sitting in the high $30s. ridiculous.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

i blame the Packers here. they didn't have to go along with it. they had the leverage. 33.5 was a huge leap. this league is going to have to realize the qb can't eat up that much of the cap. mlb is just now learning with long-term contracts. with other position's salaries starting to come up it leaves even less to build a team. la, dal, kc, phi, etc better figure this out. they're qb's are still on rookie deals. keeping qb caps under 30 is going to be mandatory pretty soon. and there the Packers will be in 2020 with a 37 year old sitting in the high $30s. ridiculous.

While I agree, teams will continue to find themselves in a Catch-22. You have an elite QB, who is an obvious difference maker, do you resign him at market value or do you let him walk and try to find a cheaper option?

While I understand what you are saying about Rodgers and after last season (using hindsight), your points look stronger, but had Rodgers played up to his old level, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. Same with Nick Perry, had he kept playing like he did in 2016 and stayed healthy, his contract looks awesome.

You and I are on the same page in regards to the fact that it would have been nice to be able to wait on #12's new contract, since his old contract still had 2 years left, but that doesn't seem to be what Rodgers or the Packers wanted to wait and do. Although, I am not too sure if the numbers would be THAT much different today as they were back when the contract was signed.

These are the risks you run when signing contracts for future performance, based off of past performance.

 

[swhitset]

Bearing in mind Pokerbrat's quote above, since Brady has been around longer than Rodgers (and has been successful at an unprecedented level during that time), you would expect Brady to have made more money during that time. He's been established longer.

That’s not logical. Salaries continue to go up... I’m pretty sure that the worst QB in the league today probably makes more than Bart Starr did over his entire career.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That’s not logical. Salaries continue to go up... I’m pretty sure that the worst QB in the league today probably makes more than Bart Starr did over his entire career.

Agreed and I would add to that the QB position has seen the biggest jump in salaries over the last 10 or so years.

 

[gbgary]

$33.5 wasn't market value. 28-30 was...and that's for guys younger than rodgers. Packers exploded market value here and for a still good but down-trending older qb on top of that.

 

[rmontro]

That’s not logical. Salaries continue to go up... I’m pretty sure that the worst QB in the league today probably makes more than Bart Starr did over his entire career.

Of course it's logical. The longer a star quarterback is in the league, the more money he tends to make. Has Rodgers ever signed a contract for less money than the previous one? As you point out, it's true that there is salary inflation, but star players also tend to make money as time goes on because they've proven their worth. That may not be true if the athlete is no longer producing, but that isn't the case with Brady obviously, he just added a sixth ring.