1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Jennings' contract question...

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Headrush, Sep 6, 2012.

  1. Headrush

    Headrush Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    26
    Ratings:
    +4
    I know there is another Jennings thread, but this one is a different type of discussion.

    I have read recently that Jennings will hope for around $11 million/year similar to recent elite WR contracts. Franchise tag is worth 9.5-9.7 ish I believe. He has been quoted as saying he'd be disappointed if he was tagged

    My question is this:

    Is there a way to renegotiate this last year of his contract to add a few million now so that it will balance out to the $11 million if we franchise him next season? Wouldnt that money count toward this year's Cap? Do we have the cash to do it? Id hate to see him go and thought this might be a creative way to satisfy him for a bit so we can hammer out a long term deal. I understand he might go and thats business, but what kindof options are there for us if we need to get deals done with AR, CM3, and others in the near future??
     
  2. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    We should have sacrificed this years "extra" cap to resign him with a front loaded contract for 2 or 3 years. After all, we sign the rest of the team in 2014/5
     
  3. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,732
    Ratings:
    +2,826
    Not a big deal but this is precisely the discussion going on in the other Jennings thread. Whether or not Jennings is a Packer next year and/or thereafter has everything to do with his contract.

    Is there a way to renegotiate Jennings contract? Of course: If the Packers tell his agent they'd like to pay him millions more than this last year of his contract requires Jennings would agree, as would any player. But that would be one of the most foolish things Thompson and Ball could do as it would accomplish absolutely nothing save drain the team's reserves and increase this season's cap number. Jennings will be disappointed if he's tagged next year because he wants a long-term deal done. While he'd no doubt appreciate extra money this season, he still wouldn't have that long-term deal and the guaranteed money it would include. And if Jennings "has" to play for the franchise amount next year, even if he's "disappointed" his motivation will be playing well enough to secure the long-term he wants, whether it's the Packers or another team. IOW, his "satisfaction" means nothing as it's in his best interest to play as well as he can this season - and next even if he's franchised. BTW, the problem with extending Jennings has nothing to do with time pressure (no need to "satisfy him for a bit"); in fact many times players are franchise tagged while a long-term deal is worked out and then the tag is withdrawn.

    As to options available to get deals done with other stars, like every other NFL team, the Packers can extend a player anytime that player and the team agree to the terms of the extension. The Packers can use the franchise tag on any player, whether the player likes it or not. And the Packers can manipulate contracts to manipulate their cap (usually with regard to the guaranteed money) to their greatest advantage as long as the player agrees.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,565
    Ratings:
    +645
    in fact many times players are franchise tagged while a long-term deal is worked out and then the tag is withdrawn.

    And haven't the Packers actually done just that in recent years past? I cant think of who, but I feel like that's happened.
     
  5. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,704
    Ratings:
    +2,126
    Agree with paragraph 2.

    It should be noted its a two-way street in a renegotiation. The player is given security in the here-and-now; the team expects a discount in return. We don't know what was offered, if anything, but it does not sound like Jennings is asking for less than market..."don't call me unless the offer is close to what we're asking" or something to that affect. Jennings recent comments are the first step in a familiar pattern...the water is starting to be poisoned. Any further comments from Jennings will reinforce the argument he won't be signed.

    Interesting to see Rodgers' "we wish him the best, we cannot pay everybody" comment...not the stumping we've seen in the past for JJ and Wells. He's maturing as a businessman; any concerns should stay in-house.

    Rodgers may wish to avoid the situation Brees found himself in...he was not extended under the management argument that other players needed to be secured in order to win. Then they slapped him with the franchise tag for 2011, and then AGAIN for 2012 without any urgency to get a contract done. Brees was pissed. He won an arbitration case in July that bumped his franchise pay from $16.3 mil to $23.5 mil. Only THEN did NO make an offer Brees was happy to sign.

    Expect moderator to merge threads.
     
  6. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,565
    Ratings:
    +645
    Oh, come on HRE. It's the dance. It's business. When has Jennings ever given the indication that he would be one to poison the water? He deserves to get paid. If the Packers can afford to keep him, they will be the ones to pay him. If not, he'll get paid somewhere else.
     
  7. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,704
    Ratings:
    +2,126
    I think I've given some indication I know it's business. Negotiating in the press is bad business.

    With the Packers in recent years, renegotiations have just happened...no prior press quoting anybody about it. Those cases where the player starts grousing have ended in departure.

    These things would all work out better if the players took the same tack as Driver..."I'll take a pay cut to stay." :eek:

    I'm not sure what "deserving to get paid" means exactly. It's not like this contract is some kind of "thank you" for past service...it's about what you expect in the future. That's business. It's also about who else you might lose in order to keep him, and whether you have a suitable, less costly replacement in mind.

    I started talking about Jennings possible departure around mid-season last year at the GBPG forum...the consensus was I was nuts, it's impossible. Well, here we are. Too many factors have been adding up. Jennings recent comments add to the list. I won't say it won't happen, but at this point I'd put the odds at no better than 50/50.
     
  8. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,565
    Ratings:
    +645
    Fair enough. I can't argue with that. But I do think Jennings has earned the benefit of the doubt.
     
  9. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    GJ already gave us one bargain contract, I doubt he'll take the paycut again. He only has so long to make his money.
     
  10. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,565
    Ratings:
    +645
    And just because he wants to get paid doesn't mean he's going to pull a Desean Jackson.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. mradtke66

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    444
    Ratings:
    +171
    It's quite simple really. I love Jennings. He's our best receiver. However, we have 4 big contracts about to come due in Rodgers, Matthews, Raji, and Jennings. We have a limit because of the cap so we can't pay everyone what they're worth.

    From that list, Rodgers and Matthews are 'essential.' We are not the same team without them. Raji to a lesser extent, just because of where he plays and how many snaps plays.

    Without Jennings, we aren't quite as scary, but we'd more or less be the same team.
     
  12. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,911
    Ratings:
    +984
    Jennings will get the tag next year. Maybe TT takes a look at wr's in the early rounds in next years draft. If he does? then that will be a strong indication Jennings will probably not be resigned. Rodgers is in the mold of a Tom Brady to where he can make even the most average receiving core look stellar and maybe that is why we could afford to loose Jennings if it came down to it.
     
  13. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,732
    Ratings:
    +2,826
    I agree Jennings is their best WR although Nelson is closing that gap. I’ll bet Jennings drew more double teams than any other Packer WR by a significant amount last season and that certainly helps others be more effective. IMO the biggest wildcard in all of this is how long is Rodgers willing to wait? His contract is up after the 2014 season and if he were willing to wait that long, extending Matthews, Raji, and Jennings would be a lot easier. But Rodgers is the most valuable player on the team and by NFL standards he is underpaid. And if his deal isn’t extended, he’ll be more severely underpaid next season and even more so in 2014. He deserves a raise.

    The problem with tagging Jennings next season is the entire tag amount would apply to the 2013 cap. If they want to extend one of the other three next season, that nearly $10M would make it more difficult. If they want to keep him, extending him would be “cheaper” cap-wise next season: A $25M signing bonus in a 5-year contract would count $5M against the cap each year.

    One other thing: IMO the 2010 BJ Raji is a “must keep” player; the 2011 version was the best DL on the team but that’s not saying much. This isn’t a contract year for BJ but he’s got something to prove this season.
     
  14. mradtke66

    mradtke66 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2011
    Messages:
    444
    Ratings:
    +171
    I put Raji in the second-tier, but only because of his position and playing time. The only two irreplaceable players on the roster are Rodgers and Matthews. Once those two are taken care of, we can worry about Raji and Jennings.

    I'm the least worried about Raji, as he did have a down year last year and being the 9th pick and being being before the lockout means he got paid well. Rodgers, re-signed when he did and Matthews picked in the 20s, are underpaid versus their production. They will break the bank.
     
  15. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,565
    Ratings:
    +645
    You've got to wonder with Raji though, how much the Cullen Jenkins loss affects Ted's attitude toward the way he values our defensive linemen. Once bitten, twice shy, ya know? Maybe in light of why happened after we lost Cullen makes Ted reassess how valuable Raji is to this team. Raji is less important than Rodgers, but imagine the black hole we have at defensive tackle if he walks. And Ted doesn't exactly have a sterling track record for drafting DT's. I'd bet the house on us re-signing Raji. He's a proven commodity. And the chance of us drafting someone who can fill his shoes are somewhere between slim and none.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Alex

    Alex Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    407
    Ratings:
    +213
    I know all these guys want to get paid, but I think if I was a pro I'd want to take less to stay on a team you know is good rather make more than anyone else on some team that may not make the playoffs. I guess I'm not in that situation but it just makes more sense to me.
     
  17. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,704
    Ratings:
    +2,126
    Raji's thing could be the snaps.

    By the time a guy gets into a second consecutive year taking 80% of the snaps sumo wrestling every play with no relief in sight, you might expect him to start saving something for the 4th. quarter. If that's the case, the intensity in each snap gets a little diluted. We'll see if he gets some relief, and if so, whether the intensity improves.

    Even so, though his pass rushing showed a fall off in 2011, his run stopping did not appear to be diminished. Besides, decent NTs are not hanging off trees.
     
  18. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,565
    Ratings:
    +645
    I hope the Packers can "afford" to reduce his snap count.
     
  19. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
  20. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    This years draft has the potential to be pretty deep at NT though.
     
  21. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    808
    Ratings:
    +384
    For an NFL team to expect a discount in exchange for security is laughable. Players and their agents aren't naive.

    Great point.

    Sure, from the franchise perspective, but you already know it's a business...

    Deserving to get paid means receiving an acceptable amount of guaranteed money for future performance in an industry where teams are under no obligation to honor the entire term of their contracts.
     
  22. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,704
    Ratings:
    +2,126
    Not really. It happens with some regularity. Here's an example reported just yesterday:

    http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Cardinals-sign-Daryl-Washington-through-2017.html

    For every Larry Fitzgerald consuming the negotiation headlines, there's a Daryl Washington (or T.J. Lang or Desmond Bishop for that matter) that goes by with a whisper outside the local media.

    The key is to lock the guy up early...a guy who's shown he's got the right stuff but hasn't earned the rep yet for the post season awards, which often lags a couple of years at the so-called non-skill positions. It works especially well with second contracts for guys who were not first round picks. Or even an Aaron Rodgers.

    Third contracts for star players, like the Jennings situation, are more difficult. They're older, but want to be recognized for past performance.

    I gotta get the face-icon thing down. I thought that shocked looking face would indicate I'd be surprised anytime a guy offered to take a cut. :eek:
     
  23. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,704
    Ratings:
    +2,126
    Well, if Raji doesn't rebound and we draft one, you'll know where we're heading.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  24. jaybadger82

    jaybadger82 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2012
    Messages:
    808
    Ratings:
    +384
    "Security" is a terrible euphemism for jumping at guaranteed money in a profession where careers can end in a single play.

    Jennings jumped at a similar offer a few years ago and it represented a great value to the Packers. Based on production, he was underpaid. Why be so accommodating this time around? -I don't hold this against him. In free agency, Jennings would probably have a number of suitors and his value would be set by the highest bidder. That's not payment for past performance, that's market value.

    We're largely in agreement. Except, in a league where the deck is so clearly stacked against players, I don't feel a need to take such a condescending and management-friendly tone in describing rational business decision-making by an individual player.

    The Packers will probably steer clear of Jennings because large contracts present large risks. I don't hold this against them, either.

    It will suck to see him in another uni, though.
     
  25. HyponGrey

    HyponGrey Caseus Locutus Est

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    3,758
    Ratings:
    +1,030
    Seems Driver will be getting that second year after all... BTW, I don't like this years reciever crop. LOTS of 6'2 guys running in the 4.5's. I'd like to see an extra 2 inches or 4.45. Really hope Abbrederis winds up here if he comes out this year (I think he's eligible) 6'2 with some jets.
     

Share This Page