D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
No idea at all. Maybe he's asking for too much money.
Losers
- Thread starter FrankRizzo
- Start date
No idea at all. Maybe he's asking for too much money.
yooperpackfan
Cheesehead
Okay, thanks.
I'm still holding out hope but it's dwindling.
Carl
Cheesehead
The one thing good about Peppers' contract is that the guaranteed money isn't outrageous like in Byrd's new deal.
Clemons does seem like a guy who could help for not a lot of money.
Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
Oshkoshpackfan
YUT !!!
Clemons had a meeting with the Lions on friday the 21st, don't know how it went.....
OP
OP
FrankRizzo
Cheesehead
It depends.
How much money did Jamarcus Russell, Justin Harrell, Rich Campbell, Tony Mandarich get?
There are more busts in first rounds than from free agency.
Carl
Cheesehead
Those are before the new rookie scale. Can't even give a guy a lot even if the team wanted to now.
Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
Shawnsta3
Cheesehead
The last two Super Bowls Green Bay won, they had signed two big-name free agents just a few years before those Super Bowl victories. Coincidence?
OK, let’s take it up a notch. When the Packers signed Reggie White, the league was just coming out of a bitter antitrust court battle with the players, which the league lost. Many teams in the league viewed participation in free agency as a betrayal of their partnership with each other. There was a reluctance to participate in free agency because a lot of owners couldn’t force themselves to accept the defeat they had suffered at the hands of the players and Judge Doty. The Eagles were beyond smug and arrogant in their refusal to even give White a contract offer. Ron Wolf took advantage of a circumstance that doesn’t exist today. Charles Woodson? The Raiders were a mess when Woodson signed with the Packers. The Raiders were so screwed up that losing Woodson in free agency traumatized them to the point that a few years later the Raiders signed Nnamdi Asomugha to a ridiculous contract that guaranteed to pay him at the average of the five highest paid quarterbacks in the league or nearly $17 million, whichever was higher. If you were going to pick a team’s pocket, the Raiders were the team. Those days are over, too.
Derek from Plymouth, MN
Vic, don’t get me wrong, I completely agree that draft-and-develop is the way to go, with occasional patches in free agency if you can find value. My question is a number of players that have signed new deals with other teams have indicated the Packers had expressed interest. Is there a possibility the reputation of the Packers has preceded them and players aren’t taking their interest seriously?
Let me paint a picture for you: It’s March and you’re a prize free agent making a visit to Green Bay. Your wife is with you on the visit. She looks around at the dirty snow and then gives you that no-way look. Your agent wants a contract that’ll guarantee $28 million, which is what Byrd got. Your agent tells you you’ll lose about $2 million of that amount to state tax. Your next visit is to one of the teams in Florida, where there is no state tax and March is the most beautiful month of the year. All of that is why draft-and-develop is a very good philosophy for the Packers, and a lot of teams are at the same disadvantage. You have to do what you have to do. Given the state tax rate, the Packers have to overpay by seven percent to be able to compete in free agency with teams from states with no tax. I think Packers fans need to get real about free agency. You can find guys in free agency that can help you, but you better not have to compete for them with other teams.
http://www.packers.com/news-and-eve...the-rest/4994bc6b-b3a4-435f-bd26-01c5cc70f478
Free agency tends to go in waves. That first day wave where crazy deals are signed. the first week or so wave. second level players are signed. Then the 3rd wave occurs after the draft because teams dont want to sign anyone til they have a better idea of the roster.
Oshkoshpackfan
YUT !!!
State Tax, City Tax, and Elsewhere
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia have NFL teams, eighteen of which charge state income taxes. Then there are nine cities that charge taxes of their own. No player will file the maximum number of returns since none of them will play in every state. Even so, a guy who lives in one state (with a state income tax) and plays for a team in another state, can easily end up filing one federal return, a stack of state returns, plus several city returns.
This year, two NFL games were played in London, where the top tax rate is 45 percent. Players will receive a foreign tax credit against the amount paid in the United Kingdom, but only up to the top tax rate in the United States, which is 39.6 percent. One of the teams that traveled to England to play against the Jaguars was California's San Francisco 49ers. California has the dubious distinction of charging the highest personal income tax rate, now 13.3 percent. This means whatever salaries the 49ers earn will be reduced by roughly 60 percent in combined taxes (45 percent to the United Kingdom, 13.3 percent to the state of California, and 1.45 percent federal Medicare tax). Ouch!
Jock Tax Explained
The jock tax is calculated by the number of "duty days" a player spends in a game function, such as practice, training, playing, or meeting, beginning with spring training and ending on the last day of the season, including playoffs. Even an injured player who travels with the team has to pay jock tax, whether he practices with the team or not.
Generally jock tax is determined this way. Let's say a quarterback earns the average of $3.84 million in 2013 and is deemed to have worked 200 to 210 duty days over the course of the year, not counting the playoffs. His salary will be attributed to each state by the number of days worked there. At tax time, therefore, each state gets its share of his tax liability. You can see why these states love the jock tax. Not only do the games themselves bring revenue, but the visiting players spend their own money while they're there and, on top of that, they owe taxes for the privilege of playing in those states and also in certain cities. It's a sweet deal . . . unless you're the taxpayer.
Tennessee doesn't have state income tax, but it has what's known as a "privilege tax," which is a flat rate of $2,500 per game charged to professional athletes who play in Tennessee (regardless of income, up to three games for a maximum of $7,500 per year). NFL players, however, aren't charged this privilege tax on NFL income, whether they're Tennessee residents or visiting teams.
California
In California, which has three NFL teams – the San Diego Chargers, the San Francisco 49ers, and the Oakland Raiders – duty days and taxable income add up fast.
In 2010 alone (the last year for which figures are available from the California Franchise Tax Board), NFL players who were California residents paid more than $24 million to their own state tax coffers. And visiting NFL players paid in close to another $16.4 million in jock tax.
If you consider all professional sports – and California is a haven for pro sports – in the same year, the state tax authorities collected a total of $171.7 million in tax revenue, more than $70 million of which was attributable to jock tax from visiting athletes. Mind you, that was prior to the recent round of tax hikes in the Golden State. In fall of 2012, California's highest state income tax rate was raised to 13.3 percent, retroactive to the beginning of the year.
Of course, not every state followed California's policy of raising personal taxes. Wisconsin, for example, dropped its top tax rate from 7.75 percent to 7.65 percent for 2013. That's a sweet deal for Green Bay Packer quarterback Aaron Rodgers. With total compensation from the Packers of $40 million in 2013, the tax rate reduction will save him a cool $40,000 in state tax, without lifting a finger.
Taken from: http://www.accountingweb.com/article/nfl-players-versus-irs-its-tough-tackle/222629
So, shawnsta3..... maybe it isnt just the look of the snow and state tax that makes players not wabt to come here, as they pay taxes in every place they play. Maybe it is the fact that GB is sooooo small for some of these young single guys who want to party it up and show off their "bling" to friends and ladies......something small town USA is not condusive to doing.
Twenty-two states and the District of Columbia have NFL teams, eighteen of which charge state income taxes. Then there are nine cities that charge taxes of their own. No player will file the maximum number of returns since none of them will play in every state. Even so, a guy who lives in one state (with a state income tax) and plays for a team in another state, can easily end up filing one federal return, a stack of state returns, plus several city returns.
This year, two NFL games were played in London, where the top tax rate is 45 percent. Players will receive a foreign tax credit against the amount paid in the United Kingdom, but only up to the top tax rate in the United States, which is 39.6 percent. One of the teams that traveled to England to play against the Jaguars was California's San Francisco 49ers. California has the dubious distinction of charging the highest personal income tax rate, now 13.3 percent. This means whatever salaries the 49ers earn will be reduced by roughly 60 percent in combined taxes (45 percent to the United Kingdom, 13.3 percent to the state of California, and 1.45 percent federal Medicare tax). Ouch!
Jock Tax Explained
The jock tax is calculated by the number of "duty days" a player spends in a game function, such as practice, training, playing, or meeting, beginning with spring training and ending on the last day of the season, including playoffs. Even an injured player who travels with the team has to pay jock tax, whether he practices with the team or not.
Generally jock tax is determined this way. Let's say a quarterback earns the average of $3.84 million in 2013 and is deemed to have worked 200 to 210 duty days over the course of the year, not counting the playoffs. His salary will be attributed to each state by the number of days worked there. At tax time, therefore, each state gets its share of his tax liability. You can see why these states love the jock tax. Not only do the games themselves bring revenue, but the visiting players spend their own money while they're there and, on top of that, they owe taxes for the privilege of playing in those states and also in certain cities. It's a sweet deal . . . unless you're the taxpayer.
Tennessee doesn't have state income tax, but it has what's known as a "privilege tax," which is a flat rate of $2,500 per game charged to professional athletes who play in Tennessee (regardless of income, up to three games for a maximum of $7,500 per year). NFL players, however, aren't charged this privilege tax on NFL income, whether they're Tennessee residents or visiting teams.
California
In California, which has three NFL teams – the San Diego Chargers, the San Francisco 49ers, and the Oakland Raiders – duty days and taxable income add up fast.
In 2010 alone (the last year for which figures are available from the California Franchise Tax Board), NFL players who were California residents paid more than $24 million to their own state tax coffers. And visiting NFL players paid in close to another $16.4 million in jock tax.
If you consider all professional sports – and California is a haven for pro sports – in the same year, the state tax authorities collected a total of $171.7 million in tax revenue, more than $70 million of which was attributable to jock tax from visiting athletes. Mind you, that was prior to the recent round of tax hikes in the Golden State. In fall of 2012, California's highest state income tax rate was raised to 13.3 percent, retroactive to the beginning of the year.
Of course, not every state followed California's policy of raising personal taxes. Wisconsin, for example, dropped its top tax rate from 7.75 percent to 7.65 percent for 2013. That's a sweet deal for Green Bay Packer quarterback Aaron Rodgers. With total compensation from the Packers of $40 million in 2013, the tax rate reduction will save him a cool $40,000 in state tax, without lifting a finger.
Taken from: http://www.accountingweb.com/article/nfl-players-versus-irs-its-tough-tackle/222629
So, shawnsta3..... maybe it isnt just the look of the snow and state tax that makes players not wabt to come here, as they pay taxes in every place they play. Maybe it is the fact that GB is sooooo small for some of these young single guys who want to party it up and show off their "bling" to friends and ladies......something small town USA is not condusive to doing.
OP
OP
FrankRizzo
Cheesehead
Many of us didn't want to live up there anymore and freeze our ***** off either.
That's why I think TT probably has tried to get some FA's that we are not aware of.
We didn't even know he was trying to reel in Peppers until we heard that Peppers signed that Saturday morning.
That area sucks, to put it plain.
The tax is another issue apparently.
These guys usually want to maximize their $ because that window is a small window, short timespan.
And this is their only chance at these lottery-type moneys.
But TT has not drafted that well either. There's a misconception that this guy is some genius when it comes to drafting.
None of our recent first round picks have made the defense better, plus 2nd rounder Worthy.
Plus, due to injury, 1st rounder in 2011 Sherrod hasn't helped either. If you rely 99% on the draft, and you have a bunch of misses at the top, you're not going to get better.
That's the case since 2011.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I´m not so sure this is really an issue, as the Packers don´t have any problems re-signing most of their own free agents they want to.
Similar threads
