Packers 2021 salary cap plan

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
12,525
Reaction score
1,152
I don't think it's more media driven...it was clear how mad Rodgers was on draft night. And again at the end of the season even though he tried to back track on his calculated post game comments. He doesn't want to just be dumped for jordan love clearly.

Remember this is the guy that held a grudge and still does against mike mccarthy for preferring Alex smith to him in the draft as a member of the 49ers staff

But bottom line you can say all you want if Rodgers wants to pout, if he needs his ego stroked, if blah blah blah. In the end though who do you want playing qb for the Packers at least the next 2 seasons?

And this is why Rodgers despite having 3 years left on his contract has all the leverage. If Love were ready to play this wouldn't be an issue. Since he's not and Rodgers knows this he's making his move at defending his position as the Packers qb through 2023
ok, put it this way, I don't give 2 flying craps if he's mad. Good. Keep playing. It didn't affect him last year and I don't expect it will going forward. he knows the drill, he's a pro and he's not stupid. He's going to play to win always. and I don't care if he is mad, i hope they keep a fire lit behind him. Replacement is a powerful motivator. He's being paid handsomely and will earn every penny if he keeps playing well. He knows and so does the FO.

It is media driven because they have to make it something.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
That would be a complete admission of error in last year's draft. I don't think that the Packers front office considers it a mistake. It was intentional. Nothing has changed that would make them trade Love, unless they final got a close-up look at him in person and realized that he isn't a good enough QB.
I agree. It’s not a mistake unless Love falls flat. In the meantime he serves as a projection and his salary isn’t out of the norm for a high upside #2. Also like you mentioned, it’s not entirely a reach to say we could recoup a similar draft selection (in which case we benefit from our rookie deal starting over again) or a substantial veteran trade.
I understand and agree with the argument he’s merely a projection at this point (but that’s any player who hasn’t set foot) but also GB would have never selected him to begin with or released Boyle if they didn’t believe Love could step in and perform.

We’re just way too early to make any firm determination one way or another and last year was merely a Redshirt type season. We should have better indicators which direction his performance needle is pointed (Up or Down) soon.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
I was about to say something similar but will add that the front office has backed themselves into a corner IMO. Extending Rodgers with additional years and more guaranteed money would be the same as admitting an error in using 1st & 4th on a QB when your future HOF starter is still playing at a high level.
The other argument is that competition for your job is the supreme motivator. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Rodgers performance just excelled to top notch after questions from year to year about his future (although he was never that bad).
If I were playing fictional GM and it cost me a late day 1 draft pick to turn my starting QB on absolute fire and get a potential QB successor? I’m feeling pretty good and staying in on that hand and letting the hand play itself out. We’ve got partial hindsight and so far so good.
It’s a great problem to have. We could very possibly have 2 starting level QB’s with 1 being the best in the league and the other his understudy with time to mature.

Tim Boyle was right, this is the best QB school in the NFL and it is an absolute blessing that made him smile... to work in that QB room and watch how the very best does it. What a catalyst for a young QB to get in the mind of a HOF QB and talk about a confidence booster.
 
Last edited:

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,203
Reaction score
461
I was totally with you til the "or". But yeah I have been thinking since doing mocks last year and seeing Love staring at me at #30. Why not take him because you technically could let Rodgers play out his contract and still go to Love on his 5th year option. Obviously the best case was akways to trade Rodgers after 2022 ans let Love take over for the next 15 years...but even the 5th year option scenario allows you to still have a chance at 3 in a row.

As for trading Love now for 4th/5th. No way, absolutely not. He's far more valuable as a backup and a future trade asset. Why dump him now? After 2 pre seasons of good play he'll be worth much more or I should say he could be worth much more.

Yeah and they're obviously trying to just restructure him but even though they can do it without his permission they're not because they are scared of completely ruining the relationship and having Rodgers playing for the bears for the next 5 years just to spite them. You'd think the Packers front office wouldve learned something from the farve situation to avoid the same thing with Rodgers but I guess that's why they get the big bucks.

I just only see those two options as the only ones that will play out - I don't see a scenario where they stay clean, no muddy and have one foot in both pools is all. That is obviously the one scenario option is all. I don't disagree with anything really you stated.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
358
That's the point I have been trying to make though. The Packers converting Rodgers' base salary into a signing bonus doesn't negatively affect the team's cap at all.

That would only happen if the cap savings this season are soend on a veteran, who would hopefully impact the team's chances of winning a Super Bowl though.



Here's what I think the Packers should do to maximize the chances of winning another Super Bowl with Rodgers over the next two years.

As you mentioned correctly convert his base salary into a signing bonus resulting in the cap hit dropping to $28.1 million for the upcoming season.

Next offseason, once again convert his base salary of $25 million into a signing bonus, adding three void years in the process to reduce his cap hit to $25.3 million (down from $39.8 million) in 2022.

The team would take a dead money cap hit of $26.5 million by trading him in 2023, still saving $1.8 million of cap space compared to the cap hit he's currently scheduled to account for that season.



The total cap hit allocated to Rodgers is the most important number to look at, dead money is just part of it.



While that might be true in 2023 it definitely matters how much Rodgers counts against the cap in 2021 and '22 in the meantime.



But it does affect the cap number. It makes it go up in the next two seasons. It doesn't affect the overall number for the three years left but it does affect each individual year which is the important part. It makes it go down this year but it goes up in the next two meaning they have to account for an extra 4.5 million each year. I really think we are just looking at it in two different ways and we are having a hard time getting each other to see how we are looking at it.

Your philosophy on how to best maximize the time AR has left is to push as much of his money out into the future as possible and it certainly is one strategy but its debatable on whether it is the best for the franchise. I'm not sure I agree with the do everything we can to win in the next two years and let the next few years after that be damned. However, your scenario includes adding years to his contract which I don't think can be done with a simple restructure. then we are talking about 2 different animals. Restructure vs renegotiate.

I agree about the total cap hit being more important than the dead money but I would say each individual year cap hit would be more important than the total. As you have said a restructure wouldn't affect the total cap hit but, like I have been saying it would affect each year.

Maybe that's where we are not seeing eye to eye. You keep saying it doesn't affect the Packers cap and in a way you are right, it doesn't. The Packers have so much money to spend. That is their cap and giving more or less to Rodgers doesn't change that. They still only have so much money to spend. What does change and my whole point, is the amount of money Rodgers accounts for towards the cap in each of the years and that affects how much money they have to spend on other players and what they might have to do to fit the extra money under the cap. I'm not concerned with the cap as much as I am concerned with how Rodgers compensation affects it.


That's not true because in the situation we are talking about the Packers FO would like to maintain the flexibility to move on from Rodgers after the 2022 season with very little dead cap. Thus his total cap number doesn't matter because you won't be paying that you'll only be paying the dead cap number...

If they move on from him then the dead money is the total cap money at least as far as that year is concerned. Of course any money converted from salary to SB this year will have no affect on his salary in the next two years anyway so the amount they won't be paying stays the same whether they do it or not. The only thing that changes is how much they will be paying, or counting towards the cap as the case may be,. That's why the Packers wanted to give Jones such a high salary in years 3 and 4. His total cap hit for the contract is around 47 million but realistically, when they cut him after 2022 it will only be around 17 and his cap hit for 2023 will be 3.25 in dead money To put it simply, IMO the most important cap numbers are the team cap number which determines how much a team can spend this year AND how much each individual counts towards that salary cap each year. That is what determines if the team is over or under the cap and if they have to cut players (or salary) or if they can sign other players. Obviously the more 1 player counts the less you can spend on others.

I agree that the unwillingness to convert Rodgers roster bonus to a signing bonus was an attempt to reduce the cap hit (dead money) in whatever year they decide to move on from him which IMO doesn't seem to be until after the 2022 season. They could have gained 4.some million this year by doing that but they would have increased the cap hit in 2023 and I don't think they want to do that even though the extra money would help this year.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
It’s my opinion that Rodgers will play at a high level through at least his current 2023 date. Even if we’ve extended his current deal slightly, it’s still a controlled contract for GB in the sense that the contract “out” is almost always a year or 2 before the last contract year (see his current deal)

I guess I’m saying that it’s not past the critical state to extend Rodgers a couple years and make the guaranteed such that it’s feasible to walk away after possibly 2022 or more probable 2023 season, dates that are still feasible for transitioning to Love (his 4th season or 5th year option) but dates that also give Rodgers some peace of mind in knowing he’s locked for at least 2 years minimum and leaning 3 seasons.

Then, at that point, the only changes Aaron will have to worry about are baby bottle changes every 3 hours and poopy diapers after every brew and he’ll soon find there ain’t nothing cosmic about either :poop:
 
Last edited:

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
4,463
Reaction score
322
The thing I'm reading most is that all Rogers wants is some commitment from the team that they're not just dumping him after this year no matter how well he plays. He just wants them to let him know that he's not going to be a lame duck quarterback this season. I don't have a problem with that, and I don't think it's too much to ask.
 

Packer Fan in SD

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
775
Reaction score
134
I thought the contract just signed a couple of years ago and the guaranteed money were signs of commitment. How does one get upset that your employer just paid you $6.8 mil when you expected it per the contract you signed?
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
127
ok, put it this way, I don't give 2 flying craps if he's mad. Good. Keep playing. It didn't affect him last year and I don't expect it will going forward. he knows the drill, he's a pro and he's not stupid. He's going to play to win always. and I don't care if he is mad, i hope they keep a fire lit behind him. Replacement is a powerful motivator. He's being paid handsomely and will earn every penny if he keeps playing well. He knows and so does the FO.

It is media driven because they have to make it something.

You might be and are right in some ways. As I heard Jason Wilde speculating that the michael silver story was put out by the rodgers camp to pressure the Packers into restructuring him. So it's possible the media is being used as it often is by teams and agents. Restructuring him would all but gurantee he's in green bay in 2022. Which I think is pretty well guranteed anyways. So I agree he's a but if a prime madonna as they all are. But at the same time he's the best qb in the NFL and I hope the FO doesn't screw this up.

Because here's you're media driving things again...

“Multiple league sources said they believe Rodgers wants assurances that he will be Green Bay’s quarterback beyond just the 2021 season and that he won’t be a ‘lame-duck” quarterback’. The team could do that by adjusting his contract without adding any money to it,” ESPN’s Rob Demovsky noted on Tuesday.

To me that sounds like it came straight from Rodgers agent...
 
Last edited:

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
127
I thought the contract just signed a couple of years ago and the guaranteed money were signs of commitment. How does one get upset that your employer just paid you $6.8 mil when you expected it per the contract you signed?

Because he's the best qb in the NFL and he sees the writing on the wall that the team is at least doing everything they can not to win now, but instead to maintain the salary cap flexibility to move on from him likely not in 2022 but prior to the 2023 season when he currently represents like 25 m in cap savings and just 2.8 million of dead cap as well as some nice draft capital for gutey to use to build around Jordan Love
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
2,741
Reaction score
149
I don't really know because I just can't get into the soap opera stuff. But it seems like Gute and Co. are not paying much attention to that crap either. Which to me, is a good thing.
 

Mexican Packer

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
18
Reaction score
2
Because he's the best qb in the NFL and he sees the writing on the wall that the team is at least doing everything they can not to win now, but instead to maintain the salary cap flexibility to move on from him likely not in 2022 but prior to the 2023 season when he currently represents like 25 m in cap savings and just 2.8 million of dead cap as well as some nice draft capital for gutey to use to build around Jordan Love

That's not true
I can guarantee no one expect Packers to be competitive again with Rodgers after 2017 and 2018 under McCarthy the offense was a pain to watch, Rodgers look frustrated, unhappy, loosing his mojo and injured

Gute has make plenty of moves, of course he have some misses but his 2019 offseason was masterclass, he went all in with Zadarius, Preston, Amos and found Jenkins in the second round after getting two starters in Gary and Savage in first round (by the way he flip his 2018 pick for Jaire and Savage)

He built the core of Packers defense that went back to back to NFCCG and bring LaFleur that helped the offense and Rodgers

Just look at 2022 salary cap, Green Bay is already over the cap, they no longer have any flexibility for next year, covid really hit hard Gute plan and he still made big extensions in Bakhtiari, Clark, Jones, there's no room to pay everyone and bring FA like Madden

And as of Rodgers he signed his contract in 2018 he should ask less money and more guaranteed back then, the door was open to move.on from him in 2022 since day 1 just keep.on mind it's also kinda bad timing Rodgers cap hit increased the same year salary decrease for the first time, what do you expect the FO to do?
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
25,648
Reaction score
1,290
If I'm the front office, I'm not making cap room if I haven't ID'd guys I need and am able to sign. I have something in place with Rodgers contract should the need arise. There is no hurry.

Actually I have no idea how the Packers were able to fit the contracts of King and Lewis under the cap without having created cap space with a move that hasn't been publicly announced up to this point.

Why not take him because you technically could let Rodgers play out his contract and still go to Love on his 5th year option. Obviously the best case was akways to trade Rodgers after 2022 ans let Love take over for the next 15 years...but even the 5th year option scenario allows you to still have a chance at 3 in a row.

The fifth year option for a quarterback drafted at the end of the first round was $17.5 million this offseason. It wouldn't be smart to guarantee that much money to a QB set to start for the first time in his career.

That's not true because in the situation we are talking about the Packers FO would like to maintain the flexibility to move on from Rodgers after the 2022 season with very little dead cap. Thus his total cap number doesn't matter because you won't be paying that you'll only be paying the dead cap number...

The only thing that actually matters once a team decides to move on from a player is the cap space saved by either trading or releasing him at that point.

The Packers having converted Rodgers' roster bonus into a signing bonus would have still resulted in them saving more than $13 million in cap space for the 2022 season if they decide to start Love moving forward.

I understand and agree with the argument he’s merely a projection at this point (but that’s any player who hasn’t set foot) but also GB would have never selected him to begin with or released Boyle if they didn’t believe Love could step in and perform.

Just for the record, the Packers didn't release Boyle but he was a free agent who signed with the Lions.

Your philosophy on how to best maximize the time AR has left is to push as much of his money out into the future as possible and it certainly is one strategy but its debatable on whether it is the best for the franchise. I'm not sure I agree with the do everything we can to win in the next two years and let the next few years after that be damned.

I fully expect the Packers to regress the season after they move on from Rodgers no matter who will replace him.

Therefore I would prefer the team to push as much money as possible into future years to fully take advantage of having a HOF quarterback starting.

I'm fine with the team taking a massive amount of dead money counting against the cap in the first post-Rodgers season as they won't contend for a Super Bowl that year anyway.

Gute has make plenty of moves, of course he have some misses but his 2019 offseason was masterclass, he went all in with Zadarius, Preston, Amos and found Jenkins in the second round after getting two starters in Gary and Savage in first round (by the way he flip his 2018 pick for Jaire and Savage)

He built the core of Packers defense that went back to back to NFCCG and bring LaFleur that helped the offense and Rodgers

Gutekunst made some great moves to upgrade the roster in 2018 and '19 but for some unknown reason decided the future was more important instead of improving the current team last offseason.

The team not restructuring Rodgers' contract to create much needed cap space this year is another head scratcher.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
I saw this....dear lord 4 years voidable....we are playing a game I don't really want any part of with all this voidable stuff...
This is what you get when you overcompensate employees. Payroll becomes an absolute mess.

I do think as the league increases the salary cap some it creates an offset. Plus Rodgers total package deal is either shed or restructured to our liking, we’ll gradually balance things out. Right now we just need $ to sign our Rookies. :eek:

This is a big reason GB was looking to move on from Rodgers. His portion is creating a massive financial strain. It’s nothing personal, I’m sure we’d love to have him at $25mil average.
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
127
This is what you get when you overcompensate employees. Payroll becomes an absolute mess.

I do think as the league increases the salary cap some it creates an offset. Plus Rodgers total package deal is either shed or restructured to our liking, we’ll gradually balance things out. Right now we just need $ to sign our Rookies. :eek:

This is a big reason GB was looking to move on from Rodgers. His portion is creating a massive financial strain. It’s nothing personal, I’m sure we’d love to have him at $25mil average.

While individual employees may be over compensated the NFL is one of the only industries that pays at least some of their employees, the players, an amount commiserate with their value to the business...I think they get somewhere around 47% of total revenue with some stuff not included into that total revenue number

As of the 2023 league year much of this won't be an issue as the cap is set to sky rocket. Due to both the tv deals and what I expect will be a very profitable post covid 2021 season. This is why much of this void year stuff won't be as big of a deal as it normally would of.

But if you're gonna go all in with void year deals then why not really do it and pick up Julio Jones for a 2022 2nd round pick or OBJ for considerably less
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
149
This is what you get when you overcompensate employees. Payroll becomes an absolute mess.

I do think as the league increases the salary cap some it creates an offset. Plus Rodgers total package deal is either shed or restructured to our liking, we’ll gradually balance things out. Right now we just need $ to sign our Rookies. :eek:

This is a big reason GB was looking to move on from Rodgers. His portion is creating a massive financial strain. It’s nothing personal, I’m sure we’d love to have him at $25mil average.
You make a good point. At what point does one player taking up 15 or 20% of the cap become more of a liability than an asset? The Packers have been paying top dollar for QB play the last 30 years with 2 SBs to show for it. I'd much rather see a team built around an elite D than an elite O. This is just my opinion, and people will disagree, but teams with elite Ds win championships more often. I'm not a stats guy, it's just a gut feeling. Losing Rodgers would create a few years of pain as dead cap rolls off the books, but it would ultimately free cap to develop other areas of the team. I don't remember the last, elite ILB we had. It wasn't Hawk and it wasn't Martinez.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
149
I saw this....dear lord 4 years voidable....we are playing a game I don't really want any part of with all this voidable stuff...
They can play with this all they want. At some point, the piper has to be paid. That's usually called dead cap.
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
1,966
Reaction score
127
You make a good point. At what point does one player taking up 15 or 20% of the cap become more of a liability than an asset? The Packers have been paying top dollar for QB play the last 30 years with 2 SBs to show for it. I'd much rather see a team built around an elite D than an elite O. This is just my opinion, and people will disagree, but teams with elite Ds win championships more often. I'm not a stats guy, it's just a gut feeling. Losing Rodgers would create a few years of pain as dead cap rolls off the books, but it would ultimately free cap to develop other areas of the team. I don't remember the last, elite ILB we had. It wasn't Hawk and it wasn't Martinez.

And assuming Love is the guy then after those few years of pain...you have to pay him a top 5 contract and the cycle starts over again
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
25,648
Reaction score
1,290
I saw this....dear lord 4 years voidable....we are playing a game I don't really want any part of with all this voidable stuff...

The move creates cap space for this season. It doesn't make any difference in total over the next two years though.

You make a good point. At what point does one player taking up 15 or 20% of the cap become more of a liability than an asset? The Packers have been paying top dollar for QB play the last 30 years with 2 SBs to show for it. I'd much rather see a team built around an elite D than an elite O. This is just my opinion, and people will disagree, but teams with elite Ds win championships more often. I'm not a stats guy, it's just a gut feeling. Losing Rodgers would create a few years of pain as dead cap rolls off the books, but it would ultimately free cap to develop other areas of the team. I don't remember the last, elite ILB we had. It wasn't Hawk and it wasn't Martinez.

Even teams with an elite defense need the offense to produce to win a Super Bowl. In addition you need to invest a lot of ressources to develop an unit like that.

The Packers have actually done that with early draft picks and a lot of money spent on that side of the ball but unfortunately haven't been able to feature a top defense in a long time.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,203
Reaction score
461
The move creates cap space for this season. It doesn't make any difference in total over the next two years though.

How can you say it doesn't make any difference over the next two years? His "1 year contract" has 1.8M "void year" cap hit in 2022, and just shy of $500,000 cap hit 2023, 2024 and 2025. These mini version of the Bobby Bonilla deal is not something I want to get used to.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
25,648
Reaction score
1,290
How can you say it doesn't make any difference over the next two years? His "1 year contract" has 1.8M "void year" cap hit in 2022, and just shy of $500,000 cap hit 2023, 2024 and 2025. These mini version of the Bobby Bonilla deal is not something I want to get used to.

Before the Packers restructured Tonyan's contract he was set to count $3.384 million against the cap in 2021.

Now, he will count $1.504 million against the cap this year and $1.88 million in 2022.

In total it doesn't make a difference over the next two years.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
5,203
Reaction score
461
Before the Packers restructured Tonyan's contract he was set to count $3.384 million against the cap in 2021.

Now, he will count $1.504 million against the cap this year and $1.88 million in 2022.

In total it doesn't make a difference over the next two years.

Sure his contract cost to us didn't change, but sorry you're wrong in saying it doesn't change anything next year or beyond. It was a one year contract, which we will be paying out to through 2025.
 

captainWIMM

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 23, 2012
Messages
25,648
Reaction score
1,290
Sure his contract cost to us didn't change, but sorry you're wrong in saying it doesn't change anything next year or beyond. It was a one year contract, which we will be paying out to through 2025.

No, the contract automatically voids after this season resulting in dead money of $1.88 million counting against the cap in 2022.

There won't be any cap hit because of it in 2023, '24 or '25.

With teams being allowed to roll over remaining cap space it doesn't make a difference.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top