Restructuring of Contracts

[yooperpackfan]

Fackrell is awful.

I'm not thinking "awful".
Would you buy below average?

 

[Veretax]

Why cut any of them UNTIL you find a replacement? Bring all 3 to the table before free agency starts, see if they are willing to renegotiate their contracts, if they aren't, go into Free Agency, the draft and camp knowing what you need to do. If you find replacements before the final 53, let the cuts begin. Besides workout bonuses, the "big" money doesn't kick in until they make the 53. I think this was the approach they used with Sitton to some extent. They realized Taylor was ready and cut Sitton.

Probably won't be a popular decision with other players, but if they were given a chance to renegotiate and/or earn their spot on the roster, business is business.

This!!!

I've been running the Packers in Franchise mode in FA. I like all three players, but I do think that Matthews is a little over rated at this point in his career. He's not quite the play maker he was early on. He is still a solid player though.

Nelson is the one I would prioritize. I like Cobb, but if its either or, my decision is made. I love having more cap space, but let's be honest, the packer way isn't bringing in tons of free agents. Freeing up cap space is only really beneficial if you have people you need to sign. Who are we going to sign?

Rotoworld lists the following Free agents at WR.


Wide Receivers

Sammy Watkins (24)
Jarvis Landry (25)
Allen Robinson (24)
Marqise Lee (26)
Paul Richardson (25)
Terrelle Pryor (28)
Jordan Matthews (25)
Mike Wallace (31)
John Brown (27)
Kendall Wright (28)
Eric Decker (31)
Donte Moncrief (24)
Bruce Ellington (26)
Brice Butler (28)
Cody Latimer (25)
Taylor Gabriel (27)
Jaron Brown (28)
Michael Floyd (28)
Brian Quick (28)

Tavarres King (27)
Michael Campanaro (27)
Deonte Thompson (29)
Dontrelle Inman (29)
Albert Wilson (25)
Jeff Janis (26)
Danny Amendola (32)
Ryan Grant (27)
Louis Murphy (30)
De’Anthony Thomas (25)
Justin Hunter (26)
Andre Roberts (30)
Kamar Aiken (28)
Brenton Bersin (27)
Brandon Tate (30)
Jeremy Butler (26)
Brittan Golden (29)
Harry Douglas (33)


The only names that jump out and me and think might be good to add are:

Andre Roberts (30), Ryan Grant (27) A great Route runner in Washington, but he wasn't getting many looks from Cousins, and looks to be not returning. I think I liked Marquise Lee (26), but does he have an injury history? what about Jordan Matthews (25)


Maybe some of those names jump out to others on this board? But unless you have a name in mind to Replace Cobb or Nelson..... I don't like the cut them lose early mantra with Wide Receivers. It can take a year or two for a Rookie to find his feet in this League.

I'm not sure you can do much better than Clay either in Free Agency.

 

[mradtke66]

You need three guys who can do the work of 4.

Oh my god no. Don't start that crap. It's simply not true.

They don't have to do the job of 4 with only 3. One of the OLB does the job on a 4-3 end, the other OLB does the job of a 4-3 SOLB. In both schemes, you're effectively in a 5-man front in the run game. In the pass game, you rush 4 and the 3-4 LOLB/4-3 SOLB drop into coverage.

It's really, really easy to see how this works when you look at a 4-3 Under defense, ala the Seahawks in base. Assuming we ran the a 4-3 under tomrrow, our front would probably be exactly the same. Your line would be Lowry at LE/Strong End, Clark at NT, Daniels at 3T Tackle, and Perry at Right End/Weak End/Leo/whatever you want to call it. Your linebackers would be Matthew, Martinez, and Ryan.

In other words, the only appreciable difference is Perry is in a three point stance rather than a two point stance. The responsibilities of our players wouldn't change. The alignments of Clark and Daniels would be similar, though the ratios would change slightly. Rather than being a head-up, 0-technique NT, he'd be a 1-tech shade. And Daniels would be a near exclusive 3T instead of sometimes a 3, sometimes a 4, sometimes a 5.


(As an aside, the duo of Martinez and Ryan is one of the big reasons to not run a 4-3. We don't have a coverage/speed guy to succeed as the WILL backer. Maybe Josh Jones, but I don't think he's big enough to play a 3 downs. Maybe I could be surprised.)

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Crazy what the 49'ers just paid Garoppolo! Five-year, $137.5 million deal with $90 million guaranteed in the first three years.

Here I have been thinking we save money by waiting on restructuring #12, but it seems like the price of signing starting QB's is just going up and up and up every year!

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/02/08/after-garoppolo-whos-next/

 

[GleefulGary]

Crazy what the 49'ers just paid Garoppolo! Here I have been thinking we wait on restructuring #12, but seems like the price of signing starting QB's is just going up and up and up every year!

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/02/08/after-garoppolo-whos-next/

Eh. Not going to make a difference on what AR gets. He's going to get as much as he can, and we'll pay him. Whether we pay him today, or in a few months, he's gonna get >30M/year, as he should. He will set the market.

 

[RepStar15]

We need to sign Rodgers today! Before Matt ryan’s contract gets done and maybe even before Drew Brees.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

We need to sign Rodgers today! Before Matt ryan’s contract gets done and maybe even before Drew Brees.

I wasn't feeling that way until I saw what Jimmy G got. After this season, A-Rod has to be feeling pretty good about his market value. He watched the Packers collapse after his injury and now this contract.

 

[OldSchool101]

Once again, we should error on the side of "keeping a player" rather than putting everyone on the chopping block and letting our emotions get the best of us, that's just good business and keeps the morale constant.
I think it's very feasible that we can extend some of these guys on short term deals for a few million per year less than what they currently make relative to age and some fall off of recent production (that's not a hard sell, that's factual) I doubt they will up and relocate over a slight decrease in pay and if they do? Well, probably couldn't have stopped them either way so let's move on.

There are going to be exceptions (guys that are constantly injured, locker room cancers, guys that get in constant legal trouble or combinations of these etc..) we have enough of that year to year to worry about without cutting perfectly fine players who may have just had a down year. The adjustments that are about to be made in our new Defensive scheme will more adequately provide a better measure of player performance IMO.

I think if the new deals are presented respectfully and honestly, those players involved will not only be open, but might even respect that this is a business also and there is a financial bottom line that has to be attained as a whole unit. Don't make it personal and it won't be personal. Let's get these guys weapons relocked and then restock on ammo

 

[GleefulGary]

We need to sign Rodgers today! Before Matt ryan’s contract gets done and maybe even before Drew Brees.

It won't make any difference at all.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm sure it varies from deal to deal, but I am curious if when a player is "restructured" are the remaining years of the contract and the schedule pay factored into the new deal? We have all been talking about restructuring Clay, Cobb and Jordy on the downside. So I doubt their agent is going to say "Yup, rip up the contract of what you would owe them and start over", he would want to include part of that old contract in the new deal. Contrarily, Rodgers agent would want to maximize AR's pay and say "Let's tear up the old deal and start over again".

 

[gbgary]

Rodgers' deal is going to end up being more than anyone ever imagined. $142m+/5yr+/$100m+ guaranteed.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

lol

 

[GleefulGary]

Rodgers' deal is going to end up being more than anyone ever imagined. $142m+/5yr+/$100m+ guaranteed.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

lol

I'll be surprised if Rodgers gets under 31-32/yr.

 

[gbgary]

I'll be surprised if Rodgers gets under 31-32/yr.

maybe. i was using garapolo's 137.5/5/90 for comparison. brees and cousins could drive it up even more.

now hearing the guaranteed money is going to be around $74m. $90m salary in the first 3 years.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I've seen a couple articles like this these, I hope Rodgers hasn't

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-rodgers-will-be-the-nfls-1st-200-million-man

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/new...ichest-nfl-history/12j847c6rpv4m18u7czyvd0kh4

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Oh my god no. Don't start that crap. It's simply not true.

They don't have to do the job of 4 with only 3. One of the OLB does the job on a 4-3 end, the other OLB does the job of a 4-3 SOLB. In both schemes, you're effectively in a 5-man front in the run game. In the pass game, you rush 4 and the 3-4 LOLB/4-3 SOLB drop into coverage.

It's really, really easy to see how this works when you look at a 4-3 Under defense, ala the Seahawks in base. Assuming we ran the a 4-3 under tomrrow, our front would probably be exactly the same. Your line would be Lowry at LE/Strong End, Clark at NT, Daniels at 3T Tackle, and Perry at Right End/Weak End/Leo/whatever you want to call it. Your linebackers would be Matthew, Martinez, and Ryan.

In other words, the only appreciable difference is Perry is in a three point stance rather than a two point stance. The responsibilities of our players wouldn't change. The alignments of Clark and Daniels would be similar, though the ratios would change slightly. Rather than being a head-up, 0-technique NT, he'd be a 1-tech shade. And Daniels would be a near exclusive 3T instead of sometimes a 3, sometimes a 4, sometimes a 5.


(As an aside, the duo of Martinez and Ryan is one of the big reasons to not run a 4-3. We don't have a coverage/speed guy to succeed as the WILL backer. Maybe Josh Jones, but I don't think he's big enough to play a 3 downs. Maybe I could be surprised.)

Lol! You can't expect me to get through a few weeks of off season without talking about 3 Dlinemen banking 26 sacks and doing the job of 4...,

Pick up Poe. Draft the top dlineman available at #14...build up the dline like Thompson built his olb corps. Use 3 Dlinemen. Have a rotation of high quality guys .play Poe 450 fresh snaps rather than 750 wore out snaps.... I say the same thing every year...

When GB had Reggie white and Sean Jones at de. Both 300 pounders. Gilbert brown and Santana Dotson at dt. Gilbert was pushing 400 and was still mobile. To me, this is the blue print of a dline. Always will be .
But in a passing league. A 3-4 version of it would be better. 3!-4, that's all I ask. Not 2-4-5 nickel. 3-4 with high quality dline keeping the blockers busy. And the LBs able to swarm.


Jones at ilb is a wild card. I like it. With Poe, and the impact rookie dlineman drafted at #14, added to our current group. The dline would be good enough for Jones to play up in the mix. And to use that speed of his...

Before we go on thinking I'm 100% serious about signing Poe and spending #14 on dline both. I want to say I would be happy with one or the other. But If we had 4 studs(instead of 2), and guys like lowry, and Adams starved for snaps. A dline so good and so deep that we have to play 3 dlineman.....
We do that and the LBs and secondary will magically look great. I bet.

OK. I'm done now.

 

[mradtke66]

When GB had Reggie white and Sean Jones at de. Both 300 pounders. Gilbert brown and Santana Dotson at dt. Gilbert was pushing 400 and was still mobile. To me, this is the blue print of a dline. Always will be .

I hate to point this out to you, but you're wrong.

Reggie was 300 plus, but he was a freak of nature.

Sean Jones listed at 270. Might have been as light as 260.

Santana Dotson was a svelt 289.

Gilbert was a monster, but he was a terrible pass rusher. Terrific in the run game though.

Interestingly enough the current roster projects somewhat similarly, as Fritz ran a 4-3 under scheme. Jones was the LEO rusher. Ergo:

Dotson = Daniels
Brown = Clark
Jones = Perry
Reggie....well, no one equals Reggie. But on run downs, Lowry is approximately the same size and shape.

3-4 with high quality dline keeping the blockers busy. And the LBs able to swarm.

And it can still work this way in the running game, though that's becoming more and more rare in any scheme. It presumes a pure 2-gapping run defense where the 3 down linemen not only can eat two blockers, but are smart and skilled enough to read and react to how the linemen are trying to block them. There's much less thinking in a 1-gapping scheme, which typically also allows for a more attacking approach. Attack a gap rather than a player and you're setting yourself up to rush the passer. This line of reasoning is how you end up with smaller (heh, smaller. In the land where Daniels is considered small) quicker players--they're built to shoot gaps.

EDIT: Listed Dotson twice in my equality chart.

 

[Veretax]

t varies from deal to deal, but I am curious if when a player is "restructured" are the remaining years of the contract and the schedule pay factored into the new deal? We have all been talking about restructuring Clay, Cobb and Jordy on the downside. So I doubt their agent is going to say "Yup, rip up the contract of what you would owe them and start over", he would want to include part of that old contract in the new deal. Contrarily, Rodgers agent would want to maximize AR's pay and say "Let's tear up the old deal and start over again".

I think typically what happens is the guarantees stay as they are, salary might be adjusted to be paid out some earlier, and more signing bonus added gets prorated over the remaining length of the contract... but I'm not sure. I've been waiting to see details of Alex Smith's new deal with Washington to see if there's been a change in the formula.

 

[adambr2]

Especially for guys with only 1 year remaining, shouldn't it be as simple as asking, "If this player were a free agent today, would I be willing to offer him this contract?"

Clay Matthews has no dead money if cut. So it literally is as simple as whether or not you'd be willing to offer him a 1 year, $11.4M contract for 2018 right now. Would you?

 

[Mondio]

I don't think it's that simple though. If we just cut him, we take 11 m off the books. Neither Fackerell nor Beigel are going to replace his production or his effort on the field. Biegel may replace the effort, but he needs to grow a bit if he can to be a regular contributor physically. he has high effort.

and to sign anybody, it will be at least half of that for an aged vet where you're probably hoping you get another year out of them or so. Not saying it's wrong, but it's not exactly a "fix" either. If we're talking about signing a big FA to replace him with, you're going to be looking at 10+ million per year easily on a longer contract. Not saying that is wrong, but it should be approached with caution. I don't think cutting him frees up enough to go and "get someone" without a really big long term investment. and from what I saw last year, I think he could be an 8-12 sack guy again. He still plays with high effort and I think he is capable of more if used right. If Matthews gets around that 10 sack range for us this year, I'd say he was worth it compared to what we'd have to sign someone else at to replace him and get that production. Looking at a guy like Fackerell and saying, well he had x amount of sacks in so many snaps and costs so much less isn't giving the entire picture because Matthews IS 10x's the player he is, even without the sack numbers.

So while I wouldn't sign Matthews to 11M to play this year, I think there is a decent chance we get good enough production from him that it will be worth it enough in the end. Replacing him will be tough and I do want to see what a new coordinator can do. I don't think any of those guys up front were used to their strengths last year. at least not very often.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Rotoworld lists the following Free agents at WR.

Wide Receivers
...
Jeff Janis (26)
...

Problem solved!

 

[HardRightEdge]

There are so many problems with renegotiations it's hard to count them all. Renegotiations make the most sense with an aging and declining star player who is willing to accept a secondary, reduced snap role. In that case you wipe out a big lump of cap and replace it with a one or two year swan song deal on the cheap for a veteran backup. Hawk's renegotiation has been cited. But that only picked up a couple million in cap savings. And how did that work out anyway? Crosby too after his historically bad season, but it was minor savings in the great scheme of things.

You cannot expect guys like Nelson, Cobb and Matthews to take cuts meaningful enough to make a difference while expecting them to perform like some approximation of the star players they have been in the past unless you just push the problem out into 2019 and beyond with new multi-year contracts.

The first question you have to ask yourself is are you looking for a bona fide Super Bowl contender in 2018 while acknowledging that the key players in the past are not what they once were, regardless of what you're paying them? This may not compute. Are you just clinging to the past? I think so.

And if 2018 is as far as you're going to look, and you think these players are in something of a decline, then just pay them what's on the books, make Rodgers wait until next year, and then just back and fill with the little cap that is left.

I would not recommend that. I see it as a two year plan, and that means cutting losses with declining players.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Clay Matthews has no dead money if cut. So it literally is as simple as whether or not you'd be willing to offer him a 1 year, $11.4M contract for 2018 right now. Would you?

If your objective is to be a bona fide contender in 2018, and (1) given who you have on the bench and (2) what edge rushers cost, you'd probably get close to your money's worth. A longer view might lead you to think otherwise.

 

[HardRightEdge]

A-Rod has to be feeling pretty good about his market value.

The better he feels about his market value the worse he'll feel about his surrounding talent. It is a hard cap reality.

 

[HardRightEdge]

As for Rodgers' prospective extension structure when comparing to Garoppolo's deal, team specific factors need to be considered.

Here's Garoppolo's details as reported by Adam Schefter:

https://overthecap.com/player/jimmy-garoppolo/3001/

What should jump out is that this is a front loaded contract with only a $7 million signing bonus. After year 2 they can ditch him for $4.2 million dead cap.

The 49ers could afford to front load. Even after this deal they have $75 million in cap space!

Whatever happens with the Rodgers, they're going to have to back load it with a hefty signing bonus.

 

[OldSchool101]

You cannot expect guys like Nelson, Cobb and Matthews to take cuts meaningful enough to make a difference while expecting them to perform like some approximation of the star players they have been in the past unless you just push the problem out into 2019 and beyond with new multi-year contracts.

Exactly what I would consider. A Shorter multi year 2-3 year deal allows some overlap we will need for our new WR or TE to develop while simultaneously allowing a guy like Jordy to bow out gracefully in a couple years. It also allows the ability to take emphasis off WR this year as a contingency if another position has a talent fall into the second day. We will need 2 years to fill all these holes adequately and we should he prepared to go after a top WR 1st day 2019 or snatch one by 2019 FA.
I’d lean heavy on QB protection l/run blocking2 (TE/OL) and getting Pettine what he needs to transition this year.