With Rodgers being a veteran who has 10+ accrued season in the league the Packers have to pay him a base salary of at least $1.015 million in 2018 and $1.03 million in '19.
I haven't thought about it until reading your post but it might actually be a good idea to front load Rodgers' contract for the reason you mentioned that it will most likely take Gutekunst more than this offseason to rebuild the roster into a championship one.
Thanks for the info about minimum salary for 10+ accrued seasons. That's a pretty obscure provision. It doesn't change much in the equation I presented.
As for putting more front load in the contract, it comes down to a realistic assessment of the roster and championship prospects in the immediate future.
The Packers current situation reminds me of a couple of other draft and development teams, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, in the early part of this decade. Those defenses aged in place and were paid handsomely as the foundation for contending peaked and then eroded. Pittsburgh got to the SB in 2010, got one more season out of the guys, then slumped to 0.500 for a couple of years. Baltimore won a SB, followed by one 10 win season and one playoff appearance, but have have been essentially a 0.500 team since.
Expecting aging Packer core players (Nelson, Cobb, Matthews, Bulaga) returning to impact form is entirely unrealistic. Getting them to take less money now while extending them just exacerbates and defers the fundamental problem. It's worth noting the team exhibited some fatal flaws even when those guys were at their peaks, there was a loaded O-Line and there were some pretty good corners.
Too many things would need to go right to be a legitimate contender this season: the team maintains above average health into the postseason; Pettine finds untapped potential in the defensive youth; the above named players return to a reasonable facsimile of their former selves, the draft fills some key holes right now. I view this as magical thinking.
It's worth considering that Gutekunst has heretofore been a senior scout, not a roster builder or immersed in the cap. I'm not sure if his initial comments about going into free agency with some aggressiveness was a case of saying what people want to hear, or inexperience and naivete, or internal pressure to keep the "win now" ball rolling. I'm somewhat encouraged by his recent comments that the vet retention/free agent considerations have a "who else we got?" consideration coming out of the draft.
Murphy has expressed urgency in getting something done with Rodgers. This is your uber-GM talking, Gutekunst is your junior GM, for the time being. I do not entertain any argument that the Rodgers contract matter is not the elephant in the cap room. Until the matter of "win now" vs. rebuild reaches internal consensus (and maybe it has already, maybe it has not), you do not know how to structure that contract, how to handle the contract year vets, what cap is left over to do something in free agency, and who is targeted in the draft.
I look at the eventual outcome of the Wilkerson interest as indicative of the direction and ask, "what does he add and what can the Packers afford for that?" He'd bring depth and rotation behind the incumbent tackles to keep their snap counts down, he'd be a starting backup in the event of injury, and a big body in short yardage. How much do you pay for that? That's not a core role. In what way does he add in that department vs. Lowry and Adams, assuming Adams foot issue is not some kind of permanent impairment? I wouldn't pay more than $4 million over 2 years for Wilkerson given available cap, the Rodgers extension looming, and the holes that need to be filled. Somebody who needs a starting DT with confidence they can work an attitude adjustment will pay more.
I hope this is a situation where Petine said, "I know this guy, I could use this guy, and I can get more out of him that what he's shown in the last couple of years," with Gutekunst responding, "let's bring him in, kick the tires, and see what's what."
Frankly, if you're going to assume you can work an attitude adjustment on a guy, you'd be better served packaging the second pick with other considerations, move up in the second round, and take Arden Key if he's still on the board. His snap timing and first step burst was elite when his head is on straight and he's not overweight, he can play up or hand in the dirt as a 4-3 weak side DE or 3-4 OLB. I'm not advocating that without having heard him tell his story of last season. Alternatively one can look at other hybrid DE/OLBs in the draft if Pettine's intent is to play a bunch of hybrid sets. DT depth at cost is not a good short term or long term use of that cap.
and a "God forbid".]
]
