Rodgers Contract

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,505
Reaction score
8,798
Location
Madison, WI

Spanky

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
630
Reaction score
396
his current deal hamstrings the Packers. can you imagine the next? wow!

His current deal does not hamstring the Packers at all. The cap hit per year from 2017 to 2019 is around $20.5 million.
 

PikeBadger

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
6,678
Reaction score
1,964
His current deal does not hamstring the Packers at all. The cap hit per year from 2017 to 2019 is around $20.5 million.
It’s significantly less of a burden in percentage of cap than it was back in 2014 & 2015 I’d guess, without running the exact numbers. I don’t remember the last time this team had cap problems.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
5,014
Reaction score
507
If Rodgers signs for 34/year, the first year he would take up 19% of the cap and it would go down roughly 1% per year. So pretty similar to his last contract. Which is totally worth it for Rodgers.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
that's right. i've forgotten about all the impact free agents we've signed over the years.

The Packers paid Nelson, Cobb, bahk, bulaga, shields, Perry, Daniels, Bennett, burnett and others very healthy contracts while Rodgers was under the current contract. Maybe they signed the wrong people but they have spent a lot
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
That's more because Ted didn't like to sign free agents. Wasn't a money issue.
it was always a money issue. that's what Rodgers' all-in edict was all about. it went ignored and now you see the result with his reluctance to sign a deal until all the other parties get their deals in. no hometown discount coming.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
5,014
Reaction score
507
it was always a money issue. that's what Rodgers' all-in edict was all about. it went ignored and now you see the result with his reluctance to sign a deal until all the other parties get their deals in. no hometown discount coming.

Uhhh...no. We did not sign FA's because we didn't have enough money, Ted just didn't think they were worth as much as they got...and most of the time, he was right.

If you expected a hometown discount with Rodgers, that's on you. It was never happening. We're going to end up paying Rodgers roughly the same cap percentage we did last time. I don't see the problem.
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
The Packers paid Nelson, Cobb, bahk, bulaga, shields, Perry, Daniels, Bennett, burnett and others very healthy contracts while Rodgers was under the current contract. Maybe they signed the wrong people but they have spent a lot
they were our best players and ted tried to keep the team together...but that's a static situation. the team didn't get any better, it stayed the same and ted would roll over the remaining cap dollars year after year instead of adding better players. the team topped out in 14 and went downhill gradually from there and Rodgers issued his all-in edict.
 

swhitset

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 28, 2015
Messages
4,373
Reaction score
1,245
they were our best players and ted tried to keep the team together...but that's a static situation. the team didn't get any better, it stayed the same and ted would roll over the remaining cap dollars year after year instead of adding better players. the team topped out in 14 and went downhill gradually from there and Rodgers issued his all-in edict.
you are not making a consistant argument. One minute you are complaining that Rodgers' contract made it impossible to sign free agents... in the next you are complaining that Ted didn't spend the money in the places you wanted.... The bottom line is that your original argument is nonsense.
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
you are not making a consistant argument. One minute you are complaining that Rodgers' contract made it impossible to sign free agents... in the next you are complaining that Ted didn't spend the money in the places you wanted.... The bottom line is that your original argument is nonsense.
spending on existing guys is one thing free agents is another. we're talking about free agents. bringing in more talent would have made the team better. the cap kept getting higher and Rodgers percentage of it dropped. thus more money left to improve the team but he kept the team static instead. no improvement. his percentage is about to take a big increase. ted missed a golden opportunity. that's ted's cheapness. Rodgers current deal affects them by keeping them from investing in outside players because they're unsure how the new deal will squeeze them. the ryan deal just gave them a huge clue. if they wait for brady's it could really get out of hand. Rodgers isn't a player on the up like he was when he signed his last deal either.
 
Last edited:

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,797
spending on existing guys is one thing free agents is another. we're talking about free agents. bringing in more talent would have made the team better. the cap kept getting higher and Rodgers percentage of it dropped. thus more money left to improve the team but he kept the team static instead. no improvement. his percentage is about to take a big increase. he missed a golden opportunity. that's ted's cheapness. Rodgers current deal affects them by keeping them from investing in outside players because they're unsure how the new deal will squeeze them.
How do you debate with someone that clearly doesn't know what he doesn't know. Your premise assumes other FA's always work. your premise assumes GB didn't sign top FA when they re-signed their own. Your premise also ignores that 2 all pro DBs, a safety and a DB were cut down in the prime of their careers and had also just been inked to rather large contracts. Ted wasn't cheap. Matthews was one fo the best pass rushers in the league, what do you think he was going to sign for? and do you not realize that every year FA acquisitions from outside an organization get lazy, get hurt or just don't perform? So it wasn't matthews that had 2 big injury seasons and played another out of position, but some other guy. Would it make you happy or Ted "uncheap"? anyway, i'm not going to waste any more time on this.
 

GleefulGary

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2017
Messages
5,014
Reaction score
507
spending on existing guys is one thing free agents is another. we're talking about free agents. bringing in more talent would have made the team better. the cap kept getting higher and Rodgers percentage of it dropped. thus more money left to improve the team but he kept the team static instead. no improvement. his percentage is about to take a big increase. ted missed a golden opportunity. that's ted's cheapness. Rodgers current deal affects them by keeping them from investing in outside players because they're unsure how the new deal will squeeze them. the ryan deal just gave them a huge clue. if they wait for brady's it could really get out of hand. Rodgers isn't a player on the up like he was when he signed his last deal either.

And now we don't have to worry about having enough money to re-sign Rodgers plus add players in the future! Crazy how that works.
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
And now we don't have to worry about having enough money to re-sign Rodgers plus add players in the future! Crazy how that works.
but you do have to worry. next year will be interesting. they'll have an opportunity with some salaries dropping off but those guys will have to be replaced and most likely with free agents (that never work out ;)). we'll see how big a bite Rodgers deal is and what they do with what's left.
 

Reggie White Cheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 26, 2015
Messages
170
Reaction score
15
The over/under on 110 guaranteed for Rodgers... I don't see it being anything much higher than Matt Ryan's... He is not getting 40 year believe that. I will eat crow if so.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,807
Reaction score
925
I guess it comes down to how much Rodgers wants guaranteed. Ryan's deal is 5-years and $30m per with $100m guaranteed. Cousins deal was fully-guaranteed. Does Rodgers take a 3-year, $96m fully guaranteed deal (hypothetical), or does he take a 5-year $160m 5-year deal with only part of it guaranteed? I'm guessing he goes more the Cousins route because it gives him another chance to sign a big deal in three years (and short of having a lineman tear his arm off, he's not at serious risk of losing earning potential).
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
his current deal hamstrings the Packers. can you imagine the next? wow!

Rodgers' current deal hasn't hamstrung the Packers over the past few years. You have to realize the Vikings allocated more cap space to quarterbacks last season than Green Bay did.

The main reason the Packers haven't won another championship since 2010 is that Thompson had some poor drafts and didn't address obvious holes on the roster with free agents.

the ryan deal just gave them a huge clue. if they wait for brady's it could really get out of hand. Rodgers isn't a player on the up like he was when he signed his last deal either.

I highly doubt Brady at age 41 will surpass Ryan's deal or set the bar for Rodgers next one.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,505
Reaction score
8,798
Location
Madison, WI
I highly doubt Brady at age 41 will surpass Ryan's deal or set the bar for Rodgers next one.
Agreed, I know Brady wants a new contract, but given there are 2 years left on his current contract, I have a hard time seeing Kraft going too crazy with the numbers. So Ryan's deal will probably stand as the second highest deal once Rodgers deal is done, for at least a year. But watch out, Brett Hundley hits the FA market next year!
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
13,228
Reaction score
3,031
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
I don't see much more than Ryan's per year but a lot more guaranteed. Maybe 7 year $225m, $60m signing, first 3 years guaranteed for maybe another $40m with about the last $125m over the last 4 years with each year guaranteed two seasons earlier.
 

gbgary

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2017
Messages
3,420
Reaction score
185
Location
up the road from jerrahworld
here are ryan's details...

1. Signing bonus: $46.5 million.

2. 2018 salary: $6 million, fully guaranteed.

3. 2019 option bonus: $10 million, fully guaranteed.

4. 2019 salary: $11.5 million, fully guaranteed.

5. 2020 salary: $20.5 million, fully guaranteed.

6. 2021 salary: $23 million, $5.5 million of which is guaranteed for injury only at signing. The $5.5 million becomes fully guaranteed on the third day of the 2019 league year.

7. 2022 roster bonus: $7.5 million, due third day of 2021 league year.

8. 2022 salary: $16.25 million.

9. 2023 roster bonus: $7.5 million, due third day of 2021 league year.

10. 2023 salary: $20.5 million.

11. All guarantees have no offset language.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/05/04/under-any-analysis-matt-ryans-sets-a-new-bar/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/atlanta-falcons/matt-ryan-3983/
 
Last edited:

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,505
Reaction score
8,798
Location
Madison, WI
yup and think about this that i saw somewhere else...
the salary cap suddenly goes down instead of creeping up.

Personally, I would LOVE to see the apple cart go down a few hills. The amount of money these guys are getting paid has gotten way off the extreme chart. I stopped watching baseball because of it and if it continues in football, who knows what I will do.
 
Top