The Jordan Love Era Begins

Will Jordan Love be 3 in a row for the Packers?

  • Yes, he's a FHOF Player

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • He'll be pro bowl good but not FHOF good

    Votes: 20 28.2%
  • He'll be average

    Votes: 12 16.9%
  • No, he'll be a below average bust

    Votes: 4 5.6%
  • Too early to Tell

    Votes: 31 43.7%

  • Total voters
    71
  • This poll will close: .

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
611
Reaction score
424
What’s loves contract situation right now?
They signed an extension May 3, 2023, locking him in through 2024 for a little under $12M. They're in the process of negotiating a new multi-year "jackpot" contract right now.

Unfortunately, Love's agent is Dave Mulugheta, possibly the most cutthroat agent in the NFL. He's the guy who got a 5 year, $230M fully guaranteed deal for Deshaun Watson - who was just coming off a full-year suspension for alienating the hell out of his GM and being sued by dozens of women for ****** assault.

Jordan's getting paid.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,545
Reaction score
8,138
Location
Madison, WI
Yeah when speaking to projections of contracts you cannot justify the numbers so you just push it aside and predict based on the market. Which is why regardless of how much folks thought I was nuts I argued that Lazard would get over $8M and he did....man I remember Capt thinking was insane for that. Fact is there is no way on this green earth that Love's people take less than Goff unless in creative ways where say Russ tells them look we will potentially give you MORE than Goff is going to make based on a million incentive for winning division, another million if we advance to the conference ship and another 1.5M if you win us a SB....IN ANY YEAR of this contract. So.....that brings down the hit per year potentially a few million....

BUT Love is signing a better contract than Goff....and by better I mean bigger. Better is subjective...
Perceived "Market Value" in the NFL is an imperfect measuring stick and ties into my frustration with NFL Contracts. Players are being guaranteed and paid based off of "this is what they did and if all goes well, this is what they will do over the course of the contract and thus, this is what they are worth." Throw in multiple teams biding for the services of 1 player and high end players are often getting overpaid. Getting overpaid by millions, not a few thousand.

In the case of Love, his perceived market value is based off of his 1 year of starting in the NFL, so that data is limited. At least with Goff the Lions are banking on him performing like he has the last 8 years.

I could care less about the money aspect and how it effects the bottom line for the owner/team, they are going to make their money no matter what, they are going to spend their cap or close to it. What it effects for fans and the frustrating aspect for me, is the Teams Cap. and the quality of the 53 man roster.

I would be 100% behind base contracts with the majority of pay coming at the end of the season, based on production. However, I know that will NEVER happen. So fine, keep guarantees and big contracts, but allow each team a 1 or 2 waiver(s) of a cut or injured (plays less than 25% of season) players cap (actual and dead) hit. Player still gets paid what was owed, but a team isn't buried as badly in the dead cap hit if the player is injured, cut or traded.

Obviously, if a team was allowed to "void a cap hit" of 1 or 2 players, something would have to be changed with how much of a contract can be "shoved out". Otherwise, a team just pushes everything possible out to the 4th year and dumps the player that year.
 
Last edited:

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
873
Perceived "Market Value" in the NFL is an imperfect measuring stick and ties into my frustration with NFL Contracts. Players are being guaranteed and paid based off of "this is what they did and if all goes well, this is what they will do over the course of the contract and thus, this is what they are worth." Throw in multiple teams biding for the services of 1 player and high end players are often getting overpaid. Getting overpaid by millions, not a few thousand.

In the case of Love, his perceived market value is based off of his 1 year of starting in the NFL, so that data is limited. At least with Goff the Lions are banking on him performing like he has the last 8 years.

I could care less about the money aspect and how it effects the bottom line for the owner/team, they are going to make their money no matter what, they are going to spend their cap or close to it. What it effects for fans and the frustrating aspect for me, is the Teams Cap. and the quality of the 53 man roster.

I would be 100% behind base contracts with the majority of pay coming at the end of the season, based on production. However, I know that will NEVER happen. So fine, keep guarantees and big contracts, but allow each team a 1 or 2 waiver(s) of a cut or injured (plays less than 25% of season) players cap (actual and dead) hit. Player still gets paid what was owed, but a team isn't buried as badly in the dead cap hit if the player is injured, cut or traded.
I've said that one way to work around the mass contracts is to give teams one player that can have a max contract with. This one max contract does not count against your cap. This would allow teams to keep their franchise player without ruining the rest of your cap. Kind of like the NBA does. I never foresee anything like that happening either. It does seem at some point that the bubble is going to burst. I know the NFL is drowning in money but how high and these contracts get?
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,545
Reaction score
8,138
Location
Madison, WI
I've said that one way to work around the mass contracts is to give teams one player that can have a max contract with. This one max contract does not count against your cap. This would allow teams to keep their franchise player without ruining the rest of your cap. Kind of like the NBA does. I never foresee anything like that happening either. It does seem at some point that the bubble is going to burst. I know the NFL is drowning in money but how high and these contracts get?
The only problem I see with that, is it won't really change what we are seeing now. Every team will just leverage as they do now. Instead of a huge contract with their franchise QB, they do it with their star OLB, CB or WR.

Imagine what Gute could have done with the roster last season, had the dead caps of Rodgers (traded) and Bahk (injured) didn't count. Players still get their money, but the teams cap isn't as dinged up by 1 or 2 players that are hurt, traded or cut.
 

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
14,141
Reaction score
5,014
Perceived "Market Value" in the NFL is an imperfect measuring stick and ties into my frustration with NFL Contracts. Players are being guaranteed and paid based off of "this is what they did and if all goes well, this is what they will do over the course of the contract and thus, this is what they are worth." Throw in multiple teams biding for the services of 1 player and high end players are often getting overpaid. Getting overpaid by millions, not a few thousand.

In the case of Love, his perceived market value is based off of his 1 year of starting in the NFL, so that data is limited. At least with Goff the Lions are banking on him performing like he has the last 8 years.

I could care less about the money aspect and how it effects the bottom line for the owner/team, they are going to make their money no matter what, they are going to spend their cap or close to it. What it effects for fans and the frustrating aspect for me, is the Teams Cap. and the quality of the 53 man roster.

I would be 100% behind base contracts with the majority of pay coming at the end of the season, based on production. However, I know that will NEVER happen. So fine, keep guarantees and big contracts, but allow each team a 1 or 2 waiver(s) of a cut or injured (plays less than 25% of season) players cap (actual and dead) hit. Player still gets paid what was owed, but a team isn't buried as badly in the dead cap hit if the player is injured, cut or traded.

Obviously, if a team was allowed to "void a cap hit" of 1 or 2 players, something would have to be changed with how much of a contract can be "shoved out". Otherwise, a team just pushes everything possible out to the 4th year and dumps the player that year.

To be fair Love's extension is based only on one year from a fan's perspective. For those intimately getting to see him, who also many of them witnessed and saw a great in Aaron Rodgers also to draw comparisons (good or bad). If Green Bay signs him to a long term big dollar extension they are not basing it off of one year IMO...and I know that may be semantics and you specifically didn't mean it that way but is a good comment for anyone observing this discussion.

It's been unpacked multiple times due to how incentives are calculated teams simply cannot build a team full of incentive laced contracts due to the MASSIVE cap implications they could potentially cause and many are structured in a way that actually steals from the future year cap and not the one which the incentives are earned.
 

Krabs

I take offense to that sir.
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
1,468
Reaction score
873
The only problem I see with that, is it won't really change what we are seeing now. Every team will just leverage as they do now. Instead of a huge contract with their franchise QB, they do it with their star OLB, CB or WR.

Imagine what Gute could have done with the roster last season, had the dead caps of Rodgers (traded) and Bahk (injured) didn't count. Players still get their money, but the teams cap isn't as dinged up by 1 or 2 players that are hurt, traded or cut.
I don't disagree. There's flaws with that too. Most likely the "free" contract will be the QB and then there will be a similar cap hit as you stated. The only thing is that each team would get to carry two big contracts instead of one.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,545
Reaction score
8,138
Location
Madison, WI
I don't disagree. There's flaws with that too. Most likely the "free" contract will be the QB and then there will be a similar cap hit as you stated. The only thing is that each team would get to carry two big contracts instead of one.
I guess I wasn't clear. A team could only "erase the cap hit for that season if 1 of 3 things happened. Players is cut, traded or injured for 75% of the season. Obviously, the 3rd situation would be determined at the end of the year and carried forward. This would be a way for teams not to get stung too bad if they are in a bad contract (Bahk) so they cut or trade the guy without the dead cap sting. Or if a big contract guy doesn't play for 25% of the season or more (Bahk) is a cap hit that doesn't sting you.
 
Last edited:

Packer Fan in SD

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
837
Reaction score
176
Mostly farcical, but if I was Love's lawyer, I would argue that his value is higher that Goff, the Rams traded him so they could get the Lions QB in order to win the SB.
 

Calebs Revenge

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 21, 2024
Messages
80
Reaction score
28
It’s really simple. Tom Brady was good…..very good. He won those titles though bc he was a team first guy.
Brady was almost never a top 10 highest paid QB. He left money on the table, prob 150 mill or so bc he made TB12 worth billions bc of the championships.
If Goff really wanted to compete and win at ALL cost he’d have taken 40 mill a year and let Detroit go out and get a really good WR to put next to St Brown.
 

Pkrjones

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
3,856
Reaction score
1,766
Location
Northern IL
The average NFL career is 3.3 yrs, with QB's averaging 4.4 yrs. Why on earth would ANY player leave money on the table when they're negotiating? One mis-step in practice (Bridgewater, Bakhtiari) can end a career? One hit (Leroy Butler, Jermichael Finley, & 1,000's of others)) can abruptly end a career. Any player NOT getting their max deal is a fool, imho.
 
Last edited:

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,657
Reaction score
1,310
Well, at least that solves the Bears quarterback problems.
Another thing about Love, last year he was reportedly texting Rodgers for advice. This year, Rodgers might actually be playing, so maybe he might be less inclined to play mentor for another team.
 

Calebs Revenge

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 21, 2024
Messages
80
Reaction score
28
The average NFL career is 3.3 yrs, with QB's averaging 4.4 yrs. Why on earth would ANY player leave money on the table when they're negotiating? One mis-step in practice (Bridgewater, Bakhtiari) can end a career? One hit (Leroy Butler, Jermichael Finley, & 1,000's of others)) can abruptly end a career. Any player NOT getting their max deal is a fool, imho.
I didn’t say it was without risk but it worked out okay for TB12.
 

Thirteen Below

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 15, 2022
Messages
611
Reaction score
424
It’s really simple. Tom Brady was good…..very good. He won those titles though bc he was a team first guy.
Brady was almost never a top 10 highest paid QB. He left money on the table, prob 150 mill or so bc he made TB12 worth billions bc of the championships.
If Goff really wanted to compete and win at ALL cost he’d have taken 40 mill a year and let Detroit go out and get a really good WR to put next to St Brown.
Totaly, 100% agree with all of this, and it's one of the things I really respect about Brady.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,487
Reaction score
611
The average NFL career is 3.3 yrs, with QB's averaging 4.4 yrs. Why on earth would ANY player leave money on the table when they're negotiating? One mis-step in practice (Bridgewater, Bakhtiari) can end a career? One hit (Leroy Butler, Jermichael Finley, & 1,000's of others)) can abruptly end a career. Any player NOT getting their max deal is a fool, imho.
I think the point is that, if all a player is concerned about is himself, sure. However, at a certain point, some of these guys might wonder how many millions one really needs and if allowing themselves and the team to have a better chance at a ring by taking slightly less (but still more than any normal person can even comprehend) might be preferable.
 

Pkrjones

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 3, 2014
Messages
3,856
Reaction score
1,766
Location
Northern IL
I think the point is that, if all a player is concerned about is himself, sure. However, at a certain point, some of these guys might wonder how many millions one really needs and if allowing themselves and the team to have a better chance at a ring by taking slightly less (but still more than any normal person can even comprehend) might be preferable.
I understand the sentiment to put a better team around the stud QB. HUGE difference, however, in taking $40mil/yr vs $53mil/yr. which is what Caleb's had proposed. Don't think Goff's wife is a world famous model worth more than Goff, so don't see why he'd walk away from $50+mil. Also keep in mind...the gov't is taking close to 1/2 of that to fund their folly.
 
OP
OP
thequick12

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
3,176
Reaction score
584
In the case of Love, his perceived market value is based off of his 1 year of starting in the NFL, so that data is limited. At least with Goff the Lions are banking on him performing like he has the last 8 years.

Or look at it this way...Love has had one shot at it, and he preformed at a level that Goff has only been able to match once maybe twice in his 8 chances

Do I think Goff is a 50 m per qb, absolutely not. Do I think Love is, absolutely. It sucks but its better than not having one or paying a slightly above average one like he's elite

Love presumably hasn't approached his ceiling yet. While Goff has shown us that his is, 30 tds 12 ints. And his floor has been shown to be about 20 tds 15 ints. Good but not great and the Lions just paid him like he's a Fohfer
 
OP
OP
thequick12

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
3,176
Reaction score
584

Likely over half because in most states you can't spend your money without paying sales tax of around 7%. Add that to your Fed income tax 37%, and state income tax around 8%. You're at 52% and thats before local taxes and property tax
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,657
Reaction score
1,310
Likely over half because in most states you can't spend your money without paying sales tax of around 7%. Add that to your Fed income tax 37%, and state income tax around 8%. You're at 52% and thats before local taxes and property tax
And with rising housing costs, that property tax keeps going up.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
32,545
Reaction score
8,138
Location
Madison, WI
And with rising housing costs, that property tax keeps going up.
Actually, that isn't a true statement at all, at least in Wisconsin. Your property taxes are derived from the mil rate of your local municipality. The Mil rate is determined by local and state budgets. If their spending needs increase, this usually mean raising the mil rate and every taxable parcel will pay more in taxes, but to an equal % of the assessed value of their home/land.

Simply put, your property taxes are fixed and tied to the assessed value of your home/land. Your taxes will go up or down, based on the needs of the taxing entities where you live. An increase in your home/land value does not necessarily mean an increase in your property taxes.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,487
Reaction score
611
Likely over half because in most states you can't spend your money without paying sales tax of around 7%. Add that to your Fed income tax 37%, and state income tax around 8%. You're at 52% and thats before local taxes and property tax
So, after all of that, what does he net, even if he accepts the lower contract? What do real people net?
 

Members online

Top