What To Make Of Our WR No-Shows

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
3,782
Reaction score
222
On board with the concept of incentive contracts. Not sure about the application. How does one establish incentives that are easy to assess and can't be managed by either the player or the team? I was going to include 'starter' examples, but I think it's probably pretty obvious. If it is, what would you suggest as incentives? If not, I'll get into it a little deeper.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
149
Agreed. I haven't sat down to try and perfect it, they don't pay me enough to do that. ;)

One part of it is quite easy. Every position gets paid a base amount and beyond that everything is earned by each player, during each season. Due to technology and todays collection of just about every tidbit of information that happens in a game, statistically and logistically it probably would be quite easy to do.

The difficult part is how do you regulate it in relation to a cap and trying to continue to keep all 32 teams on a somewhat equal playing ground to keep the league competitive. Teams could sign the top 11 players on offense at that base rate and at the end of the SB win say "oh crap, now we have to pay for it, but it was worth it". Of course, if TD's and yards are part of the pay scale, a team can only total of so many of those in each game, so the wealth is spread around.

The current pay system is mainly based on "predicted value". Sure would be nice to bring in more of a pay system that payed on "Actual earned value".
Interesting point. There are bonuses now that are used like # of games played, yards gained, pro-bowl designation, etc. I wonder how they factor that in with the cap. Do teams have to assume that the player will achieve all bonuses, and then count that as cap money? That doesn't seem very likely. Anyway, interesting point.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
You don't generally see teams paying extra over a contract for good performance either. That's what I don't like about today's teams, their unwillingness to just give extra money to good players that earn it.

And I'm not sure how anybody doesn't believe an MVP season increases a player's value.
I agree with you on the value part actually. But we need to take it a step further. Teams have a budget and must stay under it (GB is trying to scramble daily to stay within their budget as an example).

If you start paying 1 player record breaking $$ there has to be an offset. Many of the teams have been successful achieve it while their QB is on a Rookie deal or a 2nd “non league setting high $” contract

That’s not my opinion. That’s factual. Even Brady was not league setting $, Wilson was not, Mahommes was not. That list goes on forever. But who knows maybe Dak proves me wrong :tup:
 
Last edited:

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
Have you looked at Rodgers contract? I don't think that you have. He made an extra $500K for "working out" and another $850K based on incentive escalators that he met.

  • Annual Workout Bonus: $500,000
  • 2020-2023 Escalators ($1M Max)
    72.5 offensive snaps: $100,000 (earned in 2020, 2021)
    + divisional playoff game: $120,000 more (earned in 2020, 2021)
    + NFC Championship: $130,000 more (earned in 2020, 2021)
    + Super Bowl: $150,000 more
    $100,000 each for Top 3 in Passer Rating, Comp. %, INT %, Yards per Att., TD Passes ($100,000 earned in 2020, $500,000 in 2021)

I am sure $1.35M isn't enough for you, you want more right? So did Rodgers give back money during the years he didn't play up to his contracts? You can't have it both ways. Imagine having to readjust everyone's contracts after each season based almost fully on their performance of the last season. Oh wait, that would be called......performance pay!

I would be totally all for the NFL to switching to heavy in Performance and incentive based contracts. Sadly, these guys all seem to want guaranteed money. Again, you can't have your cake and eat it too.

I wasn't discussing Rodgers contract. I was commenting on today's teams.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
I wasn't discussing Rodgers contract. I was commenting on today's teams.


Actually, seems like you were, which is why I showed you just how much extra Rodgers was paid due to having that great 2020 season. Then you take that information and say it wasn't relevant to your point? So what point were you trying to make when you originally said this?

You don't generally see teams paying extra over a contract for good performance either. That's what I don't like about today's teams, their unwillingness to just give extra money to good players that earn it.

And I'm not sure how anybody doesn't believe an MVP season increases a player's value.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
230
Reaction score
31
Unless EQB and Funchess have quality reasons for missing they have big steel balls. Funchess has never caught a pass from Rodgers and EQB will be battling to make the 53 man. If the Pack have to eat a little crow to re-sign Rodgers or wind up trading him when I am sure a few FO people would like to call his bluff just to spite him but realize that is not the best move for the franchise then what would be better to get a little bit of spiteful satisfaction then cutting a couple of guys who won't make a bit of difference on a Rodger less team.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
666
Unless EQB and Funchess have quality reasons for missing they have big steel balls. Funchess has never caught a pass from Rodgers and EQB will be battling to make the 53 man. If the Pack have to eat a little crow to re-sign Rodgers or wind up trading him when I am sure a few FO people would like to call his bluff just to spite him but realize that is not the best move for the franchise then what would be better to get a little bit of spiteful satisfaction then cutting a couple of guys who won't make a bit of difference on a Rodger less team.
I read something recently where Funchess would save us nearly $1.2mil if we just cut him outright. He’s already taken a $750,000 paycut thiscseason for playing hooky. He’s treading on thin ice right now to begin with. The last time he had a 100 yard performance was week 12 of the 2017 season and he hasn’t caught a live game pass in nearly 2 years (Sept 2019)
I’m beginning to wonder if he suffers from Martellus Bennett Syndrome. If I’m Gute for a minute, I’m cutting him if he doesn’t just totally impress me this preseason.
 
Joined
May 1, 2021
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
So the *big* news is that none of our top WRs showed up for OTA's. The NFLPA has strongly urged players to stay away, but most of the Packers were in attendance. I doubt that is the main cause of the WR group's absence. Which leads to the question - are they standing out to show solidarity with Rodgers?

Normally I don't care about all of this stuff, but once it turns from one disgruntled player into multiple players....you have a problem to deal with. I'm not saying that it is a problem yet, but the arrow is starting to point in that direction.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
Anyone who does not show up should have their pay docked.

OTA's are voluntary, you can't dock their pay and if you do, the NFLPA will come knocking. Rodgers, Adams and Funchess each may have forfeited their "workout bonuses" of $500,000/$500,000/$50,000 but that is the only leverage a team can use over a player.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
Actually, seems like you were, which is why I showed you just how much extra Rodgers was paid due to having that great 2020 season. Then you take that information and say it wasn't relevant to your point? So what point were you trying to make when you originally said this?

I was using sarcasm to provide commentary on the "today's players" point as well as "brick to the head obvious" to point out that winning MVP is valuable.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
I was using sarcasm to provide commentary on the "today's players" point as well as "brick to the head obvious" to point out that winning MVP is valuable.

Which is it? "Today's Players" expect and want too much in addition to what they are already getting. Or should an MVP designation give a player a big pay hike? You seem to be talking from both ends to be honest.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
149
Which is it? "Today's Players" expect and want too much in addition to what they are already getting. Or should an MVP designation give a player a big pay hike? You seem to be talking from both ends to be honest.
I think winning MVP should provide a heavy incentive. I don't know what it is, but if a guy gets $500,000 for working out, imagine what he'd get for winning MVP.
 

gopkrs

Cheesehead
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
2,741
Reaction score
149
I think winning MVP should provide a heavy incentive. I don't know what it is, but if a guy gets $500,000 for working out, imagine what he'd get for winning MVP.
Well, it could be part of the contract. I kind of like winning the SB more though.
 

Heyjoe4

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
2,234
Reaction score
149
Well, it could be part of the contract. I kind of like winning the SB more though.
Amen to that. And while it helps, it's not necessary to have a future HOF QB to win a SB. It can be done through a strong defense, a strong running game, and a lot of misdirection.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
I think winning MVP should provide a heavy incentive. I don't know what it is, but if a guy gets $500,000 for working out, imagine what he'd get for winning MVP.

Well, it could be part of the contract. I kind of like winning the SB more though.

This is all part of what is pissing me off about Rodgers, he signs this huge contract, with a ton of guarantees and upfront money and 2 years later doesn't like it or the organization? Obviously, he hasn't completely said that, but that appears to be why we are all hear talking about it. This isn't a guy that went from 3rd string to first string Pro Bowler and has one year left on a vastly underplaying contract. This is a guy that was given the biggest ever contract in the NFL (at the time) and now appears to have contract remorse?

I have absolutely no empathy for Rodgers when it comes to what he is being paid. I have slight empathy about the Love pick, but that goes back to about zero when I actually walk through why the pick made sense.

My only empathy for Rodgers is that somehow he has convinced himself that the latest MVP has somehow vaulted him into acting like a spoiled brat stage and is somehow justifying his sudden sour attitude towards the "organization philosophy". Remember Aaron, this is the same organization that drafted you when most passed you up, despite have a FHOF QB on the roster at the time.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
4,588
Reaction score
221
Which is it? "Today's Players" expect and want too much in addition to what they are already getting. Or should an MVP designation give a player a big pay hike? You seem to be talking from both ends to be honest.

I'm now confused by my own sarcasm... To be straightforward (less fun but also less confusing) I think complaints about "today's players" in any sport tend to border on ridiculous. Players today have more power than players in the past and, in most businesses, ppl like when the employees get more power over the CEO but fandom becomes very strange at times in this regard where fans root for the CEO over the employee.

Next, I am a firm believer that winning an MVP increases a player's value.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
I'm now confused by my own sarcasm... To be straightforward (less fun but also less confusing) I think complaints about "today's players" in any sport tend to border on ridiculous. Players today have more power than players in the past and, in most businesses, ppl like when the employees get more power over the CEO but fandom becomes very strange at times in this regard where fans root for the CEO over the employee.

Next, I am a firm believer that winning an MVP increases a player's value.

I still think you are lumping 3 groups (Players, owners and fans) into 2....Leave fans out of the discussion and it becomes a bit easier to understand.

Yes, players are making a ton more money than they did 50, 40 or even 10 years ago, but this power you speak of is either real power or perceived power. Again, don't mix those up. The NFLPA through the CBA have definitely given players more power, as have agents and better negotiated contracts, but all that power is given through contracts. This perceived power, that you seem to think either exists or should, isn't real power, its perceived (by you). Players don't get auto raises due to performance, unless it is contracted. Players don't get input into Management decisions, unless its an informal policy of the organization.

Your notion that "ppl like when the employees get more power over the CEO" is really a huge generalization and I would disagree with it. Don't get me wrong, I love "Employee run businesses" when they thrive and succeed". However, I also love a great business that is run from the top down and treats their employees well. I have seen both types of business structures succeed and fail.

Imagine the NFL if the Players ran it. I think it would be a free for all quickly and turn into what we see every year during the NBA All Star game, just a bunch of guys wanting to show off. Or even worse, the Pro Bowl game. Correct me if I am wrong, but you also seem to think Rodgers "earned the ability to have management type of influence." While I agree with you that informally it might be the case (slightly) with guys like Brady, Brees and a few others, but that just happens to be the way those organizations ran. The Packers never seemed to operate that way and for you or Rodgers to suddenly expect or demand it, isn't correct either.
 

Schultz

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 8, 2021
Messages
230
Reaction score
31
There is no NFL without the footballs. I think the people who make the footballs should stop making them until their contracts are renegotiated and they get a raise as well as some up front money.
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
There is no NFL without the footballs. I think the people who make the footballs should stop making them until their contracts are renegotiated and they get a raise as well as some up front money.

Let's not forget about the Refs important role in the NFL either....all Packer fans have to do is think back to 2012 to know that.

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

Pintsizedbox9

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 1, 2016
Messages
410
Reaction score
14
There is no NFL without fans or owners, so what's your point?
The NFL absolutely doesn't need owners. You say this as a Packer fan, unironically too. The fan base that takes pride in... not having an owner.

Also, the fans exist because of the players. Not the other way around. Do you think fans would show up to cheer an empty field?
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
22,603
Reaction score
2,594
Location
Madison, WI
The NFL absolutely doesn't need owners. You say this as a Packer fan, unironically too. The fan base that takes pride in... not having an owner.

Also, the fans exist because of the players. Not the other way around. Do you think fans would show up to cheer an empty field?

The NFL absolutely doesn't need owners. You say this as a Packer fan, unironically too. The fan base that takes pride in... not having an owner.

Also, the fans exist because of the players. Not the other way around. Do you think fans would show up to cheer an empty fie
The Green Bay Packers do not have a single owner, you are correct. The NFL actually no longer allows a team to have more than 32 owners. The Packers are the only franchise in major sports with non-traditional ownership. Yet they are owned. Probably more important, they are managed and operated in a very similar way that most pro teams are with individual people making most of the major decisions. People that are not players or fans.

History has seen plenty of leagues pop up with more than enough players to fill them, yet they fail. Why? Fans aren't interested, the money isn't their for the owners or the players, so those leagues fail.

Again, the NFL exists because of quite a few parts working together, but for you to say it only exists because of the players is just not looking at the big picture. Pee Wee football exists because a lot of kids love playing football, but you wouldn't pay to see it, nor would anyone buy a Pee Wee football team. The NFL is a major business, the players are simply products of the business, they could all quit today and new players put in there place and the NFL would still continue to thrive.
 

G0P4ckG0

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 1, 2015
Messages
540
Reaction score
63
The NFL is a major business, the players are simply products of the business, they could all quit today and new players put in there place and the NFL would still continue to thrive.
Nailed it. The league has existed long enough to become a worldwide brand and that is how it will survive no matter the players or franchises. Just look at Apple, Cadillac, Rolex...even when their products suck and/or are overpriced, people pay because of the brand.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top