Packers Salary Cap

[paco]

Owners will agree to spread out the hit if players are willing to play 17 games.

Seems pretty straight forward.

Yep, except the players don't seem to want to entertain that idea. Not unless other concessions are made (pre-season, camps, roster sizes, etc).

This is where the NFLPA makes no sense to me.

Like Presseason and Training Camp are so very important for players 25 to 60 on the roster. So why are their interests never considered in these negotiations?

I just feel like the NFLPA is "whatever is best for the stars"

That's a lot of the problem with any negotiations. There is enough fighting within the NFLPA about what is best. What's best for Aaron Rodgers/Tom Brady, isn't what's best for Mahomes/Watson, isn't what's best for the average player, or PS players, or isn't what's best for retired players. Until they get their house in order, they'll never have a good even fight against the NFL and the owners.

[go pak go]

Yep, except the players don't seem to want to entertain that idea. Not unless other concessions are made (pre-season, camps, roster sizes, etc).

This is where the NFLPA makes no sense to me.

Like Presseason and Training Camp are so very important for players 25 to 60 on the roster. So why are their interests never considered in these negotiations?

I just feel like the NFLPA is "whatever is best for the stars"

That's a lot of the problem with any negotiations. There is enough fighting within the NFLPA about what is best. What's best for Aaron Rodgers/Tom Brady, isn't what's best for Mahomes/Watson, isn't what's best for the average player, or PS players, or isn't what's best for retired players. Until they get their house in order, they'll never have a good even fight against the NFL and the owners.

Yeah. As a member of the union I would be pretty pissed because to me it seems the top 10% of the players get everything catered to them when they need it the least.

Like I get it. Rodgers and Brady are what help drive the revenue. But even as a player like if you were Brady or Rodgers...wouldn't you want your teammates 25 - 60 on the roster to maybe have a better shake of being in the NFL rather than the top 10% take 80% of the payroll and rule benefits?

[wallyuwl]

Yeah. As a member of the union I would be pretty pissed because to me it seems the top 10% of the players get everything catered to them when they need it the least.

Like I get it. Rodgers and Brady are what help drive the revenue. But even as a player like if you were Brady or Rodgers...wouldn't you want your teammates 25 - 60 on the roster to maybe have a better shake of being in the NFL rather than the top 10% take 80% of the payroll and rule benefits?

The NFLPA has been a major part, perhaps the major part, in creating a system in the NFL that is the same as what they criticize in broad society.

[lupedafiasco]

This is where the NFLPA makes no sense to me.

Like Presseason and Training Camp are so very important for players 25 to 60 on the roster. So why are their interests never considered in these negotiations?

I just feel like the NFLPA is "whatever is best for the stars"

That's a lot of the problem with any negotiations. There is enough fighting within the NFLPA about what is best. What's best for Aaron Rodgers/Tom Brady, isn't what's best for Mahomes/Watson, isn't what's best for the average player, or PS players, or isn't what's best for retired players. Until they get their house in order, they'll never have a good even fight against the NFL and the owners.

Yeah. As a member of the union I would be pretty pissed because to me it seems the top 10% of the players get everything catered to them when they need it the least.

Like I get it. Rodgers and Brady are what help drive the revenue. But even as a player like if you were Brady or Rodgers...wouldn't you want your teammates 25 - 60 on the roster to maybe have a better shake of being in the NFL rather than the top 10% take 80% of the payroll and rule benefits?

When the players got the rookie deals capped and got that fiasco under control that money was supposed to get dispersed amongst the veteran players. Rightfully it should have. Instead that money went to the QBs. Its why Ive been an advocate that the league needs to cap positional contracts. Until they do that QBs will continue to make an absurdity compared to the rest of the league.

[go pak go]

When the players got the rookie deals capped and got that fiasco under control that money was supposed to get dispersed amongst the veteran players. Rightfully it should have. Instead that money went to the QBs. Its why Ive been an advocate that the league needs to cap positional contracts. Until they do that QBs will continue to make an absurdity compared to the rest of the league.

I do honestly feel the league will come at a cross roads where they find there is only 10 to 12 quarterbacks actually worth the money as other teams who have stacked teams have success without a high end quarterback.

Especially as the run game continues to get more and more prominent. I think the market may end up taking care of the absurd contracts for some quarterbacks.

[TheSkeptic]

IMO, the priority should be Corey Linsley. If that means cutting Preston Smith, so be it. IMO reshuffling the Oline is a bad idea.

[go pak go]

IMO, the priority should be Corey Linsley. If that means cutting Preston Smith, so be it. IMO reshuffling the Oline is a bad idea.

Right now, the Packers have roughly $212 Million in cap liabilities for 2021 with our Top 51. Let's say the cap is generous and only falls to $185 Million.

That means we likely have $30 Million (to make room for 2021 draft picks) to cut before we can legally field a roster on June 1.

Preston ($8 million)
Kirksey ($5.5 million)
Wagner ($4.25 million)
Lowry ($3 million)

Even after all the "sensible cuts", we have only cut $20.75 million. Meaning we have roughly $9 million to go. We probably free up space by restructuring Bak and then we have to decide if we want Rodgers cap hit to be over $45 million in 2022 if we want to restructure there.

That's the just the reality the Packers are looking at. And that is NOT resigning King or signing a CB2, Linsley or Aaron Jones and also relying on going tackle early in the draft to replace Wagner.

I don't see a world we Corey Linsley is a Packer in 2021.

[Pckfn23]

The cap is not going to fall to $181 or $185. A deal will be worked out and the cap will remain fairly static. The NFLPA without a doubt does not want it to fall and the Owners without a doubt wants 17 games. Among other things, they will negotiate a deal.

So, we have roughly $14 million to figure out.

Linsley is going to want $11 or $12 million.

Preston Smith is a pre-6/1 $8 million and a post-6/1 $12 million cut.
CHristian Kirksey is a $5.6 million cut.
Rick Wagner is a $4.25 million cut.
Dean Lowry is a pre-6/1 $3.3 million and post-6/1 $4.8 million cut.

That's a lot of guys to cut for 1 guy, but it MAY be worth it.

[NCF]

The Bak restructuring was pretty much built in to his contract so that is a no brainer and I really think you have to extend Davante. That should be another fairly easy one to create a lot of room and keep him around for another 4 or 5 years. He will be expensive, but we do have some leverage with another year on his deal + tag.

[Pckfn23]

The Bak restructuring was pretty much built in to his contract so that is a no brainer and I really think you have to extend Davante. That should be another fairly easy one to create a lot of room and keep him around for another 4 or 5 years. He will be expensive, but we do have some leverage with another year on his deal + tag.

VERY good point. We could probably free up $8-10 million by resigning Adams alone.

Bakhtiari just completed the 1st year of his new contract, going into his 2nd. I am not sure a restructure is going to happen there.

[NCF]

The cap is not going to fall to $181 or $185. A deal will be worked out and the cap will remain fairly static. The NFLPA without a doubt does not want it to fall and the Owners without a doubt wants 17 games. Among other things, they will negotiate a deal.

I think we keep discussing the cap issues and no one is real comfortable with this idea. Some I think flat out don't understand the likelihood or possibility of it happening.

The cap, is it stands now, is reported to drop to around $181-$185M. This is speculated but believed to be pretty accurate. That's Step 1. Step 2, many believe (although this is less certain) that the League and NFLPA will negotiate a deal that will bump the salary cap up to remain flat to 2020 even though they don't have the calculation-based income to support it. They will essentially "borrow cap" from future years. Step 3, also widely reported and believed likely, is that in order to concede this to the NFLPA, the League will finally get "sign off" on the 17th regular season game. It's kind of a win-win-win for everyone, in my opinion. The NFLPA doesn't want the cap to go down, the League doesn't want to unilaterally force the 17th game on the Union, and as a fan, I don't want the cap to go down, either, and hell yeah I want a 17th game.

[go pak go]

Yup. Good points by all.

I too started saying last August that the cap won't go down.

But I also am acknowledging that a lot of the articles said the owners hoped to have this all situated the week prior to the SB...and now it's after the SB.

The league and the Players Association have what....3 weeks to get this all done?

[Pckfn23]

Yup. Good points by all.

I too started saying last August that the cap won't go down.

But I also am acknowledging that a lot of the articles said the owners hoped to have this all situated the week prior to the SB...and now it's after the SB.

The league and the Players Association have what....3 weeks to get this all done?

March 17th the new league year starts.

[Christo]

The Bak restructuring was pretty much built in to his contract so that is a no brainer and I really think you have to extend Davante. That should be another fairly easy one to create a lot of room and keep him around for another 4 or 5 years. He will be expensive, but we do have some leverage with another year on his deal + tag.

I expect a lot of restructuring to be taking place on the Packers, and every other team this coming year.

[Yoop]

Yeah. As a member of the union I would be pretty pissed because to me it seems the top 10% of the players get everything catered to them when they need it the least.

Like I get it. Rodgers and Brady are what help drive the revenue. But even as a player like if you were Brady or Rodgers...wouldn't you want your teammates 25 - 60 on the roster to maybe have a better shake of being in the NFL rather than the top 10% take 80% of the payroll and rule benefits?

The NFLPA has been a major part, perhaps the major part, in creating a system in the NFL that is the same as what they criticize in broad society.

Whaaaaaaaaa? the NFL has a 4 or maybe 5 year apprenticeship, after which you can become the highest paid player in the entire league, please list outside union jobs where thats possible.

also the way the NFLPA union is set up is that players are compensated based on a % of net revenue, please list the names of outside unions that have been able to demand and receive that type of compensation for there workers.

[NCF]

Restricted Free Agency is going to be more interesting (at least to me) then ever before. Are we really going to tender guys like Tyler Lancaster and Raven Greene at $2.2M+ per pop? I think Tonyan is really the only no brainer in the RFA lot. The ERFA you basically tender at replacement level, so guys like Lazard and Sullivan are easy decisions, but I would not be shocked if we do not tender most of our RFA's.

[Yoop]

When the players got the rookie deals capped and got that fiasco under control that money was supposed to get dispersed amongst the veteran players. Rightfully it should have. Instead that money went to the QBs. Its why Ive been an advocate that the league needs to cap positional contracts. Until they do that QBs will continue to make an absurdity compared to the rest of the league.

I do honestly feel the league will come at a cross roads where they find there is only 10 to 12 quarterbacks actually worth the money as other teams who have stacked teams have success without a high end quarterback.

Especially as the run game continues to get more and more prominent. I think the market may end up taking care of the absurd contracts for some quarterbacks.

people blame the unions, but it's the owners who create these issues, there the ones that keep bumping up the cost of QB's, same with other positions, if it where set up like a regular union it would have wage scales for different positions coincided with player league tenure, the union sets the % of compensation based on revenue, the owners are free to divy it up any way they wish, at least thats how it seems to me.

the NFLPA attempts to get a % of net revenue for the players, I wish all unions could do that, instead most unions can barely squeeze COL increases, perfect compensation is a percentage of net profit, but unions have never come close to getting that.

[Christo]

Restricted Free Agency is going to be more interesting (at least to me) then ever before. Are we really going to tender guys like Tyler Lancaster and Raven Greene at $2.2M+ per pop? I think Tonyan is really the only no brainer in the RFA lot. The ERFA you basically tender at replacement level, so guys like Lazard and Sullivan are easy decisions, but I would not be shocked if we do not tender most of our RFA's.

Maybe they keep Lancaster over Lowery, that's still a savings. I doubt they let both of those guys go, considering Adams is probably gone [ maybe he signs a one year inexpensive prove it deal ]
As for Greene, I really like the guy, except he can't stay on the field. Here's hoping Vernon Scott can step up and fill the spot.

[go pak go]

When the players got the rookie deals capped and got that fiasco under control that money was supposed to get dispersed amongst the veteran players. Rightfully it should have. Instead that money went to the QBs. Its why Ive been an advocate that the league needs to cap positional contracts. Until they do that QBs will continue to make an absurdity compared to the rest of the league.

I do honestly feel the league will come at a cross roads where they find there is only 10 to 12 quarterbacks actually worth the money as other teams who have stacked teams have success without a high end quarterback.

Especially as the run game continues to get more and more prominent. I think the market may end up taking care of the absurd contracts for some quarterbacks.

people blame the unions, but it's the owners who create these issues, there the ones that keep bumping up the cost of QB's, same with other positions, if it where set up like a regular union it would have wage scales for different positions coincided with player league tenure, the union sets the % of compensation based on revenue, the owners are free to divy it up any way they wish, at least thats how it seems to me.

the NFLPA attempts to get a % of net revenue for the players, I wish all unions could do that, instead most unions can barely squeeze COL increases, perfect compensation is a percentage of net profit, but unions have never come close to getting that.

I agree. My whole argument is in agreement with yours. You should have responded to lupe who you are disagreeing with.

[go pak go]

Yeah. As a member of the union I would be pretty pissed because to me it seems the top 10% of the players get everything catered to them when they need it the least.

Like I get it. Rodgers and Brady are what help drive the revenue. But even as a player like if you were Brady or Rodgers...wouldn't you want your teammates 25 - 60 on the roster to maybe have a better shake of being in the NFL rather than the top 10% take 80% of the payroll and rule benefits?

The NFLPA has been a major part, perhaps the major part, in creating a system in the NFL that is the same as what they criticize in broad society.

Whaaaaaaaaa? the NFL has a 4 or maybe 5 year apprenticeship, after which you can become the highest paid player in the entire league, please list outside union jobs where thats possible.

also the way the NFLPA union is set up is that players are compensated based on a % of net revenue, please list the names of outside unions that have been able to demand and receive that type of compensation for there workers.

The current challenge with the CBA is not that it doesn't reward veteran players. But it instead makes the cost of veteran players too great that you need to be either a really good vet or will likely be out of work because a slightly, lower in value rookie, will do the job at 80% of the cost.