General Packer News 2021

[lupedafiasco]

I imagine Rodgers isn't too happy to be losing Linsley. Center/QB bond needs to be strong and he's always talked highly of him. Not that he won't have faith in another guy. But Rodgers wants additions, not subtractions around him.

I just have zero sympathy for that. Don't cost so much on the cap and you can keep players you want to play with around you.

That simple.

I mean its all relative to other players in the league. Its about respect with your peers and also just setting up your family for generational wealth. Just like at your job you would like to be compensated properly for your performance.

Its an absurd thing to think a player isnt going to go after what theyre worth. It isnt like Rodgers didnt earn what he made last year.

[TheSkeptic]

I imagine Rodgers isn't too happy to be losing Linsley. Center/QB bond needs to be strong and he's always talked highly of him. Not that he won't have faith in another guy. But Rodgers wants additions, not subtractions around him.

I just have zero sympathy for that. Don't cost so much on the cap and you can keep players you want to play with around you.

That simple.

I mean its all relative to other players in the league. Its about respect with your peers and also just setting up your family for generational wealth. Just like at your job you would like to be compensated properly for your performance.

Its an absurd thing to think a player isnt going to go after what theyre worth. It isnt like Rodgers didnt earn what he made last year.

Why is it absurd? https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-bra ... ain-2018-7

One is the GOAT, the other.....
And as for the other GOAT candidate, does anyone doubt that Bart Starr, if he were in Rodgers place now, would take a $10 mil real pay cut to keep his best teammates?

[RingoCStarrQB]

Remind me that February 22, 2022 is Elijah Pitts Day. GO PACK GO!!

[go pak go]

I imagine Rodgers isn't too happy to be losing Linsley. Center/QB bond needs to be strong and he's always talked highly of him. Not that he won't have faith in another guy. But Rodgers wants additions, not subtractions around him.

I just have zero sympathy for that. Don't cost so much on the cap and you can keep players you want to play with around you.

That simple.

I mean its all relative to other players in the league. Its about respect with your peers and also just setting up your family for generational wealth. Just like at your job you would like to be compensated properly for your performance.

Its an absurd thing to think a player isnt going to go after what theyre worth. It isnt like Rodgers didnt earn what he made last year.

Agreed. I'm not gonna blame Aaron for going after what he is worth. But I'm not going to sympathize that Aaron is sad because his favorite teammates can no longer be afforded by the Green Bay Packers.

In 13 seasons as a starter (and rookie deal a 1st round pick), Rodgers has made $241 million. 3 MVPs. 1 Conference Title. 1 SB ring. 1 SB MVP.
In 21 seasons as a starter, Brady has made $263 million. Brady has made $263 million. 3 MVPs. 10 Conference Titles. 7 SB rings. 4 SB MVPs.

Now there are absolutely variables that the Patriots did and Brady had that Rodgers didn't like bringing in Moss and other FAs when they were cheap. But the Pats and Bucs also unquestionably had the money to bring more players in and these vets always wanted to play with Tom Brady as they thought he would deliver for them compared to these vets wanting to come to GB.

So if you look back and ask who had the more successful career, sure Rodgers made more money per season. If that's what he values...then great. But if it's not what he values, which he prides himself on saying it isn't....then I don't really have much sympathy if he loses his friends because his cap hit is over $35 million.

Honestly for me, the difference between making $200 million active income or $250 million active income isn't all that big of a deal. There is absolutely truth in that money has a significant diminishing marginal utility after a certain point.

I mean cripes. $200 million at a conservative 5% ROI is still $10 million a year. When you are rich, you can afford to buy and value things a normal person wouldn't. Rodgers isn't normal. If he wanted to value keeping his teammates and winning...he could honestly afford to make that decision.

[YoHoChecko]

In all the Love conversation, here and elsewhere, I keep seeing people say that the best way to maximize your team's opportunities is with a good QB on a rookie contract. I HATE that narrative because it's not true.

Going back to our Super Bowl (so 11 years), the Super Bowl winning team had a QB on a rookie contract twice (Mahomes and Wilson). Going back to our Super Bowl, the Super Bowl winning team had a Hall of Fame QB on a below market deal 5 times (Brady's 4 wins and Rodgers' win on his "we didn't know he was this good yet" contract.

The way to win Super Bowls is to have a Hall of Fame QB on a below-market deal.

I don't understand why people think it's easier to find a Mahomes or Wilson to win with on a rookie contract than it is to find a Tom Brady. These are all generational players. They're difficult to stumble upon.

The best way to win a Super Bowl is to include a cap-friendly year or two in a big extension for a veteran and build around them in those years (Rodgers, Flacco, lucking out with Foles) or to have a HoFer consistently not take the top-of-the-market for QBs like Brady. If I crept back a bit further I recall that Big Ben also won one in the first or second year of an extension. Any earlier the rookie contracts were massive so there's no savings to compare.

[Yoop]

I just have zero sympathy for that. Don't cost so much on the cap and you can keep players you want to play with around you.

That simple.

I mean its all relative to other players in the league. Its about respect with your peers and also just setting up your family for generational wealth. Just like at your job you would like to be compensated properly for your performance.

Its an absurd thing to think a player isnt going to go after what theyre worth. It isnt like Rodgers didnt earn what he made last year.

Why is it absurd? https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-bra ... ain-2018-7

One is the GOAT, the other.....
And as for the other GOAT candidate, does anyone doubt that Bart Starr, if he were in Rodgers place now, would take a $10 mil real pay cut to keep his best teammates?

leave Starr out of this, completely different era, almost nothing from back then compares, salary or sacrifices are both foreign to this era.

Brady had a coach and GM that dabbled in UFA every season, they actually went out and brought in receivers, RB, OL etc to help Brady win, Rodgers has never had a GM till Gute that would do that, so why would anyone expect him to take a pay cut for a GM like Thompson.

also Rodgers didn't set the pay scale, the owners did by paying out huge dollars in there bidding wars for players, everyone likes to blame the NFLPA, but they didn't just out of the blue give Aaron Donald a 20 mil. bump on his second contract.

I'd love to get Watt, but I sure as hell don't expect Rodgers to take a pay cut to get it done

[YoHoChecko]

How about this

The Super Bowl Winning QBs over the past 11 seasons:

• 7 of 11 had cap numbers of less than 60% the top cap number in the league; only 2 of those were rookies

• Only 1 of 11 had a cap number above 90% of the top cap number in the league

• 9 of 11 were in at least their 5th year in the league

• 1 of 11 had a top-3 cap number that year

• 8 different QBs have won the Super Bowl; Flacco and Foles won't make the HoF; Eli is questionable; the other 5 are locks

So, conclusively, in this rookie wage scale era, the best way to win the Super Bowl is with a Hall of Fame QB on a below-market deal, and that has happened more often in a second contract than in rookie contracts.

[NCF]

So, conclusively, in this rookie wage scale era, the best way to win the Super Bowl is with a Hall of Fame QB on a below-market deal, and that has happened more often in a second contract than in rookie contracts.

I say this holding my breath because I don't want to turn this, but to this very specific point, it is why I still personally believe the Jordan Love timeline can be absolutely perfect.

[YoHoChecko]

So, conclusively, in this rookie wage scale era, the best way to win the Super Bowl is with a Hall of Fame QB on a below-market deal, and that has happened more often in a second contract than in rookie contracts.

I say this holding my breath because I don't want to turn this, but to this very specific point, it is why I still personally believe the Jordan Love timeline can be absolutely perfect.

I agree entirely. He needs to be at least a Flacco or an Eli for that to work out and we've all talked this to death, but giving him a big extension when he's due to be a starter that uses the baseline of his 4th season, the 5th year option, and a franchise tag as the 3-year money he'd otherwise get, you can lock up a well-developed, talented player through his early prime years at a below-market value just like we did with Rodgers because the experience isn't there.

All of that relies entirely on internal scouting and evaluation over the next 2 years. Love will earn it or not. No need kvetching about that now.

[Drj820]

I mean its all relative to other players in the league. Its about respect with your peers and also just setting up your family for generational wealth. Just like at your job you would like to be compensated properly for your performance.

Its an absurd thing to think a player isnt going to go after what theyre worth. It isnt like Rodgers didnt earn what he made last year.

Why is it absurd? https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-bra ... ain-2018-7

One is the GOAT, the other.....
And as for the other GOAT candidate, does anyone doubt that Bart Starr, if he were in Rodgers place now, would take a $10 mil real pay cut to keep his best teammates?

leave Starr out of this, completely different era, almost nothing from back then compares, salary or sacrifices are both foreign to this era.

Brady had a coach and GM that dabbled in UFA every season, they actually went out and brought in receivers, RB, OL etc to help Brady win, Rodgers has never had a GM till Gute that would do that, so why would anyone expect him to take a pay cut for a GM like Thompson.

also Rodgers didn't set the pay scale, the owners did by paying out huge dollars in there bidding wars for players, everyone likes to blame the NFLPA, but they didn't just out of the blue give Aaron Donald a 20 mil. bump on his second contract.

I'd love to get Watt, but I sure as hell don't expect Rodgers to take a pay cut to get it done

I mean life is all about trade offs right? Sure Rodgers deserves probably half to the teams salary cap every year. He also probably deserves near the top salary for QBs every year. He can feel he should take what he deserves and that will be his decision that no one can shame him for it.

Or he can say he has generational wealth already, he knows he is a top qb no matter what he is paid, and he could take a massive paycut to bring in JJ, keep Preston, pay his center, and bring back Aaron Jones. Now this would be a little wild, and it would be a risk because he would still have to go out and make that pay cut worth it by winning the super bowl.

But to someone who is already filthy rich what is more important...a much better chance at a second SB ring, or 20-30 more million dollars? Thats for him to decide. So far he has chosen the money.

Cant blame him. Just saying its an option for him to take a paycut for rings.

[Crazylegs Starks]

Why is it absurd? https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-bra ... ain-2018-7

One is the GOAT, the other.....
And as for the other GOAT candidate, does anyone doubt that Bart Starr, if he were in Rodgers place now, would take a $10 mil real pay cut to keep his best teammates?

Ha! This is impossible to even consider since the times are so different. Starr probably would've never made it in today's NFL. Let's look at his early years:

1956 - started 1 game
1957 - started 11 games, went 3-8
1958 - started 7 games, went 0-6-1, 3 TD, 12 INT
1959 - started 5 games, went 4-1
1960 - started 8 games, went 4-4 but was hot at the end
1961 - finally a full time starter

Most teams today don't have the kind of patience to give a guy 5-6 years to learn, especially after multiple head coaching changes

leave Starr out of this, completely different era, almost nothing from back then compares, salary or sacrifices are both foreign to this era.

For once, I agree with Yoop!

[Yoop]

Why is it absurd? https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-bra ... ain-2018-7

One is the GOAT, the other.....
And as for the other GOAT candidate, does anyone doubt that Bart Starr, if he were in Rodgers place now, would take a $10 mil real pay cut to keep his best teammates?

leave Starr out of this, completely different era, almost nothing from back then compares, salary or sacrifices are both foreign to this era.

Brady had a coach and GM that dabbled in UFA every season, they actually went out and brought in receivers, RB, OL etc to help Brady win, Rodgers has never had a GM till Gute that would do that, so why would anyone expect him to take a pay cut for a GM like Thompson.

also Rodgers didn't set the pay scale, the owners did by paying out huge dollars in there bidding wars for players, everyone likes to blame the NFLPA, but they didn't just out of the blue give Aaron Donald a 20 mil. bump on his second contract.

I'd love to get Watt, but I sure as hell don't expect Rodgers to take a pay cut to get it done

I mean life is all about trade offs right? Sure Rodgers deserves probably half to the teams salary cap every year. He also probably deserves near the top salary for QBs every year. He can feel he should take what he deserves and that will be his decision that no one can shame him for it.

Or he can say he has generational wealth already, he knows he is a top qb no matter what he is paid, and he could take a massive paycut to bring in JJ, keep Preston, pay his center, and bring back Aaron Jones. Now this would be a little wild, and it would be a risk because he would still have to go out and make that pay cut worth it by winning the super bowl.

But to someone who is already filthy rich what is more important...a much better chance at a second SB ring, or 20-30 more million dollars? Thats for him to decide. So far he has chosen the money.

Cant blame him. Just saying its an option for him to take a paycut for rings.

come on you know damn well none of those guys guarantee a SB victory, so Rodgers would take a financial hit for nothing, this team was good enough to win it last year, it didn't because of extenuating circumstances ( crap officiating, and some of the best players not playing as well as they should)

Brady took pay cuts and reworked his contract a few times, each time it was to bring a player aboard more so then resigning existing team players.

lis, why would anyone take a discount contract for Thompson? just to watch him blow his oppertunity to sign one of the best WR's to ever play, or now with Guty, Guty showed how much he wanted to help Rodgers win a SB last year when he drafted Love, not to bring up a sore spot for some here, but thats not the way to inspire someone to take a pay cut for the team, Rodgers went basically 3 years begging for better WR talent, whats Guty do, he drafts 3 mid round WR that where absolutely NOT READY TO PLAY, this team under both Thompson and now lesser so Guty use the D&D approach to team building, nothing wrong with that per se, it's a tried and true way to do it, but ya have to supplement it with ready to play FA, or higher more ready to play draft picks, you want Rodgers to sacrifice when he was never given incentive to, hardly the case with Tom Brady, circumstances matter.

[Yoop]

Why is it absurd? https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-bra ... ain-2018-7

One is the GOAT, the other.....
And as for the other GOAT candidate, does anyone doubt that Bart Starr, if he were in Rodgers place now, would take a $10 mil real pay cut to keep his best teammates?

Ha! This is impossible to even consider since the times are so different. Starr probably would've never made it in today's NFL. Let's look at his early years:

1956 - started 1 game
1957 - started 11 games, went 3-8
1958 - started 7 games, went 0-6-1, 3 TD, 12 INT
1959 - started 5 games, went 4-1
1960 - started 8 games, went 4-4 but was hot at the end
1961 - finally a full time starter

Most teams today don't have the kind of patience to give a guy 5-6 years to learn, especially after multiple head coaching changes

leave Starr out of this, completely different era, almost nothing from back then compares, salary or sacrifices are both foreign to this era.

For once, I agree with Yoop!

wow, not sure if I should feel glad or sad glad obviously that you agree with me concerning this topic, but sad that it sounds like the first time

well, one thing for sure, it's not as though Bart ever had been given enough money to ever take a discount to help the team, 200th player drafted in his draft class, the guy probably had to take a bank loan to survive.

I actually signed Bart to his last contract," Harlan recalled in an interview with ESPN.com. "In fact after five world championships, I gave him his all-time high salary of $100,000."

[Yoop]

Lafluer and Rodgers are so good in the red zone it's becoming tough for Crosby to earn his keep.

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/4th-down-s ... 15117.html

[texas]

How about this

The Super Bowl Winning QBs over the past 11 seasons:

• 7 of 11 had cap numbers of less than 60% the top cap number in the league; only 2 of those were rookies

• Only 1 of 11 had a cap number above 90% of the top cap number in the league

• 9 of 11 were in at least their 5th year in the league

• 1 of 11 had a top-3 cap number that year

• 8 different QBs have won the Super Bowl; Flacco and Foles won't make the HoF; Eli is questionable; the other 5 are locks

So, conclusively, in this rookie wage scale era, the best way to win the Super Bowl is with a Hall of Fame QB on a below-market deal, and that has happened more often in a second contract than in rookie contracts.

Yeah but go all the way back to Elway tbh. The pattern has rewarded below-market QBs for a much longer time than this. The other thing is, your stats for the past decade are sort of skewed because Brady/Manning account for half of the Super Bowls. Before Brady's recent dominance, it really did skew young in addition to below-market.

Regardless, you need a good QB at a cheap price. Just a fact.

[Yoop]

How about this

The Super Bowl Winning QBs over the past 11 seasons:

• 7 of 11 had cap numbers of less than 60% the top cap number in the league; only 2 of those were rookies

• Only 1 of 11 had a cap number above 90% of the top cap number in the league

• 9 of 11 were in at least their 5th year in the league

• 1 of 11 had a top-3 cap number that year

• 8 different QBs have won the Super Bowl; Flacco and Foles won't make the HoF; Eli is questionable; the other 5 are locks

So, conclusively, in this rookie wage scale era, the best way to win the Super Bowl is with a Hall of Fame QB on a below-market deal, and that has happened more often in a second contract than in rookie contracts.

Yeah but go all the way back to Elway tbh. The pattern has rewarded below-market QBs for a much longer time than this. The other thing is, your stats for the past decade are sort of skewed because Brady/Manning account for half of the Super Bowls. Before Brady's recent dominance, it really did skew young in addition to below-market.

Regardless, you need a good QB at a cheap price. Just a fact.

no it's not a fact, Brady is the only QB to win it more then once in the last 14 years, and as Yoho pointed out, most are on 2nd contracts, so rarely are they on cheap contracts, do you even bother to look stuff up?

even Elway was on a expensive contract when he won, just as most of the rest where.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_S ... arterbacks

[APB]

I mean life is all about trade offs right? Sure Rodgers deserves probably half to the teams salary cap every year. He also probably deserves near the top salary for QBs every year. He can feel he should take what he deserves and that will be his decision that no one can shame him for it.

Or he can say he has generational wealth already, he knows he is a top qb no matter what he is paid, and he could take a massive paycut to bring in JJ, keep Preston, pay his center, and bring back Aaron Jones. Now this would be a little wild, and it would be a risk because he would still have to go out and make that pay cut worth it by winning the super bowl.

But to someone who is already filthy rich what is more important...a much better chance at a second SB ring, or 20-30 more million dollars? Thats for him to decide. So far he has chosen the money.

I'm not sure it'd be that easy.

The NFLPA puts a lot of pressure on players to maximize their contracts as do their agents. It is, after all, a business. The union needs those huge contracts to leverage their larger overall negotiating position.

I get the impression Rodgers, or Watt for that matter, would receive serious blowback if they signed a significantly below market contract, especially if the team that benefited from the contract then simply rolled the savings over and didn't make an honest effort to maximize the talent around that player.

Yes, Brady signed some contracts that weren't ceiling breaking deals but it's not like he was playing for peanuts, either. Rodgers cutting a million or two off his annual compensation is not gonna get this team in a position to sign whoever they want. It'd take a significant rework with significant savings to realize that advantage. I think the forces aligned against that type deal are pretty powerful and I would be very surprised to see it happen.

[APB]

do you even bother to look stuff up?

I just had to quote this...

[YoHoChecko]

Yeah but go all the way back to Elway tbh. The pattern has rewarded below-market QBs for a much longer time than this. The other thing is, your stats for the past decade are sort of skewed because Brady/Manning account for half of the Super Bowls. Before Brady's recent dominance, it really did skew young in addition to below-market.

Regardless, you need a good QB at a cheap price. Just a fact.

Going all the way back eliminates the argument about rookie wage scales because it used to be that early pick rookie contracts were top-of-the-market deals. For instance in 2011, Mark Sanchez had the highest QB cap value in the league based on the final year of his rookie contract. That's why I stopped when I did.

So before Brady's second streak of dominance, even if you had Big Ben and Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco all succeeding on rookie contracts, they weren't bargains or values or less expensive.

Plus, while Brady's wins put a tally in the column for taking less money, Manning's SB win was the only time a top-3 cap number won a SB ring. So lumping Brady and Manning together in this discussion is antithetical. They are opposite ends of the spectrum.

And on one hand, you can say Brady's win streak skews the numbers. But on the other hand, you could suggest a causal link--that maybe Brady winning all these Super Bowls is in part BECAUSE he took less money and his teams could always afford that one extra piece. There's certainly not conclusive evidence on that, but there also aren't a lot of examples of HoF QBs playing multiple seasons at the 60th or 70th percentile of QB contracts. The one example we do have has set the bar for dominance, suggesting it is something worth attempting to replicate.

[Yoop]

do you even bother to look stuff up?

I just had to quote this...

just shut up