2022 Cap

[Yoop]

Yup.

When someone tells you something...believe them.

Well, unless he's talking about be vaccinated.

Who on the Packers said they were "vaccinated" and were not?

duh

[go pak go]

Let's not have the vaccination discussion kidnap the 2022 Cap Thread please.

[YoHoChecko]

Well I'm listening to what he says now and not in the past. He is the one being reflective and saying that he's in a good place. My point was the last sentence...we will find out if he just wants to finish a Packer or whether he wants to finish a Packer with a competitive team and the teammates he "loves" so much. There is no way you can convince me he expects the Packers to keep him and Davantae if they are paying him $30+ million. The guy is not an idiot. He doesn't need money but he certainly needs Adams if he wants to be successful here. Why not take the discount to keep Adams? It's actually the logical thing to do.

Rodgers was on Pat McAfee talking about how happy he was and how much fun he was having all throughout the 2020 season. That is not his issue and never has been. That he is saying happy thought things now is as meaningless this year as it was last year.

Rodgers has gotten 3 major contract extensions in his career. The first came during his first season as a starter. He was paid handsomely, but not as a top player. The next two contract extensions made him the highest-paid player in the league at the time of signing in terms of new money and new years.

He has never indicated, hinted, or acted on his ability to take less money.

If you think there is a chance that this would happen because he loves his teammates, you are making that up. You're not listening to a word he has said. You are speculating your way into hope. There is not a shred of innuendo, evidence, implication... that he would take less than being the highest paid player in the league, depending on how you choose to view Mahomes' weirdly structured 12-year contract. He has never opened that door. We don't need to "find out." It is done. It has been written and said; asked and answered. Aaron Rodgers does not play for less. This is the prime way that he has never desired to be more like Tom Brady. Funny where a guy draws the line, right?

[bud fox]

Well I'm listening to what he says now and not in the past. He is the one being reflective and saying that he's in a good place. My point was the last sentence...we will find out if he just wants to finish a Packer or whether he wants to finish a Packer with a competitive team and the teammates he "loves" so much. There is no way you can convince me he expects the Packers to keep him and Davantae if they are paying him $30+ million. The guy is not an idiot. He doesn't need money but he certainly needs Adams if he wants to be successful here. Why not take the discount to keep Adams? It's actually the logical thing to do.

Rodgers was on Pat McAfee talking about how happy he was and how much fun he was having all throughout the 2020 season. That is not his issue and never has been. That he is saying happy thought things now is as meaningless this year as it was last year.

Rodgers has gotten 3 major contract extensions in his career. The first came during his first season as a starter. He was paid handsomely, but not as a top player. The next two contract extensions made him the highest-paid player in the league at the time of signing in terms of new money and new years.

He has never indicated, hinted, or acted on his ability to take less money.

If you think there is a chance that this would happen because he loves his teammates, you are making that up. You're not listening to a word he has said. You are speculating your way into hope. There is not a shred of innuendo, evidence, implication... that he would take less than being the highest paid player in the league, depending on how you choose to view Mahomes' weirdly structured 12-year contract. He has never opened that door. We don't need to "find out." It is done. It has been written and said; asked and answered. Aaron Rodgers does not play for less. This is the prime way that he has never desired to be more like Tom Brady. Funny where a guy draws the line, right?

I don't think Rodgers will take a pay cut, atleast not with the packers. He has issues with them - why would he help them out?

If Rodgers takes a pay cut so should Mark Murphy, Gute, MLF and everyone else. It starts to become a philosophical argument.

Also Packers are the number 1 seed with Rodgers on his current contract - so the team can be highly successful with Rodgers on a big contract. It is up to management to decide do we want big money Rodgers and fill out the rest of the team or do we want to spend the money elsewhere.

[wallyuwl]

Well, Murphy, Gute, etc don't count against the cap. But maybe the gesture would sway AR to take less than market value? He us big on action, not words.

[go pak go]

Bud, the Packers are able to field an awesome team while paying Rodgers a lot of money for a variety of reasons.

1. They drafted pretty damned well the last 5 years or so (especially 2019 and later)
2. Rodgers is playing up to his contract
3. Their external signings have been incredibly effective. Gute has an unbelievable hit rate on his FA signings.
4. The Packers have deferred a sh*t load of cap into future years. This is not sustainable and why another team can absorb Rodgers's contract if he wants top dollar and a top team. He has essentially used the Packers up. The Packers paid for it and are just hoping a ring back in GB will make it all worth it.

But let me get one thing straight. The Packers financially only were able to do what they did in 2019 - 2021 because they deferred cap expense like crazy. They cannot do this at this level moving forward. They can only try and continue to defer cap to appease and keep Rodgers by pushing cap space into say 2023 - 2026 or so but they still will feel a lot of 2022 cap pain at other places on the team to do so.

And the results have been really, really good. Only the best team in NFL history over a three year time frame with more wins than any team in the league's history over a 3 year span.

[bud fox]

Bud, the Packers are able to field an awesome team while paying Rodgers a lot of money for a variety of reasons.

1. They drafted pretty damned well the last 5 years or so (especially 2019 and later)
2. Rodgers is playing up to his contract
3. Their external signings have been incredibly effective. Gute has an unbelievable hit rate on his FA signings.
4. The Packers have deferred a sh*t load of cap into future years. This is not sustainable and why another team can absorb Rodgers's contract if he wants top dollar and a top team. He has essentially used the Packers up. The Packers paid for it and are just hoping a ring back in GB will make it all worth it.

But let me get one thing straight. The Packers financially only were able to do what they did in 2019 - 2021 because they deferred cap expense like crazy. They cannot do this at this level moving forward. They can only try and continue to defer cap to appease and keep Rodgers by pushing cap space into say 2023 - 2026 or so but they still will feel a lot of 2022 cap pain at other places on the team to do so.

And the results have been really, really good. Only the best team in NFL history over a three year time frame with more wins than any team in the league's history over a 3 year span.

So the only issue out of the 4 things you listed is deferring cap space. So they can't possibly continue to do this? 1,2 and 3 can continue with a market value Rodgers contract. I don't know the technicalities on deferral but I have seen people suggested they do it for Jaire and Clark etc. Also are we not expecting a jump in cap? That will surely help considering the restrictive cap growth in the most recent period.

[Pckfn23]

No, because we are incurring a lot of dead cap with this strategy unless all the people we extended with voidable years choose to sign with us at below market value. It is not a sustainable strategy. It is an all-in strategy.

[go pak go]

Bud, the Packers are able to field an awesome team while paying Rodgers a lot of money for a variety of reasons.

1. They drafted pretty damned well the last 5 years or so (especially 2019 and later)
2. Rodgers is playing up to his contract
3. Their external signings have been incredibly effective. Gute has an unbelievable hit rate on his FA signings.
4. The Packers have deferred a sh*t load of cap into future years. This is not sustainable and why another team can absorb Rodgers's contract if he wants top dollar and a top team. He has essentially used the Packers up. The Packers paid for it and are just hoping a ring back in GB will make it all worth it.

But let me get one thing straight. The Packers financially only were able to do what they did in 2019 - 2021 because they deferred cap expense like crazy. They cannot do this at this level moving forward. They can only try and continue to defer cap to appease and keep Rodgers by pushing cap space into say 2023 - 2026 or so but they still will feel a lot of 2022 cap pain at other places on the team to do so.

And the results have been really, really good. Only the best team in NFL history over a three year time frame with more wins than any team in the league's history over a 3 year span.

So the only issue out of the 4 things you listed is deferring cap space. So they can't possibly continue to do this? 1,2 and 3 can continue with a market value Rodgers contract. I don't know the technicalities on deferral but I have seen people suggested they do it for Jaire and Clark etc. Also are we not expecting a jump in cap? That will surely help considering the restrictive cap growth in the most recent period.

They can to a point.
The challenge is each time you do it, you simply further limit yourself what you can do in future years. You lose future year flexibility. And at some point the music does have to stop.

Also, yes...the cap will continue to rise, but all this ultimately does is raise the level of future contracts. Rashan Gary for example, is going to likely be insanely expensive based on our current mind frame because his market value will be based on future league-wide cap increases. You can't sign Rashan Gary to an extension after 2022 if Kenny Clark has a 2023 and 2024 cap hit of $30 million or more.

The other major challenge is you will be forced to cut good players for minimal savings while incurring huge dead cap, a stupid way to run a team consistently. Like we may have to have a 2023 Packers where our LT is making $6 million on the cap but we have a dead cap hit to Bakhtiari of $14 million just to band-aid together Rodgers and Adams for another year. The model is fragile and could unravel into disaster very quickly.

I think the Packers and Rodgers could do it if they really want to. But Aaron Rodgers better continue to play at 2020 and last 6 games of 2021 levels for it to be worth it.

[YoHoChecko]

So the only issue out of the 4 things you listed is deferring cap space. So they can't possibly continue to do this? 1,2 and 3 can continue with a market value Rodgers contract. I don't know the technicalities on deferral but I have seen people suggested they do it for Jaire and Clark etc. Also are we not expecting a jump in cap? That will surely help considering the restrictive cap growth in the most recent period.

The way they deferred the cap is, indeed, unsustainable because the impacts compound.

What we have now is a lot of money that will be allocated for players that are no longer on the team in the coming years. That's what these signing bonuses spread across void years does. Personally, I think it's a cap loophole that needs to be banned, the same way they got rid of unlikely to be earned incentives and just made extra space roll over en masse, but that's a different topic.

If you keep doing these types of deferrals, the percentage of your cap taken up by players no longer on your roster continues to compound and grow, because you don't always eat it in one year; you can do a post June-1st cut and have dead money on the books for 2 years. Anyway, the space allocated to players no longer on the team crowds out the space you can use for players on the team, essentially giving you a lower effective cap than teams without such dead money. Now you're on an uneven playing field trying to pay great players what they're worth while also being limited to a lower expenditure for active players than your competitors.

It's a short term game and it's the kind of thing the team never used to do. Gutey pushed the chips all in and while I think we can make some moves and field a competitive roster again next year, it does force our hand, and it can't go on forever.

The Saints pulled this off for the last few years of Brees' career and wound up paying the piper in Brees' last year when they had to make a bunch of moves to get uner the cap in 2020 and 2021 the same way we'll have to this year.

Drew Brees, for what it's worth, still costs the Saints $11 mil this year. He will count for $11 million again next year. The Saints have $47 million in dead money under their cap--that's cap allocation to players no longer on their roster. That's more than 25% of their cap going to players who aren't on the roster. They didn't get Brees that last Super Bowl, either. AND they don't have their next QB. Essentially, this is the future you advocate for when you advocate for continuing deferrals

Of course the Saints may still eke into the playoffs, so...

[go pak go]

Basically I just want to win one ring so we can make this worth it and play with house money.

The Saints is the ultimate picture of failure. They went all in and have nothing to show for it outside of b*tching about a ref's pass interference call vs the Rams.

I don't want that. I want just one f*cking ring. I want what Tom Brady does in his sleep to make this whole thing worth it.

[Pckfn23]

Eagles did it too some years back.

[go pak go]

Eagles did it too since years back.

2011

[BSA]

There is not a shred of innuendo, evidence, implication... that he would take less than being the highest paid player in the league, depending on how you choose to view Mahomes' weirdly structured 12-year contract. He has never opened that door. We don't need to "find out." It is done. It has been written and said; asked and answered. Aaron Rodgers does not play for less.

I will bet you one dollar that he does.
And the reasons he will are because that's aligned with what he really wants ( more Titles) and he no longer needs to measure his worth by his paycheck. Taking a top QB contract prevents him from attaining the goals he values more than his bank account. You don't need to argue your point any further, you've made a cogent and lucid argument above. Just let me know if you're in for $ 1.

edited to add: Rodgers said the regular season is where you earn your money, the playoffs/Championships are where you earn your legacy

[Yoop]

great comments, we all would like to retain Rodgers, reality is it might not be possible

almost every thing the team has done since Guty took over focused on building a better defense and strengthening the run game, we added a monster RB and bigger OL guys, retained Lewis arguably the best blocking TE in the league, added Dequora, sort of a clone type guy to Lewis, the additions to the WR room is Cobb, a pacifier for Rodgers and drafted Amari his clone, all receivers are asked to block, and do it pretty well, and we now have closed the balance of run to pass, Running more successfully burns clock, keeps the opposing offense on the bench, and keeps our defense rested.

Point is the FO has built towards a time when Rodgers isn't the QB any more, imo they wont scavange this team to keep him, not when we have such a potent rushing attack and a stingy defense, Love will get the baptism under fire ( I say that because he's played very little in live fire action, he's still a newbie) and will either do well, or he wont, who knows we could even bring in a vet or two to push him.

End of a era, be nice to keep Tae to smooth the transition to Love, but I have my doubts about that to, a tag if possible would produce some resources, we could draft and buy a couple receivers for what we could get for Adams, again imo we will become even more of a run focused offense, we do a ton of R/P option now, as this OL matures together I expect that to increase even more.

rant over lets go and get a ring.

[YoHoChecko]

There is not a shred of innuendo, evidence, implication... that he would take less than being the highest paid player in the league, depending on how you choose to view Mahomes' weirdly structured 12-year contract. He has never opened that door. We don't need to "find out." It is done. It has been written and said; asked and answered. Aaron Rodgers does not play for less.

I will bet you one dollar that he does.
And the reasons he will are because that's aligned with what he really wants ( more Titles) and he no longer needs to measure his worth by his paycheck. Taking a top QB contract prevents him from attaining the goals he values more than his bank account. You don't need to argue your point any further, you've made a cogent and lucid argument above. Just let me know if you're in for $ 1.

edited to add: Rodgers said the regular season is where you earn your money, the playoffs/Championships are where you earn your legacy

Sure, I'll bet a dollar, but we have to define what it means to take less. I would imagine that teams would struggle to match $45 million per year that Mahomes got due to the length of that deal and the structure and the fact that he had 2 years left on the deal when he signed it, so the "new money, new years" portion is pushed up. Josh Allen signed a 6-year $258 ($43M/year) million deal, but also had 2 years left on his deal to jack up the new money/new years reporting.

If the bar is under $39 million per year is "taking less" and over $39 million per year is "taking the market value" I'm in.

[APB]

There is not a shred of innuendo, evidence, implication... that he would take less than being the highest paid player in the league, depending on how you choose to view Mahomes' weirdly structured 12-year contract. He has never opened that door. We don't need to "find out." It is done. It has been written and said; asked and answered. Aaron Rodgers does not play for less.

I will bet you one dollar that he does.
And the reasons he will are because that's aligned with what he really wants ( more Titles) and he no longer needs to measure his worth by his paycheck. Taking a top QB contract prevents him from attaining the goals he values more than his bank account. You don't need to argue your point any further, you've made a cogent and lucid argument above. Just let me know if you're in for $ 1.

edited to add: Rodgers said the regular season is where you earn your money, the playoffs/Championships are where you earn your legacy

You hit on thoughts I was having as I read [mention]YoHoChecko[/mention]’s post.

People change. Priorities change. Goals change.

What Rodgers prioritized his last extension may not be what he prioritizes this time ‘round. Yes, I get what Yoho is saying and history does support his rather strong assertion that Rodgers WILL NOT take less but as we all know, he is one complicated dude. It may be over-simplifying things to just assume Rodgers still covets beings the highest paid player at this point in his career. He’s got that distinction twice already and look what it’s got him.

[British]

Yes, for all the admiration Rodgers receives for his play, his legacy is currently one of missed opportunity and squandered talent. It may be the Packers that squandered his talent, rather than Rodgers himself, but the fact remains that in 30 years of unbroken Hall of Fame quarterbacking, the Packers have only got 2 Superbowls. It must burn Rodgers that he's won the same as Joe Flacco and Trent Dilfer, fewer than Eli Manning and Big Ben.

If Rodgers wants to be seen as a winner, he's going to need another ring, whether that be in Green Bay or elsewhere. It's possible that if he fails again to win one here he may decide his chances are better served in Denver, where Manning and Elway happened to get their late career Superbowl victories.

[YoHoChecko]

If Rodgers wants to be seen as a winner, he's going to need another ring, whether that be in Green Bay or elsewhere. It's possible that if he fails again to win one here he may decide his chances are better served in Denver, where Manning and Elway happened to get their late career Superbowl victories.

I think if he GETS a ring here, he's more likely to move on, because his legacy will be secure and so the stakes of his move won't be as high.

[British]

If Rodgers wants to be seen as a winner, he's going to need another ring, whether that be in Green Bay or elsewhere. It's possible that if he fails again to win one here he may decide his chances are better served in Denver, where Manning and Elway happened to get their late career Superbowl victories.

I think if he GETS a ring here, he's more likely to move on, because his legacy will be secure and so the stakes of his move won't be as high.

I can see that. The psychology of this is interesting. It's possible the best for both parties is they go their separate ways after the season.

But if they break up a SB winner you can imagine the meltdown in media land as the hot takes roll in.

Get ready for: "How could they end a Superbowl winning partnership! I don't care about the cap, you find a way to make it work!"