Packers Huddle

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 07:44

go pak go wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 07:15

So basically the Packers offered a contract of "Pay as you Play" like everyone on this forum here wanted and Jones said....no.

Dalvin Cook was given $28 Million in Guarantee Pay.

come on, who here ever thought Jones would sign a contract absent of some of it guaranteed? I sure didn't, I figured a 3 yr contract with team options for year 3, but either all of the first two years guaranteed or most of it.

thats fair, if you want him to take less then top annual dollar, then ya have to offer other incentives

Obviously we knew there would likely be some guaranteed money in the deal. But the amount of guaranteed is the question. Did we offer $20 Guaranteed? $30 Guaranteed?

We have no idea at this point. I would be absolutely shocked if Jones would take less than a 4 year deal and my guess is he is very much closer to the Calvin Cook, or higher, than say the Joe Mixon type of contract at this point.

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 08:11

BF004 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 08:03

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 07:56

whos guessing? who plays for pay after being one of the best RB's in the league for two straight seasons?

If thats what the FO offered then they shouldn't have even made a offer

You and everyone else?

It didn’t say anything about pay for play.

No idea why you are getting upset about this. We don’t know what the packers offered. You are acting if you think it was zero guaranteed.

I'am not upset, and I responded to this, GPG does not get to speak for the members of this forum.

So basically the Packers offered a contract of "Pay as you Play" like everyone on this forum here wanted and Jones said....no.

Dude. You need to stop nitpicking and making mountains out of mole hills of everything I say and then get in an angry mood with everyone else who discusses around it.

I get it. You don't like me. I don't deserve why you don't like me but I get you don't like me. Message is pretty loud and clear.

We had a discussion on another thread where we discussed potential contract numbers for Jones and compared his to McCaffrey, Cook, Kamara and Mixon. I would still imagine that is where he lines up. Clearly we didn't offer the guaranteed portion that Jones likes which I don't fault him for. I would want more guaranteed too, but as a fan I wish he would have taken it. We all want our players to give us "friendly team deals"

They can still probably work something out by using signing bonus to front load the contract (giving him guaranteed money at the same time) and reduce 2021 and 2022 cap hit if they really want him with really large annual salary numbers on the back half of the contract to still give us an "out" after year 3.

go pak go wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 08:33

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 07:44

go pak go wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 07:15

So basically the Packers offered a contract of "Pay as you Play" like everyone on this forum here wanted and Jones said....no.

Dalvin Cook was given $28 Million in Guarantee Pay.

come on, who here ever thought Jones would sign a contract absent of some of it guaranteed? I sure didn't, I figured a 3 yr contract with team options for year 3, but either all of the first two years guaranteed or most of it.

thats fair, if you want him to take less then top annual dollar, then ya have to offer other incentives

Obviously we knew there would likely be some guaranteed money in the deal. But the amount of guaranteed is the question. Did we offer $20 Guaranteed? $30 Guaranteed?

We have no idea at this point. I would be absolutely shocked if Jones would take less than a 4 year deal and my guess is he is very much closer to the Calvin Cook, or higher, than say the Joe Mixon type of contract at this point.

this is what you should have said the first time, instead of this play for pay BS which says nothing about quarantee's, and it doesn't matter if he gets a 10 yr contract for 150 mil. as long as the team has a get out thing written in after the first 2 guaranteed years , WHO CARES, really, does it matter?

as you said, your guessing

go pak go wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 08:44

Dude. You need to stop nitpicking and making mountains out of mole hills of everything I say and then get in an angry mood with everyone else who discusses around it.

I get it. You don't like me. I don't deserve why you don't like me but I get you don't like me. Message is pretty loud and clear.

this is so wrong, in fact a few times I've felt like Pming you to explain my feelings, hate the sin, love the sinner, speaks volumes here, I don't hate anyone here, and I apolagize to all if I've given that impression.

you do rub me the wrong way though when you critic our players so unfairly, and my impression is that what ever the FO does has to be acceptable, I've been around a long time and I challange FO decisions probably more then others, and you have to admit some of your post are just baiting for a argument, just as this one seemed when I read it, you don't get to speak for the forum, speak for yourself, and your comments are not facts, they are your opinions, just as most post from everyone here are, I enjoy most of your comments, do I have to compliment you about everyone of em?

and while I'am old and retired I'am still busy, and I admit to not giving some post a full explanation simply do to lack of time, but I sure as hell don't hate you, if I did I wouldn't even talk to you.

Yoop wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 09:01

go pak go wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 08:44

Dude. You need to stop nitpicking and making mountains out of mole hills of everything I say and then get in an angry mood with everyone else who discusses around it.

I get it. You don't like me. I don't deserve why you don't like me but I get you don't like me. Message is pretty loud and clear.

this is so wrong, in fact a few times I've felt like Pming you to explain my feelings, hate the sin, love the sinner, speaks volumes here, I don't hate anyone here, and I apolagize to all if I've given that impression.

you do rub me the wrong way though when you critic our players so unfairly, and my impression is that what ever the FO does has to be acceptable, I've been around a long time and I challange FO decisions probably more then others, and you have to admit some of your post are just baiting for a argument, just as this one seemed when I read it, you don't get to speak for the forum, speak for yourself, and your comments are not facts, they are your opinions, just as most post from everyone here are, I enjoy most of your comments, do I have to compliment you about everyone of em?

and while I'am old and retired I'am still busy, and I admit to not giving some post a full explanation simply do to lack of time, but I sure as hell don't hate you, if I did I wouldn't even talk to you.

My comment regarding this Jones contract had no baiting whatsoever. That thought never crossed my mind.

In fact, you and I have agreed we are one of the two people who are in the camp of pay Jones really what he wants to keep him here. I truly think he is that important to our offense.

But come on with the whole critique of players unfairly. You have a problem with one player I critique which I have not done often this year. Last Saturday was really the first time I have done it in a while and he frankly deserved it a little bit. Even Andy Herman brought it up in his grades that the offense left a lot on the field. You have a problem with anyone critiquing that player. But understand there is a pot meet kettle here. I don't say the FO does everything that is acceptable. In fact I have documented many times before the season how important this year was for BG's draft grades. He needed guys like 52 and 26 to succeed or he would deservedly start being questioned. My bigger thing is I said, "let it play out. Too early to judge" As the season has progressed, I have recognized what the FO has been doing is working as they have put together a squad that is probably the best team in the NFL after a 2 year turn around that is not dependent on 12 making us so. In addition, when you are defending the player you love, you are also at the same time unfairly criticizing lower level depth roster players (you actually call them stooges) who are clearly playing their heart out and that effort has led to a fantastic Packers season.

Honestly, signing a RB, I wouldn't want to have a contract that ensures he's un-releasable beyond 2 years. And that sounds like what they offered.

The question is: did Jones fire his agent because the agent couldn't get to a deal and he hoped another agent would.... or have they more or less moved on from the Packers' offers.

If the reporting is accurate then that would mean Jones would have made more than Dalvin Cook's average of $12.6 million a year. I am going to assume that we did not offer him over 45% of the contract guaranteed. The lowest guaranteed percentage in the top 20 contracts is again Cook with 44.64%.

I am ok with not offering him more than 50% guaranteed.

The only high contract players with more than 50%+ guaranteed are Rodgers, Bakhtiari an Adams.

On the other hand, Clark is pretty darned close (48.7%), and there are only two other high-dollar contracts, the Smith brothers.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 09:37

Honestly, signing a RB, I wouldn't want to have a contract that ensures he's un-releasable beyond 2 years. And that sounds like what they offered.

The question is: did Jones fire his agent because the agent couldn't get to a deal and he hoped another agent would.... or have they more or less moved on from the Packers' offers.

I havn't seen any contract offers besides speculation from cheesehead and a few other sources, and I doubt they have any real insider info.

imo contract extensions have to not only respect the future of the player, but also express gratitude and reward for the past performance, it's why players want extensions prior to the last contract year, Jones earned around 750,000 this season, or about 11.3 mil. less then he deserved lol. seriously though, we've milked this cowbell RB, last year cheesehead felt he should get 12.3 annual with 25 mil. guaranteed on a 5 year deal, I expect that might be about what Jones wants this season, we'll see what happens.

Half Empty wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 10:44

On the other hand, Clark is pretty darned close (48.7%), and there are only two other high-dollar contracts, the Smith brothers.

Other than rookies, no other player has over 50% guaranteed.

The Packers rarely give greater than 50% guaranteed contracts. The 3 that have them can easily be considered the best at their positions.

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 11:20

Half Empty wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 10:44

On the other hand, Clark is pretty darned close (48.7%), and there are only two other high-dollar contracts, the Smith brothers.

Other than rookies, no other player has over 50% guaranteed.

The Packers rarely give greater than 50% guaranteed contracts. The 3 that have them can easily be considered the best at their positions.

Certainly true, and zero difference to what I said. My point was you made a big deal out of only three high contracts being over 50%, and I thought it worthwhile to point out that they represent half of all the high contracts, and one more is a sliver away from making it 2/3. I try to get the beyond the fact that you always have to be right, but sometimes the lengths you go to in order to so are almost absurd. However, if it'll make you feel better, I wholeheartedly agree that only three current high contracts are over 50%.

Half Empty wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 12:22

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 11:20

Half Empty wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2021 10:44

On the other hand, Clark is pretty darned close (48.7%), and there are only two other high-dollar contracts, the Smith brothers.

Other than rookies, no other player has over 50% guaranteed.

The Packers rarely give greater than 50% guaranteed contracts. The 3 that have them can easily be considered the best at their positions.

Certainly true, and zero difference to what I said. My point was you made a big deal out of only three high contracts being over 50%, and I thought it worthwhile to point out that they represent half of all the high contracts, and one more is a sliver away from making it 2/3. I try to get the beyond the fact that you always have to be right, but sometimes the lengths you go to in order to so are almost absurd. However, if it'll make you feel better, I wholeheartedly agree that only three current high contracts are over 50%.

I was not disagreeing with you, nor was I making a big deal out of anything. I was simply providing facts to help shed light on the situation.

Not sure where the hostility came from...

Is it me or did the convo’s on this thread denigrate and sound a lot like depressed Packer fans...lol

This almost makes it a no brainer, doesn’t it?

That is interesting.

I was expecting like 12, impractical when you could get his year 1 cap hit down to 5-6, but 8.5 gotta be tempting if they can agree to anything longer.


OL should be split by position. With the Bak and Tunsil market going on, C’s and G’s not gunna be so far behind.

I posted in my most recent mock that we tag Jones. I think that makes the most sense. You avoid the long term deal for backs and get him on a very affordable deal.

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2021 15:29

I posted in my most recent mock that we tag Jones. I think that makes the most sense. You avoid the long term deal for backs and get him on a very affordable deal.

When you looked at franchise estimate previously, around like $12, that would be silly to do that.

BF004 wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2021 17:50

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

07 Feb 2021 15:29

I posted in my most recent mock that we tag Jones. I think that makes the most sense. You avoid the long term deal for backs and get him on a very affordable deal.

When you looked at franchise estimate previously, around like $12, that would be silly to do that.

In my mock I think I estimated it at 10 which was what OTC had estimated. Thats still an easy move to make. Even at 12 I think you do it.

ITs the long term deal you dont want for RBs. A 1 year deal is the perfect move to be made here.

Yeah I think $8.5 million does make sense. I think you also try and sign Jones after that with the advantage of being able to spread cap over future years when it likely goes up.

But Jones is a playmaker and one that we should make every effort to keep.