Packers Huddle

I woulda traded him. They have a pretty good receiver group without him, could flip him for picks, plus go hog wild in FA while McCarthy is on his rookie deal if he's any good, build up a stacked roster around him. I'm not a big believer in JJ but Sean McVay got to a SuperBowl with a middling Jared Goff by having a really talented top-to-bottom roster.

Labrev wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:44

I woulda traded him. They have a pretty good receiver group without him, could flip him for picks, plus go hog wild in FA while McCarthy is on his rookie deal if he's any good, build up a stacked roster around him. I'm not a big believer in JJ but Sean McVay got to a SuperBowl with a middling Jared Goff by having a really talented top-to-bottom roster.

fans like have the highest paid player at there position, this place went hog chit bananas when we did it with Rodgers

I always said 2 very good are better then one super star when it comes to receivers, and 3 is better then two.

I do believe though the better receiver you give a rookie QB the easier it will be for that QB to gain confidence, and JJ is as good as they come.

who didn't think Jefferson would get this or close to it? I was sure he would, ya pay for production, and he gives ya that.

now he just has to stay healthy

As I always like to do; worth pointing out that the 4-year $140M extension is a 5-year $148M deal

New money/new years, $35M/year. But actual life of the contract, still a hair under $30M/year

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:54

Labrev wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:44

I woulda traded him. They have a pretty good receiver group without him, could flip him for picks, plus go hog wild in FA while McCarthy is on his rookie deal if he's any good, build up a stacked roster around him. I'm not a big believer in JJ but Sean McVay got to a SuperBowl with a middling Jared Goff by having a really talented top-to-bottom roster.

fans like have the highest paid player at there position, this place went hog chit bananas when we did it with Rodgers

I always said 2 very good are better then one super star when it comes to receivers, and 3 is better then two.

I do believe though the better receiver you give a rookie QB the easier it will be for that QB to gain confidence, and JJ is as good as they come.

who didn't think Jefferson would get this or close to it? I was sure he would, ya pay for production, and he gives ya that.

now he just has to stay healthy

It makes sense for many teams, but where Minnesota is right now, it is a little bit of a tougher sell. By the time the team is good, again, Jefferson will be entering decline years or will need another, even higher-priced contract. I think you do it 10/10 times, but from a Vikings fan standpoint, I think you would have wanted the timing to work out better. I also get @Labrev's position, but that also sends the wrong message to locker room about how this team is set to grow and develop. These big money deals are never super-easy decisions.

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 11:51

As I always like to do; worth pointing out that the 4-year $140M extension is a 5-year $148M deal

New money/new years, $35M/year. But actual life of the contract, still a hair under $30M/year

I also think this was the obvious domino to fall first as (in contrast to many) I think Ja'Marr and CD are better receivers and will get even more $$$.

Definitely mixed feelings. JJ is awesome and well deserving of the deal. On the other hand, my goodness that money is insane and I'm glad it's not us paying it, although in about 2-3 years, we'll have to pay our WR's (but not that kind of contract unless one of them blows up).

NCF wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 12:57

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:54

Labrev wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:44

I woulda traded him. They have a pretty good receiver group without him, could flip him for picks, plus go hog wild in FA while McCarthy is on his rookie deal if he's any good, build up a stacked roster around him. I'm not a big believer in JJ but Sean McVay got to a SuperBowl with a middling Jared Goff by having a really talented top-to-bottom roster.

fans like have the highest paid player at there position, this place went hog chit bananas when we did it with Rodgers

I always said 2 very good are better then one super star when it comes to receivers, and 3 is better then two.

I do believe though the better receiver you give a rookie QB the easier it will be for that QB to gain confidence, and JJ is as good as they come.

who didn't think Jefferson would get this or close to it? I was sure he would, ya pay for production, and he gives ya that.

now he just has to stay healthy

It makes sense for many teams, but where Minnesota is right now, it is a little bit of a tougher sell. By the time the team is good, again, Jefferson will be entering decline years or will need another, even higher-priced contract. I think you do it 10/10 times, but from a Vikings fan standpoint, I think you would have wanted the timing to work out better. I also get @Labrev's position, but that also sends the wrong message to locker room about how this team is set to grow and develop. These big money deals are never super-easy decisions.

This is kind of my point. Minnesota should not even consider kicking the can with him, but its the Vikings, so its certainly possible. Not a position I would want to be in if the team arrow starts pointing up for them.

Man. I just want to keep drafting WRs. The money going to the position is absolutley insane.

I could be in favor of paying Watson if he stays healthy because you can't teach that athleticism but you gotta keep it to a 2nd contract only. As the athleticism goes away...so does Watson.

Fortunately we seem to be pretty good at drafting WRs for the exception of Ty Montgomery and Amari Rodgers. And even Ty Mont was more personality and team fit issues than talent issues.

NCF wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 13:10

NCF wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 12:57

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:54

fans like have the highest paid player at there position, this place went hog chit bananas when we did it with Rodgers

I always said 2 very good are better then one super star when it comes to receivers, and 3 is better then two.

I do believe though the better receiver you give a rookie QB the easier it will be for that QB to gain confidence, and JJ is as good as they come.

who didn't think Jefferson would get this or close to it? I was sure he would, ya pay for production, and he gives ya that.

now he just has to stay healthy

It makes sense for many teams, but where Minnesota is right now, it is a little bit of a tougher sell. By the time the team is good, again, Jefferson will be entering decline years or will need another, even higher-priced contract. I think you do it 10/10 times, but from a Vikings fan standpoint, I think you would have wanted the timing to work out better. I also get @Labrev's position, but that also sends the wrong message to locker room about how this team is set to grow and develop. These big money deals are never super-easy decisions.

This is kind of my point. Minnesota should not even consider kicking the can with him, but its the Vikings, so its certainly possible. Not a position I would want to be in if the team arrow starts pointing up for them.

Love how he assumes the Vikings will have to clear cap space in 2026-27. Apparently having $169 million in cap space in 2026 isn't enough right now. Packers are in deep dodo, because they only have $167 million in cap space right now for 2026. And they have to sign Love and a few other players.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 14:03

NCF wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 13:10

NCF wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 12:57

It makes sense for many teams, but where Minnesota is right now, it is a little bit of a tougher sell. By the time the team is good, again, Jefferson will be entering decline years or will need another, even higher-priced contract. I think you do it 10/10 times, but from a Vikings fan standpoint, I think you would have wanted the timing to work out better. I also get @Labrev's position, but that also sends the wrong message to locker room about how this team is set to grow and develop. These big money deals are never super-easy decisions.

This is kind of my point. Minnesota should not even consider kicking the can with him, but its the Vikings, so its certainly possible. Not a position I would want to be in if the team arrow starts pointing up for them.

Love how he assumes the Vikings will have to clear cap space in 2026-27. Apparently having $169 million in cap space in 2026 isn't enough right now. Packers are in deep dodo, because they only have $167 million in cap space right now for 2026. And they have to sign Love and a few other players.

Yes, it is a hypothetical and he prefaced it as such by saying he is assuming.....

He is just noting the max end of what they can do. No big mean Packer conspiracy here. Just called analysis.

Yoop wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 10:54

fans like have the highest paid player at there position, this place went hog chit bananas when we did it with Rodgers

Your memory has failed you...again.

The only excitement I recall over Rodgers getting signed to a long term deal was excitement for the future and excitement over having arguably the best player in the league secured.

If anything, and similar to the discussion currently taking place over the inevitable Love extension, there was apprehension over how Rodgers cap number would impact the rest of the roster, not this yearning to have the highest paid player on the roster. You'll surely note (or not) in the current Love discussion, not a single mention of desire for Love to be the highest paid player.

This obsession you have in repeating the fable that members craved signing Rodgers to the highest contract ever is just weird.

BF004 wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 22:40

Yes, it is a hypothetical and he prefaced it as such by saying he is assuming.....

He is just noting the max end of what they can do. No big mean Packer conspiracy here. Just called analysis.

Yes, it is hypothetical. And the numbers are wrong. Sometimes it's better to stay silent than to speak up and prove you don't know what you are talking about.

But I guess he has to bash the Vikings somehow. Let's see what he says when Love gets his new contract.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024 09:50

Let's see what he says when Love gets his new contract.

Pretty sure he is going to say, "Thank God that JJ McCarthy is not our QB."

go pak go wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 13:49

Man. I just want to keep drafting WRs.

hey, thats my line

thing is ya can't win without some good receivers, and they will demand top dollar even if there not as good as Tae Adams was, and 2 is actually better then one, and 3 better still, so ya, ya have to draft them often and the higher rounders typically are the best and most ready to play

Raptorman wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024 09:50

BF004 wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 22:40

Yes, it is a hypothetical and he prefaced it as such by saying he is assuming.....

He is just noting the max end of what they can do. No big mean Packer conspiracy here. Just called analysis.

Yes, it is hypothetical. And the numbers are wrong. Sometimes it's better to stay silent than to speak up and prove you don't know what you are talking about.

But I guess he has to bash the Vikings somehow. Let's see what he says when Love gets his new contract.

thats what team forums do, they bash opponents, you being a fan of a opponent are taking this personally, and it was never mean to be a attack on you.

also it's listed as a 4 year contract extension at 35 per year, thats how the football world will look at it, that it encompasses this year at 8 mil. does not discount that it is a 4 year contract at 35, do you think CD Lamb and other top tier receivers will look at it as 5 years for 148 or whatever? of course not.

also again, this is a Packer forum, so quit belly aching for getting a hard time when we slam a decision your team makes, right or wrong, it's normal to cretic it

Teams have to spend money. If you don't have a QB there is no reason not too pay for a top guy and screw over every other team that then has to pay inflated rates for their talent.

I expect us to be trading some of our young WRs rather than try to pay for all of them when the time comes.

Cdragon wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024 11:59

Teams have to spend money. If you don't have a QB there is no reason not too pay for a top guy and screw over every other team that then has to pay inflated rates for their talent.

I expect us to be trading some of our young WRs rather than try to pay for all of them when the time comes.

I don't know about trading any away but I'm sure the team won't be able to retain them all when it comes time for second contracts. It's the nature of roster management in the salary cap era.

Raptorman wrote: ↑

04 Jun 2024 09:50

BF004 wrote: ↑

03 Jun 2024 22:40

Yes, it is a hypothetical and he prefaced it as such by saying he is assuming.....

He is just noting the max end of what they can do. No big mean Packer conspiracy here. Just called analysis.

Yes, it is hypothetical. And the numbers are wrong. Sometimes it's better to stay silent than to speak up and prove you don't know what you are talking about.

But I guess he has to bash the Vikings somehow. Let's see what he says when Love gets his new contract.

What did he say that was wrong?

When Love signs his contract, I would be curious to know what his max structures could look like. It helps to understand the levers and possibilities of his contract.