Packers Huddle

Let's play that scenario out. What do we think would be the lowest probable cap hit for Rodgers if we extend him? I have heard $25 million thrown around. Sound right?

I think this might be the longest thread topic ever from this 13 year old forum, it never ends, most comments concerning one topic or another are on double and even triple digit repeat status, every inuendo of the results of Rodgers staying or going has been regurgitated so much everyone has constipation, yet it seems everyone including me comes back for another bite

I just want to admit right here and now that I have absolutely NO knowledge of the future, NO psychic in sight into just what happens either way should the God of the holy rhelm Lambeau depart, one thing for sure, this team will strive to provide us a player worthy of another 180 page thread to ponder and for that I think I'am grateful, not sure though, like this thread I'am prone to changing my mind

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 10:39

Let's play that scenario out. What do we think would be the lowest probable cap hit for Rodgers if we extend him? I have heard $25 million thrown around. Sound right?

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 10:39

Let's play that scenario out. What do we think would be the lowest probable cap hit for Rodgers if we extend him? I have heard $25 million thrown around. Sound right?

Yes. I think the minimum it can be is 20m due to previous commitments. So a cap hit between 25-30 for '22 is probably about as low as it could go.

So $25M at bare minimum cap hit with a Rodgers extension. That means we save about $21M on the 2022 cap by extending him. We are currently about $37 million over the cap so that would bring the number down to $16M. Let's say we extend Z. Smith instead of outright cutting him give him a cap hit of $12M instead of $27 million, so we need to save another $1M somewhere. That's manageable. Now we need to fill out a 53 man roster at bare minimum and we only have 38 guys signed, currently. So fill that out with 15 rookie minimum salary guys at $705,000 a pop and we have to add $11 million on to the cap, so we are back up to $12M over. More cutting or extending has to be done! We can't cut Bakhtiari and we can't cut Clark. Let's extend P Smith so that he has a cap his of $9M instead of $21M. Probably need more room to deal with injuries and what not, so let's extend Amos. Let's give him a cap hit of $5M instead of $12M, so now we have $7 million to work with. That might give us some room to resign one of our FAs or a low level FA.

With that scenario, this is what our depth chart looks like in 2022 (minus a guy like Lazard, MVS, or another low level FA):

QB:
Rodgers
Love

RB:
Taylor
Hill
Dillon
Jones

TE:
Lewis
Deguara
Davis

WR:
Cobb
Rodgers
Winfree

OL:
Bakhtiari
Jenkins
Newman
Runyan
Myers
Turner

DL:
Clark
Slaton
Lowry
Keke
Heflin

OLB:
Z. Smith
P. Smith
Gary
Galeai
Garvin

ILB:
Summers
McDuffie

CB:
Alexander
Stokes
Jean-Charles

S:
Amos
Savage
Scott

LS:
Wirtel

K:
Crosby

So if we extended Rodgers, Amos, and both Smiths that would mean we have 22 guys on the 2023 roster. That probably adds at least $30 million on to the cap and we have a cap hit of about $57M, minus about $25M for bare minimum rookies to fill out the roster and we have $22M for our own 2022 FAs or other FAs.

salmar80 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 07:05

bud fox wrote: ↑

10 Jan 2022 23:49

It would make it easier.

But imagine being the GM that trades NFL MVP 15 year team player and the team under performs for the next decade. It is tough move for Gute. It is much easier for him to just keep Rodgers until he retires or leaves.

Ultimately that is why I think Rodgers stays in 22 and leaves in free agency.

AR staying on the current deal and walking/retiring in 2023 is literally the most unlikely scenario imaginable. Trading him to the Bears for a used Dom Capers is more likely than that.

It would be monumentally stupid, the worst of all possible worlds. Not only would we have a sucky roster around AR in 2022, but we'd lose young long term talent due to being unable to extend them, then we'd lose AR in 2023 for lousy comp pick, AND have to roll with Love with no picks from a trade to have an advantage in the long term. If Gutey did that, I'd start a Fire Gutey site myself.

Bud, I really don't get what part of a 46M cap hit being utterly roster-destroying is difficult for you to understand.

Do you think we can just restructure it? Well, not so much, because it's the final year of his deal. We maybe could free like 12M of cap by restructuring, but that's it. Still leaves a 34M cap hit.

There are only two real options:
1) Extend AR (if he's willing) and try to open another SB window after a likely rough 2022.
2) Trade AR get a monster pick haul, use those assets to start over with Love (or if he fails, the next option)

I am saying it's tough for a GM. He will always be known as trading MVP Rodgers and it might go very badly.

This year's roster had no Z, Jaire, Bahk, Jenkins, Tongan, beat cards without davante, not much mvs, billy turner. I don't agree with the idea we lose if we can't sign Adams and extend whoever else - we will draft and pick up others. Devondre and Rasul pick ups - oline has been random players.

The other point I have made is the deal made between Rodgers and packers. It was reported on that last contract year was voided and Rodgers can have say on where he is traded. It may be possible that Rodgers could void trades which force him back on the roster - speculative.

Just to continue to be a pain ion the ass. These numbers are extending his current deal? Is it not possible to just negotiate a brand new contract? I know YoHo that "he is who he says he is" but are there any rules prohibiting tearing up the current contract and negotiating a new one?

packman114 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 14:08

Just to continue to be a pain ion the ass. These numbers are extending his current deal? Is it not possible to just negotiate a brand new contract? I know YoHo that "he is who he says he is" but are there any rules prohibiting tearing up the current contract and negotiating a new one?

That is essentially what they do, yes.

packman114 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 14:08

Just to continue to be a pain ion the ass. These numbers are extending his current deal? Is it not possible to just negotiate a brand new contract? I know YoHo that "he is who he says he is" but are there any rules prohibiting tearing up the current contract and negotiating a new one?

It is essentially a new deal.

But what you have to keep in mind is no matter what, the Packers have to expense prior bonus/deferred dollars already paid to Rodgers. The Packers can't escape that.

So even though they can start from scratch of new money, they still have to recognize the deferred cap already paid to Rodgers. Which is what a lot of that 2022 cap number would be.

The 2x in a row MVP is going to be expensive, time to move on so we can afford Amos, MVS, and Kevin King.

bud fox wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 14:03

I am saying it's tough for a GM. He will always be known as trading MVP Rodgers and it might go very badly.

I agree with this. What Ted Thompson did with Favre took major guts and was the right decision but it could easily have ended up being the wrong decision. If Rodgers had failed to meet expectations, TT almost surely would have been dismissed from his job, likely with prejudice. I think that decision has caused some fans to be more "ok" with dumping our elite QB than they should be. It's been stated so many times but this franchise truly is beyond lucky to have found 2 consecutive HOF QB's. It's easy to forget how hard it is to find 2 consecutive good QB's.

Ultimately, I will support whatever decision the team makes. I'm just saying that I hope BG doesn't feel obligated to say goodbye to our diva HOF QB just because that's what we did with the last one and it worked out.

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 15:52

bud fox wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 14:03

I am saying it's tough for a GM. He will always be known as trading MVP Rodgers and it might go very badly.

I agree with this. What Ted Thompson did with Favre took major guts and was the right decision but it could easily have ended up being the wrong decision. If Rodgers had failed to meet expectations, TT almost surely would have been dismissed from his job, likely with prejudice. I think that decision has caused some fans to be more "ok" with dumping our elite QB than they should be. It's been stated so many times but this franchise truly is beyond lucky to have found 2 consecutive HOF QB's. It's easy to forget how hard it is to find 2 consecutive good QB's.

Ultimately, I will support whatever decision the team makes. I'm just saying that I hope BG doesn't feel obligated to say goodbye to our diva HOF QB just because that's what we did with the last one and it worked out.

I agree with you guys. But important to point out a few differences. Favre had been threatening to retire for some time, and after he left he played for 3 more seasons.

Rodgers has never publically threatened retirement, and he is coming off 2 straight MVPs. There is no reason to believe he will not play at minimum 5 more seasons.

Rodgers “decision” time is due to packers org cap mismanagement and drafting Love. Favres was due to favre himself flip flopping on retirement.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 16:28

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 15:52

bud fox wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 14:03

I am saying it's tough for a GM. He will always be known as trading MVP Rodgers and it might go very badly.

I agree with this. What Ted Thompson did with Favre took major guts and was the right decision but it could easily have ended up being the wrong decision. If Rodgers had failed to meet expectations, TT almost surely would have been dismissed from his job, likely with prejudice. I think that decision has caused some fans to be more "ok" with dumping our elite QB than they should be. It's been stated so many times but this franchise truly is beyond lucky to have found 2 consecutive HOF QB's. It's easy to forget how hard it is to find 2 consecutive good QB's.

Ultimately, I will support whatever decision the team makes. I'm just saying that I hope BG doesn't feel obligated to say goodbye to our diva HOF QB just because that's what we did with the last one and it worked out.

I agree with you guys. But important to point out a few differences. Favre had been threatening to retire for some time, and after he left he played for 3 more seasons.

Rodgers has never publically threatened retirement, and he is coming off 2 straight MVPs. There is no reason to believe he will not play at minimum 5 more seasons.

Rodgers “decision” time is due to packers org cap mismanagement and drafting Love. Favres was due to favre himself flip flopping on retirement.

Agree - Favre was literally bringing up retirement constantly, it was tough for the packers to not put a plan in place. In this circumstance the packers just got it wrong.

2019, 2020, & 2021 offseason: "The Packers should go all in and do everything they can to get the players for a SB run."

2022 offseason: "Not like that! You mismanaged the cap!"

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 16:53

2019, 2020, & 2021 offseason: "The Packers should go all in and do everything they can to get the players for a SB run."

2022 offseason: "Not like that! You mismanaged the cap!"

Truth lol

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 16:53

2019, 2020, & 2021 offseason: "The Packers should go all in and do everything they can to get the players for a SB run."

2022 offseason: "Not like that! You mismanaged the cap!"

The wrong thing was drafting Love. Imagine something simple as drafting Tee Higgins instead of Love. We have WR number 2 for this period and then we extend Rodgers, lose Adams Higgins takes the spot and we go WR again in the draft.

We Gucci

Captain_Ben wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 15:52

bud fox wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 14:03

I am saying it's tough for a GM. He will always be known as trading MVP Rodgers and it might go very badly.

I agree with this. What Ted Thompson did with Favre took major guts and was the right decision but it could easily have ended up being the wrong decision. If Rodgers had failed to meet expectations, TT almost surely would have been dismissed from his job, likely with prejudice. I think that decision has caused some fans to be more "ok" with dumping our elite QB than they should be. It's been stated so many times but this franchise truly is beyond lucky to have found 2 consecutive HOF QB's. It's easy to forget how hard it is to find 2 consecutive good QB's.

Ultimately, I will support whatever decision the team makes. I'm just saying that I hope BG doesn't feel obligated to say goodbye to our diva HOF QB just because that's what we did with the last one and it worked out.

The memory of the Favre situation will likely help things along in the short term at least. Moving on from an ageing HOFer can be the right move.

I think it will also be clear that it's not the Packers decision. It will be Rodgers' call.

Gute has been praised for accomodating Rodgers this year, including by Rodgers himself.

Once Rodgers started playing like an MVP, Gute went all in to try and get Rodgers another ring. Gute maxed out the credit card. Whether it works out or not, I think many will say it was worth the shot.

If Rodgers does decide to leave it will likely be very amicable. The Stafford trade is the perfect model. Snazzy social media videos, lots of celebrating his time here etc. Both sides benefit from it not being toxic.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 15:25

The 2x in a row MVP is going to be expensive, time to move on so we can afford Amos, MVS, and Kevin King.

Yeah. That $6 million for King has to come from somewhere.

British wrote: If Rodgers does decide to leave it will likely be very amicable. The Stafford trade is the perfect model. Snazzy social media videos, lots of celebrating his time here etc. Both sides benefit from it not being toxic.

I agree with you on this. Nobody wants ugly. I think the ice has melted between Rodgers and the FO and whatever happens, we won’t see the public airing of dirty laundry like we saw last year.

…until Schefter starts with his shenanigans again, anyway.

APB wrote: ↑

11 Jan 2022 18:30

British wrote: If Rodgers does decide to leave it will likely be very amicable. The Stafford trade is the perfect model. Snazzy social media videos, lots of celebrating his time here etc. Both sides benefit from it not being toxic.

I agree with you on this. Nobody wants ugly. I think the ice has melted between Rodgers and the FO and whatever happens, we won’t see the public airing of dirty laundry like we saw last year.

…until Schefter starts with his shenanigans again, anyway.

Thing is Schefter was basically right. Rodgers could have spoken up and nixed that stuff if he had wanted to.

This year if things are rosy then you'd expect Rodgers to call out bogus stuff like he did with Boomer the other day.