It Isn't Pretty, But Here Comes Aaron Rodgers' New Contract

The new contract for Aaron Rodgers does a lot of what was desired, but at a price down the road.

 

The Packers finalized a new agreement with Aaron Rodgers that provides $18.13 million in salary cap relief.  As a note, the Packers got under the cap by not submitting DeVondre Campbell's new deal to the league yet and by the decision of Randall Cobb to take a pay cut of roughly $5.5 million, per Tom Silverstein though it apparently is closer to $5.8M.  The Packers did have to issue qualifying offers to its ERFAs and also the second-round tender to Allen Lazard, so those deals were included in the salary cap when the new league year started.  The Packers chose not to issue qualifying offers to Chauncey Rivers and Henry Black, but those decisions are unrelated to the salary cap.  Presumably, the Packers just did not want those players back.

Let's look at the deal first.  There are so many columns that I am just going to identify them abbreviations for them here:

YR = year; Base = base salary, SBO = old signing bonuses; RSB1 = new roster bonus that is guaranteed and works like a signing bonus; OB23 = option bonus for 2023; OB24 = option bonus for 2024; WO = workout bonus ($50,000 each year); Cap # = salary cap number for that year; Dead is the dead money charge; and Cash = running cash total to date.  

YR Base SBO R RSB1 OB23 OB24 WO Cap # Dead Cash
'22 1.15M 19.17M   8.16M     .05M 28.53M   42M
'23 1.165M 7.67M   8.16M 14.575M   .05M 31.62M 40.3M 101.5M
'24 2.25M     8.16M 14.575M 15.67M .05M 40.70M 68.2M 150.8M
'25 15.85M   5M 8.16M 14.575M 15.67M .05M 59.30M 76.8M 171.7M
'26 10.00M   5M 8.16M 14.575M 15.67M .05M 53.45M 38.4M 186.7M
                     

2022: Rodgers receives a fully guaranteed roster bonus (which acts exactly like a signing bonus becasue it is fully guaranteed, per CBA rule) of $40.8 million and a minimum base salary of $1.15M.  Because it is a roster bonus and not technically a signing bonus, the bonus is not subject to forfeiture/refund should Rodgers retire (and nor should it arguably be because it is entirely in lieu of salary).  The $40.8 million is amortized over five years, or $8.16 million per year.  He also has a $50,000 workout bonus which actually is just for showing up at OTAs for three days; he does not have to participate in the complete weight-lifting program that takes over 30 days.  His previous deal called for a cap number of $46.66 million and change.  Rodgers will receive $42 million in cash in 2022.

2023: Technically, the base salary in 2023 is a fully guaranteed $59.465 million.  Upon making a payment to Rodgers of $58.53 million (exercising the option for 2025), Rodgers' base salary in 2023 drops to a fully guaranteed $1.165 million.  The Packers exercise the option anytime between the first day of the 2023 new league and the day before the first regular season game.  [Technically, $28.3M has to be paid within 10 days of exercising the option and the remaining $30M by September 30th].  That theoretically means Rodgers could be traded before the Packers make that payment as his contract does not have a no-trade clause.  The Packers could pay some of the $58.53 million with the acquiring team paying the rest as part of negotiations for compensation.  Should Rodgers retire after playing just in 2022, the dead money hit would be $40.3 million, so the cap savings would be just a negative $8.68 million.  If Rodgers wants to play in 2023 (does not retire), then in practical terms, the Packers will either pay it or trade him.  If they don't pay it, it is still guaranteed and Rodgers' cap number would soar to $75.29 million, so a release is not a possibility.

The $58.53 million is an option bonus (prorated over the remaining four years of the deal, so it might be tempting to add a void year for 2027), and option bonuses are subject to forfeiture/refund.  This does provide protection to the Packers in the event Rodgers decides to retire.  If instead of just immediately refunding it Rodgers forced the team to file a claim for it, that generally results in teams getting the refund and cap relief in the following season.  I have chosen to insert $40.3M as his dead money since that is correct if Rodgers only plays in 2022 and retires in 2023 (depending on timing).  If Green Bay just does not want him back in 2023 or if he sustained a career-ending injury in 2022, his dead cap would be $92.055 million (absent any insurance: the Packers got several million dollars in cap credits for injury insurance in 2022).  Overall, I would expect the team to exercise the option by paying $28.3M immediately in order to secure the salary cap benefits and then pay the rest on September 30th.  Cash for 2023 is $59.515 million and the running total under the deal would be $101.515 million.

2024: Rodgers' base salary is technically $49.25 million but it is initially guaranteed for injury-only.  Five days after the super bowl (so February 16th, 2024), the base salary becomes fully guaranteed (for skill and cap reasons as well).  That means he can be released absent dead money concerns.  The Packers again can exercise a $47 million option (for the 2026 season) during the same time period as above, and this option also reduces his 2024 base salary to a fully guaranteed $2.25 million while amortizing the $47 million over the remaining 3 years on the contract ($15.666M per year).  Again, adding a couple of void years would save over $6M on his cap number.  Rodgers will earn $49.3 million in cash (assuming he earns the $50,000 workout bonus) and his running total of cash over the first three years would be $150.815 million.  Trading Rodgers is not practical since his dead money hit before exercising the option would be $68.2 million (though I suppose the cap savings would only be a negative $27.5M).  After exercising the option, his dead money soars to as much as $115.2 million ($68.24M plus $47M).

2025/2026: These look like dummy years to me, though Joel Cory disagrees.  I agree they are not void years.  Rodgers' scheduled cap number for 2025 (his age 41 season) would be $59.3 million (if it isn't higher because the Packers might have added void years in 2023 or 2024), which means that a renegotiation would be necessary: no team has ever won a super bowl with a player making more than 15% of the salary cap and the cap would have to be $395.4 million for that to be the case with Rodgers in 2025.  The cap might go up a lot, but not by $187 million in three years. 

That said, I decline to bend my mind to the problem of writing a contract with $76M in dead money still on the books if Rodgers wanted to continue to play in 2025 and the Packers agreed.  Since there is $20.8M in cash already (base plus a traditional $5M roster bonus) and if Rodgers' market value was $62M, I suppose the Packers could pay $2M in base, give a $60M signing bonus ($12M per year for 5 more years) to reach a 2025 cap number of $52.41.  The dead for 2026 would rise to $86M.  The numbers would be less if Rodgers' market value was smaller.

WHAT'S THE AAV?

This question is not academic because it is precisely the issue the Packers are having with Davante Adams due to the DeAndre Hopkins's contract.  Overthecap and Joel Cory (in his interesting article analyzing Rodgers' contract) suggest  that the AAV is $50.271 million ($150.815 divided by three years) even though Mr. Cory claims 2025 and 2026 are not voids or mere dummy years.  He calls them placeholder years (a distinction without a difference, in my view).  Mr. Cory does admit that normally an agent would only use new money (while being silent on why it would not then be $186.7 million divided by 5 years, or $30.163 million).  Anyway, normally an agent would look at what Rodgers was scheduled to earn in 2022 ($26.97M), subtract it from the $150.8M he is scheduled to earn in the first three years (leaving $123.845M), divide that by the two new years (2023 and 2024) to get an AAV of $61.922M.  I don't see how one can think one can rip up a contract that has $26M dead on it.  I think it is an extension.  $61.922M would be a 37.6% increase over the deal Mahomes received (10 years, $450M though it surely will be renegotiated in 2027, making it worth noticeably less than $45M AAV).  

Briefly, in March of 2020 Houston traded Hopkins to the Cardinals, Hopkins had 3 years remaining on his contract that was scheduled to pay him $40.415 million, or a $13.47 million average.  The trade meant there was no dead money from previous signing bonuses, as Houston took a dead money hit of $3 million when it traded him.  Arizona, not surprisingly, signed Hopkins prior to the 2020 season to a 5-year, $94.4M deal ($18.88M average).  That is for two additional years and $54 million more in compensation, hence the $27.5M AAV used by agents and some pundits.  As it happened, the deal had a 3-year out for $60M, so I mentally figured it to be worth $20M per year.  In year 4, Hopkins earns $19.45M (not unreasonable for an elite receiver when it was signed) and $14.9 million in year 5 (2024), but that year is voidable if Hopkins meets some stiff performance statistics.  Since Hopkins came to Arizona with no dead money but under contract for three years, it seems to me like the parties ripped up the contract and wrote a new one.  So, what is Hopkins' AAV?  $18.88M?  $20M?  $27.5M  

Hopkins' AAV matters because Davante Adams thinks he should make more than Hopkins and that Hopkins' AAV is $27.5M.  Perhaps someone will ask Rodgers what his own AAV is: if he is in solidarity with Adams he should respond with $61M instead of $50M, though I imagine he will sidestep the question by just suggesting the situations differ.

VERDICT:

It is fair to say that the contract does what it is supposed to do: it gives the Packers a three-year window in which to win a Lombardi Trophy.  Cap numbers of $28M, $31M and $40.7M are not incompatible with fielding a team that can legitimately contend.  A reader posted the likely returning players in 2022 on the Pack-A-Day thread, and it is a pretty good roster.  The dead money is huge, particularly if Rodgers plays more than just in 2022. 

I do not immediately perceive a way to handle a $68M or a $76M dead money charge.  None of the prorations would be subject to refund or forfeiture.  Often, elite players who retire wait until June 2nd to file the paperwork, which in this case would still mean a $38.4M dead money charge in 2025 and the same amount in 2026 (I do not know when the $5M roster bonus for 2025 is due.)  That would require the Packers to comply with the 2025 salary cap limit while carrying Rodgers' $59M cap number on the books.  The Packers could not release Rodgers with a June designation until the 2025 league year began, again meaning they would have to carry his $59M cap number on the books while complying with whatever the limit is that year. 

If Rodgers decided to retire, I suppose he could agree to eliminate his $5M roster bonus and cut his base to the minimum, which would reduce his cap number for 2025 to roughly $41M and make it easier for the Packers to carry his cap number on the books until he retired in June of that year.  I just do not know if that is legal.  [No, cutting his base and roster bonus does not reduce the dead money hit.]  Perhaps Russ Ball has found a way to address this in the contract language.

There is a whiff of malicious compliance in this deal.  Rodgers' AAV is at least 10% and as much as 37% higher than the next highest paid quarterback.  His guaranteed money at signing and overall guaranteed money are the largest ever, even larger than Josh Allen's deal calls for in a 6-year deal whereas Rodgers' deal accomplishes this in 3 years.  Moreover, what happens if things go sour on the field in 2022 or 2023, or the relationship between Rodgers and the front office disintegrates?  

It is bad.  It is not as bad as I thought it would be.  It probably requires a complete rebuild in 2025 and the release of some high-priced players, but I should acknowledge that Russ Ball and Gute did a better job of keeping the band together in 2022 than I had anticipated.    

 

 

NFL Categories: 
2 points

Comments (39)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Pantz_Burp's picture

March 17, 2022 at 04:12 pm

Thanks TGR, appreciate the info.

I am blinking, mouth open...still blinking...I got no words...nothing...

2 points
3
1
murf7777's picture

March 18, 2022 at 05:47 am

As I’ve stated all along…..Sign Rodgers and tag and trade Adams, many said it couldn’t be done, but there’s many ways to slice the SC Pie!. They got the draft picks from Adams after fleecing the Raiders and kept one of the best QB’s in the league. YES and YES. Wait, there’s still more, you now have 20M in SC more to play with. Lastly, they will only have two years of salary cap hell…way to go Ball. I will also predict the Packers Offense will not miss a beat and maybe even better without Adams. As Brady always did, throw the ball to more receivers, TE’s and RB’s.

-1 points
1
2
Coldworld's picture

March 17, 2022 at 04:21 pm

It’s as bad as bad can be absent a Super Bowl win, and that’s most likely this year as I see things working through in your description. I hate to think what your worse scenario looked like.

I’ve said it long, loud and often. This front office should be chased out of town for paying that for (at best) a rerun with a roster equivalent to last year’s.

A sad day for all but Rodgers. Over half a billion over his career if I count it correctly. Not a penny back in discount. If that’s a true Packer, maybe that’s not an accolade that matters anymore.

I ask myself, as an early proponent of Rodgers, if I had known how things worked out and will leave the franchise, would I have clamored to keep Favre? I am no longer sure.

6 points
9
3
PeteK's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:10 pm

hahahaha

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:04 pm

Is it a bad sign that I gave your comment a thumbs up?

My working title was Here Come The Monstrosity: Rodgers' Contract. In part to avoid clickbait, I toned it down a bit. I worried that at that figure, the contract would not get any part of things right. I worried that the cap numbers would be too high to actually put the talent on the field in any of the 2022, '23, or '24 seasons. I didn't think Ball would use a double option bonus structure - which is a fancy way of saying a signing bonus plus two option bonuses. I made my own attempt at $45M AAV, and couldn't keep his cap numbers down enough to field good talent and still generated $67M dead at one point. That prompted me to call it a monstrosity in the article I wrote called the cap suggests trading AR.

Also some uncertainty over the rules. I watched the podcast in which Andy Herman hosted Ken Ingalls. Andy asked Ken if a player could lower his compensation if contemplating retirement in February to help the team comply with the new salary cap and then retire in June. I don't want to put words into Ken's mouth but I believe he essentially said that it was unclear whether the league would allow that. I had looked at CBA language that deals with how often one can alter a contract, and it usually is once per 12 months. I was unsure of the answer. So, I don't know if there is a way to deal with that $76M dead charge in 2025.

I also don't really understand the reason to put in a $15.85M base and a $5M traditional roster bonus in 2025. I think it was to force a renegotiation in case AR wanted to play the 2025 season.

I know there was a huge opportunity cost to going this route instead of a trade. But if (and I mean if) AR really only wants to play 3 more seasons, or less, there is no way a team trades two firsts, two seconds, and three players for a one or two-year rental. With Wilson, Denver can figure on the two remaining years and a 4 year extension.

Also, to a certain degree I tied myself into knots. I think players should get all the money they can (at least, usually), so why do I think AR could have given a discount if only for the sake of his legacy? Yet I think there was some malicious compliance. So GB wants me back? Well, here is what it is going to cost. Yes, the structure produced decent cap numbers in the first three years, but I don't think he really had to beat Mahomes so much and beat Allen's guaranteed money totals at all.

At least the one-year out is reasonable if AR retires (not a true "out" because it is only an option for AR in case he retires). But it snowballs fast after that.

FWIW: the title for the article that Jersey Al changed originally was published as "Packers extend Preston Smith, Release ZaDarius Smith And Billy Turner."

We don't really disagree, you know. Just a matter of degree.

3 points
3
0
PeteK's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:25 pm

I don't know how accurate Spotrac is, but they have 24 mill dead cap, 16 mill saving if AR is released in 2024, which is not terrible. I'm just worried about the enormous cap hit in 2023 especially if we underachieve in 2022.

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:08 pm

I don't think spotrac has it right. Pretty sure Joel Cory also specifically mentions the $68.205M dead in his article. So does OTC, but they also aren't always careful with bonuses and when they become guaranteed.

Thanks though. I would rather be corrected than be inaccurate.

2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:22 pm

Is Al your personal penguin?

I think when one hits the half billion income earned a little charity isn’t too much to ask, especially when it’s your reputation that would be the biggest beneficiary. Rodgers is not the norm and it’s his cost that is a major obstacle to his stated ambition!

2 points
2
0
PeteK's picture

March 17, 2022 at 07:05 pm

A little cap relief two years down the road would have really strapped his wallet. I was out to dinner with a group years back and this eye doctor in his 50's who owns five businesses reminded the person figuring the tip to not include the tax in the calculation ( 2.50 addition to the tip. ). Now mind you, there was 8 of us, the food was abundant and delicious, a BYOB, and service very good. For some greed has no limit or shame.

2 points
2
0
murf7777's picture

March 18, 2022 at 06:44 am

I guess adams and Bak should’ve given the Packers a discount as well. You can’t expect players to play for less than their value. I’m sure you would go to your employer and say you will give him a discount so they can hire another person to make the company stronger.

0 points
1
1
gpt999's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:06 pm

I agree Coldworld - this is a management problem! Only a corporation with directors that have little "skin in the game" could spend money so foolhardily! All the other NFL teams have a rich owner who make decisions to protect and enrich their investment in their team. GB team directors spend money like the government with the same expectations of value for the money they spend.

I feel sorry for the shareholders of the Packers. No wonder why they couldn't sell out their last "offering" - a $300 certificate that says you put money into the team but have NO ownership rights.

Look, Rodgers is a rare talent I admit. But he is just too expensive for what he gives in return and the sheer turmoil he causes this organization.

3 points
4
1
PeteK's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:20 pm

This does not protect us in case of a drop in performance which can happen quickly at the age of 38, especially after an injury. I think many see Brady, but forget about Brees and Roth.

4 points
4
0
Matt Gonzales's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:39 pm

Have to disagree there. The Packers don't have to worry about selling out games or keeping the stadium at max attendence, but other teams do, and this is the kind of butts in seats deal an owner, who knows their pie of the national revenue share will be enough to fund cap obligations, would absolutely do to to keep bringing in the local market share they can pocket.

Not saying it's a good deal, but the Packers ownership structure tends to make them more conservative vs. less since they have a more fixed budget in terms of actual operating cash coming in.

This contract is almost a Rube Goldberg machine. It literally ONLY works if GB cuts bait with a trade or Rodgers retires after 2022, OR plays through 2024, wants to keep playing, and is willing to take a deal with no more prorations or funny money to wind down all the crazy dead money already out there.

(Edited to correct idiot typos)

-1 points
1
2
Return_To_Sanity's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:30 pm

A trade after '22? Please dont get my hopes up.

0 points
0
0
Pantz_Burp's picture

March 17, 2022 at 08:38 pm

So your sayin' there's a chance.... :D

1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

March 18, 2022 at 06:21 am

Why does he owe a discount to anyone for asking for his value? He has given the Packers his best. At this point, nobody has any idea how good the players they will pick up compared to those gone will perform. Just because Adam is gone they might get more from others. 6-0 without Adams proves that. Adams is great, but guess what it is a team game. Just look at what we did last year in picking up some of our best players off the Waiver and FA list. Now, we are loaded with 2 firsts and 2 seconds to add to this team. Excellent management in getting so many assets for Adams who was a FA and if left we only would’ve got a 3rd round compensatory pick.

-1 points
0
1
croatpackfan's picture

March 17, 2022 at 04:16 pm

Thanks TGR for all your SC work. It is complicated and I understand that you did a huge job to put everything together.

I still do not like the contract because it is basically AAV $50 mill per year. I do not think Aaron Rodgers has that value any more in his hands...

Second, he can suffer career ending injury in his age from tomorrow through his contract. It will be huge problem with SC, I guess.

3 points
5
2
gpt999's picture

March 17, 2022 at 04:52 pm

Complicated and stupidly expensive contract! Imagine that from #12? So the tens of millions in dead money in 4 years time is really worth the chance at a Super Bowl in the eyes of GBs "executive" management?

And what about the issues it brings in now? Every guy on this team will want and expect more from their contracts. Adams is already greedily crying about it. I guess Rodgers will have to support this. How about Cobb? Rodgers stiff arms GB into bringing him here only to have his salary seriously cut - mostly due to keeping Rodgers in GB and helping the Davante Adams Benevolence Fund. Boy, I am glad I don't have good friends like that LOL!

And given how Rodgers under performs in the playoffs, why would you have the expectation that Rodgers will deliver another Super Bowl in 2-3 years? The law of averages may be the only thing I can think of.

My point is that, yes, Rodgers will likely bring in good regular season won-loss records over the next 2-3 years - especially in the NFC North. But deep playoff runs/Super Bowls? Only well rounded teams get those. And with the money GB will tie up in Rodgers and Adams, GB has little hope of fielding a well rounded team in the near future...

1 points
3
2
PeteK's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:37 pm

I don't mind Adam's contract, he is a fantastic talent and deserves the money especially when compared to other WR. We are only looking at him in a negative way because of Rodgers's contract. Interestingly, I was watching the NFL network this afternoon and Maurice Jones-drew was commenting on how some QBs go for the big play too often and don't throw underneath enough. Certainly, brought back some sad memories.

3 points
3
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 17, 2022 at 07:22 pm

I don't object to Adams being the highest paid. I think that was $22M with julio Jones, but he no longer is at that number. I went through Hopkins' deal. I think Hopkins got $20M AAV (not $27.5M) but that was two seasons ago.

$30M is too much. If (IF!!!) $22M is the most ever, then $30M AAV is about 37% more. Hmmm, AR got 37% more if his AAV is $61M. So I'd be okay at $26.4M AAV, which is 20% more than Julio got in his prime.

Looking at Megatron, he signed for 16.06M/year in 2012 when he was 27 and in his absolute prime. The salary cap was $120.6M. 208.2/120.6 = 1.726 x 16.06M would mean Calvin Johnson deal in 2022 dollars was worth $27.72M AAV.

I value Adams and think he is the best WR in the NFL. Just not going to pay Adams at age 30 more than Johnson got in his prime.

I think Adams should get what's fair, not what the peculiar circumstances of the AR thing, all-in, Covid cap hamstringing GB just when the went all-in. He doesn't have a ring, either. IDK.

[Just looked: PFF gave a lot of great grades to Johnson, but Adams' last two PFF grades are higher than any grade PFF gave to Johnson. Well, damn.]

2 points
2
0
ricky's picture

March 17, 2022 at 07:33 pm

Adams is now a Raider. Cobb took a big pay cut to stay with the team. Who expected Campbell to be re-signed? Why worry about something we have no control over, and should be a source of amusement, spectacle and excitement? As the Joker might say, "Why so serious?"

1 points
1
0
LambeauPlain's picture

March 17, 2022 at 04:57 pm

This is the entire Packer FO shoving all their chips to the center. This is it. It better work. No room for error that includes a devastating injury to Rodgers.

I would be prioritizing OL talent in the draft. Not because I have no confidence in Love, a career ending injury/retirement within the next few years to Rodgers is "no more chips".

1 points
2
1
flackcatcher's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:22 pm

Great job TGR. For those who think Rodger's contract is bad, just remember this the floor for future contracts at the QB position. On Rodgers, he got what he wanted. There is no out for him if he pukes in the playoffs once again. (Injuries aside) Two comments: Gutekunst/front office must have concluded that the reload wasn't going to happen given the current state of the league. Bluntly put, Rodgers gave the team the best road to Superbowl bumps and all. Two: Balls breakdowns on future Caps must have convinced the Executive Committee that they can ride out the negative Cap numbers in the short term. With the massive TV/Nets contract that is a reasonable bet. But, with this last contract with Rodgers, the Packers are committed to a long term rebuild after Rodgers is gone. Enjoy the ride, it is sure going to be interesting.

2 points
2
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:24 pm

That's a lot of salary cap for a Division Title or less even.

2 points
4
2
HarryHodag's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:40 pm

Before AR signed the contract extension prior to this one I suggested the Packers trade him to the Raiders for David Carr. Carr was in Gruden's doghouse and Gruden loved Rodgers. I was soundly gnashed for even suggesting it. But looking back that would have benefited both teams.

Rodgers new contract virtually brings on a cratering of the team in about three years. Yes, I know the salary cap is going up, but think of the incredible dead cap as keeping potential free agent players from coming to Green Bay or decent players from re-signing. Some of the current players will also be ending their recently signed deals.

I sarcastically bashed Ted Thompson back in the day for trying to win a trophy for having the most cap space. Now we've gone completely the other way and it's even more uncomfortable.

Sorry AR fans but keeping 'the tradition' is like the story from World War II about a bridge too far. This contract is just a little too far to keep me optimistic. It's either win this year or next. Even so, the Packers could return to the 1980's real fast.

5 points
6
1
Tingham's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:21 pm

I can understand why David Carr was in Gruden's doghouse...since he retired 10 years ago. 😊

1 points
1
0
LeotisHarris's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:47 pm

And the seasons, they go round and round
And the painted ponies go up and down
We're captive on a carousel where a malignant narcissist calls the shots
We can't return, we can only look
Behind, from where we came
And go round and round and round, in the circle game

Okay, so I'll never make it as a lyricist. Apologies to Joni Mitchell.

4 points
5
1
Pantz_Burp's picture

March 17, 2022 at 05:53 pm

We go from Rodgers wanting to be on Jeopardy to putting the Packers in Jeopardy.

Was Ball stuck in traffic when this was "negotiated" and approved?

R-E-L-A-X-I-O-W-N-Y-O-U You are all entitled to the Rodger's Rate.

4 points
5
1
BoHunter's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:17 pm

Rodgers claims SFO will be sorry for not drafting him and then loses to the Kneeler and Jimmy G in the NFCCG. Wish we could have reaped the windfall of picks/players that Seattle got for Rusty.

1 points
3
2
ckoski's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:18 pm

Thank you for all the effort, TGR. Man, I work with numbers all day, and I still think this gave me a headache. I'm going to be as optimistic as I can be and just picture him actually playing for five more years and staying productive.

1 points
1
0
Pantz_Burp's picture

March 17, 2022 at 06:41 pm

Report says Davante is being traded to the Raiders for 2 premium picks

4 points
4
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 17, 2022 at 08:01 pm

Demovsky tweeted GB will get pick #22 and #53 in the 2022 draft!

Gute needs to hit on a WR.....

1 points
1
0
Pantz_Burp's picture

March 17, 2022 at 08:34 pm

Excellent...thanks TGR!

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 24, 2022 at 09:20 am

This is behind a paywall. Yes, it is $1 for six months, but I won't give a nickel to USA Today or the Journal Sentinel. Yes, I know they won't miss my dollar and that I am probably cutting my nose off just to spite my face. Don't care. Nothing against the sportswriters.

I read the teaser Dougherty has out there. Yes, it could be a one and done, either by trade or retirement. I don't know what other points Dougherty made.

At Greengold: yeah, that is possible. I would think GB would have let the acquiring team write the contract, but it is not precluded.

1 points
1
0
greengold's picture

March 24, 2022 at 09:51 am

Hohoho!
TGR! I feel exactly the same, as much as I love Old Tom & Pete! I’m not going to toss JS another dime. Sorry to my friends there.

Also, thank you! I thought the possibility - does - exist for Rodgers to yet be traded. I see NYG as his destination. I also see a boatload of picks & players being exchanged in the process.

Nothing else is making sense, really. Please, let it be so, such that our Packers can realize value, and immense cap relief to move forward.

Status quo appears more to be spinning wheels. Eventually, they burn and fall off…

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

March 19, 2022 at 11:35 am

TGR, as always thank you for all of your hard work to bring us this information. For better or worse here we are.
Thanks, Since ‘61

0 points
0
0
greengold's picture

March 24, 2022 at 07:37 am

This is so well done and considered, TGR! Thank you for all the hard work you put into hashing out the details.

I have a take, a guess, on what might be the Packers - ultimate goals - with the Aaron Rodgers’ deal outlined here. You know the math and clearly see the anomaly in the $15.85M base and $5M roster bonus for 2025, where thereafter the deal - should - force a restructure.

1. The initial goal was to bring the Packers under the required 2022 cap threshold per league rules.

2. They made the contract tradeable.

Personally, I don’t see Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay’s future plans. I see him in the NY Giants future plans. They were quietly listed as a suitor, what? 10 months ago, when the shit storm of Rodgers’ future trade possibilities raged? So quietly, they were rendered an afterthought at best.

What has changed there, in NY? Besides the growth of fan outrage at the Giants’ QB position, increase in fan apathy, with the subsequent reduction in gate receipts/revenues? They’ve added top draft picks.

Trading back last year with Chicago (Justin Fields) gave them two R1s to trade this year: #5 & #7 overall. NYG also has 36, 67 & 81 this year.

What if NYG offered both 5 & 7, 36, 81, and their R1 in 2023? That certainly seems doable. They’ve got some good players they could add as well.

The Packers will never again be in a better position to trade him, because the window for another team to realize value dwindles. Rodgers’ value as an immediate explosive addition to increase fan excitement/interest/revenues to the Giants is greater than his value in Green Bay, working with which receivers? Exactly?

This is mere speculation by me, but I think the possibility of him being dealt in a blockbuster trade has grown exponentially with the way this deal was restructured. The team acquiring him would have that 3 year window + more with that 2025 anomaly you noticed, allowing an additional restructure, making his deal possibly more desirable in trade.

Any deal requires value for both sides. Maybe GB takes less. Maybe NYG’s first 3 rounds of this April’s draft will suffice?

Does that seem reasonable? The Packers actually righting their own ship from a fiscal standpoint, while adding enormous draft capital & top players to keep GB competitive for the next, new era?

Maximize Rodgers’ value in trade now. That, to me, seems the prudent course.

0 points
0
0