Skip to main content

From Florio:

Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers was sending a message to the team with his post-game comments after Sunday’s loss to the Buccaneers in the NFC Championship. The message likely had multiple tentacles.

Here’s one. Per a league source, Rodgers wants a new contract.

Rodgers should want a new contract. He makes $33.5 million per year. He’s going to win the 2020 NFL MVP award. And he’s getting into the later years of his last deal, which will pay him far less in comparison to other quarterbacks.

He’s due to make $22.35 million in 2021, $25.5 million in 2022, and $25.5 million in 2023.

Rodgers currently ranks fifth in average new-money value, behind Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes ($45 million), Texans quarterback Deshaun Watson ($39 million), Seahawks quarterback Russell Wilson ($35 million), and Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger ($34 million).

Rodgers earns the same amount as Rams quarterback Jared Goff. Which means that Rodgers is grossly underpaid, Goff is grossly overpaid, or both. (Both.)

Rodgers has a cap number in excess of $37 million for 2021, but a new contract easily could reduce it. A new deal also would reflect the team’s commitment to Rodgers over the next few years, based on the guaranteed payments and the cap consequences arising from cutting or trading him.

If Rodgers officially asks for a new contract, he’ll definitely get one thing: Clarity as to where he stands. A new deal means renewed vows. No new deal means the clock will still tick toward a potential, if not inevitable, divorce.

While Rodgers may want more (especially as it relates to efforts to improve the team), one thing he wants — and deserves — is a new contract.

https://profootballtalk.nbcspo...ants-a-new-contract/

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers was sending a message to the team with his post-game comments after Sunday’s loss to the Buccaneers in the NFC Championship. The message likely was that he was physically and emotionally drained from the game, and just wanted to go home and pour about 4 fingers of Tequila and kick back.

@H5 posted:

Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers was sending a message to the team with his post-game comments after Sunday’s loss to the Buccaneers in the NFC Championship. The message likely was that he was physically and emotionally drained from the game, and just wanted to go home and pour about 4 fingers of Tequila and kick back.

Perfect example of media/social media driving the narrative. I know we really need to know everything 5 minutes after the game. But this shit is off the hook these days. They lost a big game. Is this the end of GB? Will Rodgers demand a trade? Will this be the beginning of the end of MLF? Leave it to whore Mike Florio to be dousing the world with gasoline. Can we let them shower first at least? Dissecting what went wrong is fine. Debate about front office/draft/personnel is part of that discussion. But maybe the world doesn't need to know a second by second account of who thinks what. Unchecked, this trajectory will force AR to become Bert, if it hasn't already. He's a certain first ballot, MVP at 37, conference title losses, incredible portfolio. He's not the entire team, and no one should be held hostage by him or any other player. It's another crushing loss. Everyone, fans included, really need to sit down and absorb it without projecting every aspect and perpetuating this type of garbage. There's a reason guys like Sterling Sharpe and Marshawn Lynch and others loathed the media. I can't imagine what it must be like in 2021 to face this type of scrutiny.

“Aaron Rodgers spoke about his future after the game- and it’s uncertainty. It was a clear message to Packers management- the locker rooms need new, plush toilet seats.

For years the locker rooms has hard, cold seats, often causing brief discomfort when the time came. Said Rodgers,”I have been in this league a long time. it’s hard... real hard.”

Film at 11...

Last edited by Music City
@artis posted:

Is this the end of GB? Will Rodgers demand a trade? Will this be the beginning of the end of MLF? Leave it to whore Mike Florio to be dousing the world with gasoline. Can we let them shower first at least?

It’s the beginning of a long dry spell, not the end.

Rodgers will restructure and leave.

MLF is going nowhere.

Gute is going nowhere.

Pettine is going nowhere.

There was no reason to let King shower yesterday, and because the GBP locker room is “active” 365 his stuff should have been placed outside the door with security waiting to escort him out in his jock strap that he had to beg Evans and Brady to give back since he gave them the NFCC as a trophy.

Last edited by NumberThree

A new deal won’t lower our cap number unless they add years. He’s going to be 40 when this deal ends, I think it’s a little silly to think of extending him this far out. They likely have already (before the end of 2020) reworked his deal to pay him cash and lower his cap number.

It’s kind of a hilarious idea that Rodgers was sending a message that the team wasn’t putting a better team around him AND he also wants MORE money for himself in a year when the cap is reduced. Cant have both. Cant take up 1/5 of the cap yourself and expect the team to be able to stack the roster. That’s when you have to hit on a bunch of Elgton Jenkins’ and Jaire Alexanders on rookie deals. I’m sure he wants a stronger commitment from the team to him and to winning SBs, which they do owe him more transparency IMO, and I think that’s all his message was.

Last edited by Grave Digger

As someone else said this is a perfect example how social media is a curse and a blessing all at the same time.  Anyhow, Florio if I am not mistaken is a die hard Spermheads fan and will throw whatever he can against the wall to see what sticks to trash #12 and the Packers.

But I will say that he does deserve a contract in the very top tier in the NFL.  I would be very much in favor of it if they can make it somehow cap friendly.

Last edited by The Heckler

Rodgers should take less money, not more. This is a results driven league.  The Packers paid Rodgers to get them into and win the Super Bowl. He did not do that.  In fact if every player took a reduction in pay equal to the % the salary cap is reduced the Packers would be in ok financial shape.  They all talk about doing what is good for the team, well live up to your words.

I must have missed the part where Rodgers even suggested he wanted more money?  

Clearly, he was frustrated, disappointed, and probably annoyed at how MLF and Pettine made certain calls and certain times and you know he wasn’t happy with the defense - especially guys like King and Sullivan that played horrible.

I do find it amusing that some think he should take less money or even better that he has to play at a higher level. Better than what?  MVP level?  JFC.

The challenge in the NFL is it’s a QB driven league and as we’ve seen time and time again once the QB gets that huge payday it really hampers what you can do around them.  Look no further than the Seahawks and Rams and Eagles.  You have to hit on a number of draft picks to equalize out salaries of star QBs that make up 20% of the cap.

To me, you have 2 solutions to this issue with GB.  

1) you go all in for 2021 knowing that it’s likely Rodgers last year

2) you trade him after June 1 this year knowing that you could pick up 20MM in instant savings this year

The difficulty I see is Stafford is out there and would cost less in terms of what it would take to get him and in theory Deshaun Watson is available as well.   So teams have options.  

But make no mistake about it - Rodgers has a lot of power in this situation and I’ll be fascinated to see what happens.   To some extent, it’s like the Giannis thing all over again.  He went to management and demanded they fill out and upgrade the roster.  Will it work?  We shall see but if I’m Rodgers I put the Packers on notice - either upgrade the team or trade him.

Last edited by Tschmack

Rodger's power in this is to hold out, nothing more. If he does that he likely would be in violation of his contract. And yes, I know pro sports contracts often don't get enforced like real world contracts.

He's under contract through 2023, when he'll be 40. They could restructure, add 1 or 2 years, and still decide to move on after 2023 if they feel it is time. I see the Packers having the control, unless Rodgers decides to get all teenaged girl in public.

So, does anyone think he would try to force his way out of GB or into a new deal?



Kuhn doesn't.



A look back at a story from Brandt in '18 (last AR extension). While they did get the deal done at that time and AB didn't think they would, there is still some good stuff in here from the business perspective.

Last edited by H5

Rodgers seems like he genuinely doesn't know what the plan for the future is. It seems kind of silly to me that LaFleur seems to trust Rodgers enough to collaborate with him to create the offense and call his own plays (which is A LOT of control/ego to surrender to a player IMO), but they don't seemingly trust him enough to share the plans for the next 3 years of his contract. They're not under any obligation to share that with him, but this guy is your MVP, he's a 15 year veteran, he's sensible and realistic, and he may have input. Maybe they don't know the plan, I hope that's not the case. You would expect the plan is 1 more year with Rodgers, after which his contract becomes more manageable to separate from, and then proceed with Love barring something screwy. You would also think Rodgers would be able to say "I feel like I have 5 more good years in me", which he basically has. Can Gute/Murphy/MLF/Rodgers not all pow wow and create a succession plan? Or make it clear they want to fulfill his contract, possibly re-up another and Love will be traded? Or agree that the team will make moves to go all-in for '21 and if they win a SB then Rodgers will retire or whatever... It's naive to think all these big egos could work out something so honest and straight forward, but I think the FO not being transparent and Rodgers publicly confronting the FO in a way is less productive and could sow some distrust in the lockerroom. Makes me worry about a hangover in '21.

Last edited by Grave Digger

The NFL isn’t like the NBA or MLB but you have to imagine guys like Rodgers follow other pro sports and see how much power the star players have in terms of guaranteed money and trade clauses and opt out clauses.  

At this point in his career, he doesn’t have much more to prove.  He’s been a loyal soldier.  But at what point does he say enough is enough and force the issue?   He’s certainly earned that right.  Would it piss off the fans?   Probably.  But loyalty and dedication is a two way street.

We all get attached to players and want the John Elway fairy tale ending but more often than not it doesn’t work out that way.  I truly believe there was no back door move drafting Love other than I don’t think they were expecting Rodgers to play this well this year.  There was nothing over the last 3 years to suggest his skills weren’t declining.   But maybe the system and his own motivation changed and here we are.

The smart play would be to go “all in” for 2021 and see where the chips fall and then decide after this season whether or not to flip the switch and move on.  It would be better for both Rodgers and the Packers.  But can they realistically upgrade the roster with Rodgers making 20% of the cap?  It will take a miracle just to bring back Jones and Linsley.  And they still need LB and DL and CB help.

GD, did you listen to the Kuhn comments? It's not just about ARs future. Kuhn mentioned there is the potential for a lot of changes in personnel this off-season (Lewis, Jones, Linsley) that has a direct impact on ARs future - and not just if he is with the team, which is where everyone jumped to, but who will be around him to make another run.

@Tschmack posted:

But loyalty and dedication is a two way street.



I've never considered loyalty to be a 2-way street in business. Every company I've ever worked for, it was clear in my mind what I could gain from them, and how they could use me to their advantage.

Digger, I would bet good money that some preliminary discussions have taken place about where they could be going and when with AR and with other moves that need to be made.   MLF and AR seem to have a really good relationship and I am sure they will be having a heart to heart very soon. 

This franchise is run very efficiently so I would find it very difficult to believe meetings have not taken place to lay down the future plans.

@H5 posted:

I've never considered loyalty to be a 2-way street in business. Every company I've ever worked for, it was clear in my mind what I could gain from them, and how they could use me to their advantage.

Capitalism baby.  Every man for themselves.

Fun fact:  Did you know "trickle down economics" was originally called the "horse and sparrow theory"?  If you feed the horse enough oats there will be oats for the sparrows . . . in the horseshit.  Talk about branding fail amirite!

Last edited by Henry
@H5 posted:

I've never considered loyalty to be a 2-way street in business. Every company I've ever worked for, it was clear in my mind what I could gain from them, and how they could use me to their advantage.

I've been at the same place for over 20 years. Almost none of my contemporaries remain. The problem is that the incentives have evolved over the 30-40 years to often make loyalty a losing proposition for both the employer and the employee.

I know plenty of people at my business and others who could have moved onto better jobs but stay because they value the stability and they were invested in their identity with that company. In some cases, less than 3 years later they are let go because they have a down period or some management consultant comes in and determines that and business wants a "young, energetic" replacement. That really means cheaper and more malleable. In many cases, they don't even need a down period to be a target.

I also know of departments where managers stuck their necks out to keep strong employees that were experienced and loyal, the department remained productive, but the managers were still criticized because their superiors thought the department could have been even more profitable had they swapped in a cheap, recent college grad for a more expensive, experienced employee that was a key reason for retaining profitability. The issue is that the metric is often quarterly or, if you are lucky, annual reports. In many contexts, you could get rid of every experienced employee and your revenues won't change for a year or two because of current contracts and commitments by your customers. Senior management looks at the savings on an annual report and loves it because they get bonuses for yearly changes in increasing profitability. Often the middle manager gets promoted because they increased profitability and are long gone before the department collapses because you lost all institutional memory.

The whole system has evolved to maximize flexibility and reward vulture capitalists. There are dozens of companies that were moderately profitable that are now gone because some Ivy League business school grad working for a firm that specializes in "restructuring" identified "inefficiencies" that could be exploited in the short term. They do a hostile takeover of the company (or force an owner to sell - the owner either gets a golden parachute or they risk being a target for a takevoer and losing a significant portion of everything they've worked for their whole life by trying to fight the inevitable). The new firm then takes over management, charges enormous fees to manage the company during the restructuring to suck out all the accumulated capital, and then lays off a lot of expensive long-time employees to make the bottom line look better to sell it to even bigger firm (usually a competitor) that just absorbs the gutted companies buildings and brand. They then install cheaper employees to run it more efficiently. The vulture capital firm has almost no risk. The worst that happens is that they make some money by charging enough management fees to cover their original costs of acquisition. The best that happens is that they make enormous amounts of money by charging both the management fees and getting the premium resale of a company with a valuable set of real-estate holdings, capital equipment, and a popular brand without all the pesky long-time older employees with higher salaries and health-care costs.

If you had to invent a system to suppress the middle class from scratch, you couldn't do a better job. The problem is that none of us are blameless (you could argue we don't have a choice unless we want to stick our retirement money in a bank at low interest). Because there are almost no places with pensions anymore, everyone's retirement portfolio is tied up in something like a 401K. Our 401Ks go up when the market does well and the market does well in eliminating these "inefficiencies" from moderately profitable companies that try to do the right thing.

Interesting speculation from Jason Wilde.

“ @jasonjwilde: ... this is my belief: Rodgers wants his contract restructured to give him more guaranteed money so he's not a lame duck in 2021. Converting base salary and roster bonus to signing bonus helps both sides.

He said in May he wanted to finish his career in Green Bay, and the Love pick made that less likely. His contract makes it financially advantageous for #Packers to cut him after 2021. I think he wants a longer commitment to not be a lame duck. Not to be traded. Just my $.02.

... I'm not here to carry water for him. This is an informed opinion, no more. “

@ilcuqui posted:

Interesting speculation from Jason Wilde.

“ @jasonjwilde: ... this is my belief: Rodgers wants his contract restructured to give him more guaranteed money so he's not a lame duck in 2021. Converting base salary and roster bonus to signing bonus helps both sides.

He said in May he wanted to finish his career in Green Bay, and the Love pick made that less likely. His contract makes it financially advantageous for #Packers to cut him after 2021. I think he wants a longer commitment to not be a lame duck. Not to be traded. Just my $.02.

... I'm not here to carry water for him. This is an informed opinion, no more. “

This is beyond insane if true.  Cutting an MVP after 2021 for a turd just because you pissed away the capital on him.