@MichiganPacker2 posted:If we throw in Jaire Alexander, Aaron Jones, and Bakhtiari for even more future picks we can become the Oklahoma City Thunder of the NFL.
If we can get the entire first round, wouldn't they have to hold the draft in Green Bay?
@Henry posted:The thing I can't figure out is why any QB is kept past his rookie contract. If you can't win with a QB and now a WR taking up so much cap it sure seems like futility to pay that money in the first place.
Wouldn't it be better just to keep drafting QBs continually and turn the team over every 5 years?
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic but I think any GM has to seriously ask himself if he can win a Super Bowl with a 20% cap hit at QB before he offers the contract. The fact that a QB making over 13% of the cap has never won a Super Bowl in the free agency era makes a legit question. Best case, you find a QB who understands the equation and takes less, keeping his cap hit around 12-13%. Only player to do this is Tom Brady.
Other side of the question is job security. A great QB will get you to the playoffs every year and it's hard to fire a coach and GM if you're winning 11-12 games even if you're losing in the second round of the playoffs. But if you trade that great QB and miss the playoffs, it's very easy to fire everyone. So giving a QB a huge contract offers job security to everyone, even if it reduces the odds of winning a Super Bowl.
Yes and no.
Seriously, is Mahomes contract worth it? Are they one and done now? I know contracts like Dak Prescott sure the hell aren't worth it. So if Rodgers and Mahomes aren't worth the contract I would seriously be looking to semi rebuild every 5 years looking to catch lightening in a bottle.
jfc listening to mcafee - you would think tb12 owns the bucs now. he's calling all the shots. this cannot be the way the nfl thinks is the way forward does it? that's what this is all about, even mumblings of russell wilson looking for that kind of clout. no more 'do your job' mentality here...
If you look at some of the teams that have won Super Bowls over the last few years, it wasn't just the QB that was on a rookie contract, it was a lot of the other stars as well.
The Seattle title team (which should have won two titles) had about 4 future HOFers on rookie deals. Wilson, Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas, and Bobby Wagner were all on their rookie deals and Wilson and Sherman were mid-round draft picks making peanuts. Russell Okung was a high-paid LT on that team and M. Lynch was well paid, but the other key guys I mentioned were all really cheap.
The 2010 Packers had CM3, Raji, J. Nelsen, Josh Sitton, and TJ Lang (among others) on rookie deals. Rodgers was on an economical contract and they had two outstanding CBs making the minimum (Tramon and Shields). The money was going to Jennings, Woodson, Driver, and Pickett.
To win a title, you have to have some superstar-level players on their rookie deals. However, you almost always need a HOF QB. In the 30 Super Bowls since the Packers became relevant again, 24 of the titles have been won by teams with QBs that are in the HOF or are shoe-ins to get there. If you count Eli Manning as a HOFer, that number goes to 26 of 30. The remaining 4 are the 1999 Ravens (Dilfer), the 2002 Bucs (Brad Johnson), the 2011 Ravens (Flacco), and the 2017 Eagles (Foles). Those first three teams had historically great defenses. I'm still trying to figure out how the 2017 Eagles won. The only guy on the roster with a HOF chance is the NT, Fletcher Cox.
So, you need to have a HOF QB to optimize your chances of winning a title, but you also need him on a rookie deal. There might be a HOF QB every 3 drafts or so. Brady is the exception because he took less money, but he'll still make 300+ million in his career. His teams were saving 5 million a year or so, not 20 million.
Maybe the key is to have your star QB marry a wife that will eventually approach billionaire status so he can get by on 25 million a year instead of 30+? Shailene's only worth about 10-12 million. Danica is worth 80 million, so ARs going backward on that stat.
@Henry posted:Yes and no.
Seriously, is Mahomes contract worth it? Are they one and done now? I know contracts like Dak Prescott sure the hell aren't worth it. So if Rodgers and Mahomes aren't worth the contract I would seriously be looking to semi rebuild every 5 years looking to catch lightening in a bottle.
Of the 20 teams that have made it to the SB since the rookie wage scale came into effect, 8 of them had QB's still on their rookie deals. Only Wilson and Mahomes won one however (and also lost one).
The QB with the highest cap % to win the SB during that same timeframe was P.Manning at 12%.
We'll find out soon. Mahomes' 2020 and 2021 cap hits were $5m and $7m, which is ideal for competing for a Super Bowl. But cap hits are $36m in 2022 and $47m in 2023. That's a whole lot of talent the Chiefs won't be able to keep or bring in.
@pkr_north posted:jfc listening to mcafee - you would think tb12 owns the bucs now. he's calling all the shots. this cannot be the way the nfl thinks is the way forward does it? that's what this is all about, even mumblings of russell wilson looking for that kind of clout. no more 'do your job' mentality here...
The Chiefs let Mahomes pick their 1st round choice.
@Timpranillo posted:I agree, and I think people are going to be in for a rude awakening how many worts a generational QB covers up on any roster.
I kind of like a good IPA wort myself.
@Timpranillo posted:I agree, and I think people are going to be in for a rude awakening how many worts a generational QB covers up on any roster.
D. Adams is probably going to look no good no matter who the QB is. He did continue to put up good number with Hundley (maybe because he was one of the only guys that could get open off his release. Bakh is going to be a generational talent (if healthy) on any team. E. Jenkins may approach that level. The Billy Turners of the world look good with a veteran QB who can make quick reads or avoid the rush. They tend to look worse with inexperienced QBs who don't make the first rusher miss.
MVS will still get open, but his one good route requires a guy to throw the ball 55 yards in the air.
The other returning guys are all guys that don't get a ton of separation and require a guy with a big arm to fit passes into a tight window.
@Tschmack posted:That’s why the Broncos as a trade destination can make a lot of sense. They have some young, decent players at position of need for GB, and some of them are still on rookie deals for the next 2-3 years. Namely guys like Surtain, Jeudy, Fant, and Hamler, and Dre mont Jones. Surtain would be longer.
To me, the players are more important than picks at this point. I’d rather have a Jeudy or Fant than a first round pick.
If Rodgers goes I would actually consider moving Adams as well. If he’s not interested in extending then you need to get as much as you can for him in his final year.
WTF would Denver offer the supporting players they need to make a run when trading for Rodgers, though?
@CUPackFan posted:Trade Rodgers and Adams to the Broncos for 2 firsts, 2 seconds, 1 third, Jeudy, Surtain, Jones, and Bridgwater. 2021 is a transition year with Bridgwater as starter and Love learning, then the team is Love's in 2022. Then back to back Super Bowls in 2023 and 2024
.
You really have to ask yourself if it's possible to win a Super Bowl with your QB and WR combining for over 25% of your cap. A Super Bowl winning QB has never had a cap hit over 13%. Rodgers is 20%. You can't ignore that.
You really aren't this stupid, are you? Cap money isn't real money. Rodgers $21.642m cap hit last season was under 11% of the cap. Brady's contract has three dummy years added to spread the cap hit, and his last "extension" in New England added two. Manning had a $20m dummy year on his contract, as well. The Packers have been reticent to use dummy years on larger contracts, but they have three on Kevin King's deal. Restructuring Rodgers' deal could have happened had Gutey and Murphy not screwed the pooch, as well.
Oh yeah, add in the fact the fact the cap went down this year is an aberration, especially when a new TV deal for $113 billion was signed, and that's before the DirecTV deal expires next year.
@Timpranillo posted:I agree, and I think people are going to be in for a rude awakening how many worts a generational QB covers up on any roster.
So much this. Too many fans have been spoiled the last two decades and can't see as far as the rest of the division, let alone the league.
Matt Stafford is a very good QB, and Detroit hasn't had anywhere near the success Green Bay has had with otherwise pretty similar teams at times.
The Vikings build a team then throw a dart at a QB and even when they get a good return there's no Super Bowl payoff.
Then there's the Bears, whose not only best, but only viable QB in that time has been Smokin' Jay. The time they built the really good team with a game manager QB? They got to the Super Bowl and got beaten by the team with the great QB. The time they won it was over 35 years ago with a crap ton of HoF players.
And yet the Packers have been consistently closer with easily arguably worse supporting casts many times. QB has been the position of greatest differential against the rest of the division for going on 30 years.
And actually won a Super Bowl.
Maybe if they put together a legit defense instead of sniffing the top ten every once in a blue moon there'd be more titles.
@Timpranillo posted:I agree, and I think people are going to be in for a rude awakening how many worts a generational QB covers up on any roster.
Seattle is a 4 or 5 win team without Wilson
@Timpranillo posted:I agree, and I think people are going to be in for a rude awakening how many worts a generational QB covers up on any roster.
I doubt the "good" and "loyal" fans are capable of any such awakening. After all, significant parts of the fan base are still, or at least were, convinced that:
(1) TED THOMPSON remained at the top of his game post-2010 despite the constant use of high picks on bad defensive players;
(2) MIKE MCCARTHY was an offensive guru and something special as a head coach in Green Bay;
(3) DOM CAPERS was not at fault for any problems on the D and remained a top-notch coordinator; and
(4) The consistently poor Special Teams play was due to bad luck not worthless Coordinators in SHAWN SLOCUM, RON ZOOK, and SHAWN MENNENGA.
There was only 1 aspect of the GB Packers organization that was truly SPECIAL throughout the 2008-2020 time period -- and no it was not Mark Murphy.
@Boris posted:Seattle is a 4 or 5 win team without Wilson
Wouldn’t that depend on who was their QB?
If Rodgers exits, the Packers probably lose Davante Adams next year and their prestige vanishes, along with any shot at a Super Bowl.
@Henry posted:And actually won a Super Bowl.
Maybe if they put together a legit defense instead of sniffing the top ten every once in a blue moon there'd be more titles.
Oh, the Rodgers ball sniffers.
The Packers win a Super Bowl? IT WAS RODGERS!!!
The Packers go 10 years without winning one? RODGERS GOT NO SUPPORT!!!
Guess what? The last 10 years the Packers FO has been far from perfect. You know who else has been less than perfect? YOUR BOY RODGERS!
@Herschel posted:And yet the Packers have been consistently closer with easily arguably worse supporting casts many times. QB has been the position of greatest differential against the rest of the division for going on 30 years.
Closer? Don’t we laugh at the Queens for getting “CLOSER”?
@Goalline posted:Oh, the Rodgers ball sniffers.
The Packers win a Super Bowl? IT WAS RODGERS!!!
The Packers go 10 years without winning one? RODGERS GOT NO SUPPORT!!!
Guess what? The last 10 years the Packers FO has been far from perfect. You know who else has been less than perfect? YOUR BOY RODGERS!
You're the one who brought up Rodgers not winning a Super Bowl since 2010 and trying to equate that to the Vikings and Bears failures.
He won a Super Bowl with a top 10 defense. Go figure.
@skully posted:If Rodgers exits, the Packers probably lose Davante Adams next year and their prestige vanishes, along with any shot at a Super Bowl.
Rodgers will leave the team, at some point, but I think he will be back by the start of the season. When Davante was injured and missed games, the Packers won all those games. I think the Packers are a lot better team than most give them credit for.
@Henry posted:You're the one who brought up Rodgers not winning a Super Bowl since 2010 and trying to equate that to the Vikings and Bears failures.
He won a Super Bowl with a top 10 defense. Go figure.
So, clearly, it was the top 10 defense that won the Super Bowl, yet we are paying Rodgers like he is going to win it by himself and now he’s braying for a fucking raise, and you think that’s going to win you the stupid game you so clearly need to complete your life?
@Herschel posted:You really aren't this stupid, are you? Cap money isn't real money.
Over the life of a contract, cash paid = cap hit. It's a simple equation, really. Now you can decide WHEN the cap is hit but at the end of the day, all cash the team pays out will eventually hit the cap. All dummy years do is push the cap hit to when the player is no longer with the team.
@mrtundra posted:Rodgers will leave the team, at some point, but I think he will be back by the start of the season. When Davante was injured and missed games, the Packers won all those games. I think the Packers are a lot better team than most give them credit for.
Way better than the ball washers give them credit for. Get a decent QB in MLF’s offense and it will perform. Take the money saved and get a better defense and a Super Bowl is possible, although Henry will have no Arod balls to wash then, which will suck…for him.
@CUPackFan posted:Over the life of a contract, cash paid = cap hit. It's a simple equation, really. Now you can decide WHEN the cap is hit but at the end of the day, all cash the team pays out will eventually hit the cap. All dummy years do is push the cap hit to when the player is no longer with the team.
Cap money isn’t real money if you look at any one year in isolation. Over the term of the contract it is pretty damn real.
@Goalline posted:So, clearly, it was the top 10 defense that won the Super Bowl, yet we are paying Rodgers like he is going to win it by himself and now he’s braying for a fucking raise, and you think that’s going to win you the stupid game you so clearly need to complete your life?
No, clearly it was a HOF QB with a great defense. That's the whole point. Rodgers covers a lot of warts but he still can't do it by himself. So when you get a lazy fucking FO that goes with "good nuf" or "let Aaron handle it" they never get over the top.
Pretty sure this isn't about a raise either. Also, I'm pretty complete as it is. I have my yak and know when people are being dishonest with themselves and treat it as such.
You have HOF QB. A few things as a GM you might want to consider
1) Don't be so fucking inept you piss him off to the point of never wanting to return because you don't think he deserves a phone call.
2) Quit relying on him to make you look good when the reality is when he's gone, everything is going to look a lot shittier.
3) Win a fucking Super Bowl. You'll get a friggin' blank check for at a least 5 years.
@Henry posted:No, clearly it was a HOF QB with a great defense. That's the whole point. Rodgers covers a lot of warts but he still can't do it by himself. So when you get a lazy fucking FO that goes with "good nuf" or "let Aaron handle it" they never get over the top.
Pretty sure this isn't about a raise either. Also, I'm pretty complete as it is. I have my yak and know when people are being dishonest with themselves and treat it as such.
You have HOF QB. A few things as a GM you might want to consider
1) Don't be so fucking inept you piss him off to the point of never wanting to return because you don't think he deserves a phone call.
2) Quit relying on him to make you look good when the reality is when he's gone, everything is going to look a lot shittier.
3) Win a fucking Super Bowl. You'll get a friggin' blank check for at a least 5 years.
No one understands economics on this board better than you. Don’t be so obtuse. If you pay the money to the QB that money is not available to improve the defense.
If the cap era has shown one thing it is that paying top dollar to one player means you will not win a Super Bowl. It has never been done.
That's simply not true. You probably will take some lumps down the road but the money is there.
I think I need to reiterate this. I am all for destroying the fuck out of the cap a few years down the road for a chance a Super Bowl right now. That's it. Then everyone can get excited about building a new, young team.
@Goalline posted:Closer? Don’t we laugh at the Queens for getting “CLOSER”?
Nice try at moving the goalposts. Without Rodgers, the Packers are lucky to be an average team, at best some years. They went through a five-year period of basically garbage drafts with only one good starter/year developing and they were still in the running most years, yet you seem to think they can get rid of him and have a better shot somehow?
@Herschel posted:Nice try at moving the goalposts because you're out of your depth. Without Rodgers, the Packers are lucky to be an average team, at best some years. They went through a five-year period of basically garbage drafts with only one good starter/year developing and they were still in the running most years, yet you seem to think they can get rid of him and have a better shot somehow?
Out of my depth?😂😂😂😂You are the one literally crying over a kid’s game. I don’t give a shit who wins a Super Bowl or not. YOU DO!
@Henry posted:That's simply not true. You probably will take some lumps down the road but the money is there.
I think I need to reiterate this. I am all for destroying the fuck out of the cap a few years down the road for a chance a Super Bowl right now. That's it. Then everyone can get excited about building a new, young team.
Well, your QB wasn’t willing to do that. Don’t forget that.
@Goalline posted:The Packers win a Super Bowl? IT WAS RODGERS!!!
The Packers go 10 years without winning one? RODGERS GOT NO SUPPORT!!!
Guess what? The last 10 years the Packers FO has been far from perfect. You know who else has been less than perfect? YOUR BOY RODGERS!
So you think the Packers win a Super Bowl in 2010 with Brian Brohm or Brady fucking Quinn? That they aren't on the Chicago/Jacksonville/Cleveland treadmill after that? Those are the QBs take after their first-round picks with Favre still as starter.
I know you think what you are saying here is super profound. IT IS NOT! You are not a 12 year old boy. Grow the fuck up and stop worshipping super heroes. IDIOT!
