Elgton Jenkins signs extension

[McKnowledge]

Great move. Retain a versatile chess piece for the O-Line, and lower the cap for next season.

 

[Pkrjones]

Great move. Retain a versatile chess piece for the O-Line, and lower the cap for next season.

How does it lower '23's cap? Jenkins counted $0 towards it prior to this extension.

 

[McKnowledge]

How does it lower '23's cap? Jenkins counted $0 towards it prior to this extension.

Jenkins New Deal

"With the extension, his cap number for next season now will be significantly lower."

 

[Pkrjones]

Jenkins New Deal

"With the extension, his cap number for next season now will be significantly lower."

His cap will be lower than IF THEY HAD FRANCHISED TAGGED HIM.

He'll count at least $7mil towards the cap in '23 ($6mil SB + $1mil min salary)...which is MORE than '22's $4.7mil cap number.

 

[McKnowledge]

His cap will be lower than IF THEY HAD FRANCHISED TAGGED HIM.

He'll count at least $7mil towards the cap in '23 ($6mil SB + $1mil min salary)...which is MORE than '22's $4.7mil cap number.

Ok

 

[Deleted member 6794]

His cap will be lower than IF THEY HAD FRANCHISED TAGGED HIM.

He'll count at least $7mil towards the cap in '23 ($6mil SB + $1mil min salary)...which is MORE than '22's $4.7mil cap number.

The Packers could use this season to prorate the signing bonus over five seasons as well, reducing the number to $4.8 million per year.

 

[Pkrjones]

The Packers could use this season to prorate the signing bonus over five seasons as well, reducing the number to $4.8 million per year.

True, but that only leaves $2.3mil cap left for Gute to use in '22. Lower than TT ever felt comfortable, but a good use of the cap.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

True, but that only leaves $2.3mil cap left for Gute to use in '22. Lower than TT ever felt comfortable, but a good use of the cap.

We need to wait on the details of how Jenkins contract is structured before being able to fairly evaluate it.

Thinking about it it would make more sense to prorate the signing bonus over only the next four seasons though as it would otherwise result in less cap space being availabe for 2023.

 

[Heyjoe4]

That number was landed on because it narrowly tops the last elite guard deal— Scherff at 16.5M AAV. And Scherff’s number was landed on because it narrowly topped the guy who set the market before him— Thuney at 16M AAV.

Just like inflation, keeps going up.

Can't wait to see what Hurts and Allen get next and then Burrow. I think they're next. Mahomes has his deal at $45 mil/year which is a "bargain". That will get reworked if he wins another MVP or the SB or both.

Why does it not go down? Anyone think Rodgers is worth $50 mil this year or that Zach Wilson is worth his rookie deal? Well, that's not fair given Rodgers' WRS and the shifting O line, but the meaning is the same. Salaries never go down. Russ Wilson will still get his $40 plus million in spite of an awful year.

Now if you or I started to **** up at work.......

 

[Dantés]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Just like inflation, keeps going up.

Can't wait to see what Hurts and Allen get next and then Burrow. I think they're next. Mahomes has his deal at $45 mil/year which is a "bargain". That will get reworked if he wins another MVP or the SB or both.

Why does it not go down? Anyone think Rodgers is worth $50 mil this year or that Zach Wilson is worth his rookie deal? Well, that's not fair given Rodgers' WRS and the shifting O line, but the meaning is the same. Salaries never go down. Russ Wilson will still get his $40 plus million in spite of an awful year.

Now if you or I started to **** up at work.......

The thing about the QB market is that it’s not just that the raw number keeps going up, it’s that the number as a percentage of the salary cap keeps getting bigger.

So it’s going to be harder and harder to sustain success when you’re paying a good QB at market rate.

A bold organization should try investing in the rest of the roster and keep churning QB’s on rookie deals. Probably target players with mobility who can make plays even if they aren’t mature enough to totally pick apart a defense.

The problem with that is that much of a team’s marketability is wrapped up in the QB position. From a business standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to keep turning over at the face of the franchise.

But it’s gonna hit a tipping point eventually.

 

[Pkrjones]

The thing about the QB market is that it’s not just that the raw number keeps going up, it’s that the number as a percentage of the salary cap keeps getting bigger.

So it’s going to be harder and harder to sustain success when you’re paying a good QB at market rate.

A bold organization should try investing in the rest of the roster and keep churning QB’s on rookie deals. Probably target players with mobility who can make plays even if they aren’t mature enough to totally pick apart a defense.

The problem with that is that much of a team’s marketability is wrapped up in the QB position. From a business standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to keep turning over at the face of the franchise.

But it’s gonna hit a tipping point eventually.

Baltimore may be doing exactly that by not extending Jackson. Will be interesting how that situation plays out this spring.

 

[OldSchool101]

This speaks to me as a series of moves about to happen. That’s a nice size puzzle chunk we just put in place in a puzzle that’s over half put together. It will allow us to maneuver with more fiscal clarity on the next several players we want to retain.

 

[Mondio]

The thing about the QB market is that it’s not just that the raw number keeps going up, it’s that the number as a percentage of the salary cap keeps getting bigger.

So it’s going to be harder and harder to sustain success when you’re paying a good QB at market rate.

A bold organization should try investing in the rest of the roster and keep churning QB’s on rookie deals. Probably target players with mobility who can make plays even if they aren’t mature enough to totally pick apart a defense.

The problem with that is that much of a team’s marketability is wrapped up in the QB position. From a business standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to keep turning over at the face of the franchise.

But it’s gonna hit a tipping point eventually.

I think it will limit itself to a degree. There are a few teams that seem to do well with lesser QB's. Most of them do not win the super bowl however. We can argue it didn't help GB by having one, and I'd agree. But by and large, excellent QB's are who end up on the winning team more often than not. I think that will continue.

the other part is, those teams that do, are stacked everywhere else. It works when you have very good players at every other position especially on defense. Build a team like that and they will have to be paid, but the problem is, those guys tend to miss more time than QB's it seems. Sure san fran can churn thru QB's, but lose Bosa and a linebacker and see where they go?

Nobody tilts a field like a great QB. The problem is many teams have been paying big bucks for mediocre QB's and in return has skyrocketed QB costs in general. I think the truly elite QB's will always get paid the big bucks because nobody tilts a field like they do. I think the middle of the road QB's will start to see teams saying, see ya, on big dollar contracts.
Someone mention Baltimore and Jackson. They could be doing just that. IMO, he's just a mediocre QB. Yeah he looks great on a team with a great defense and a pounding run game which he can operate behind. Take either away and he has to be a complete QB to tilt a field? I don't think he can do it and the exposure to injury if he has to will come back to bite a team paying him a lot of money. He's makes plenty of highlight reels, that's for sure. But that's because he does one thing really well with a game set up that way and that's it. I don't think that's winning over the long term.

 

[lambeaulambo]

Any Englishman in need of an extension?

 

[Dantés]

I think it will limit itself to a degree. There are a few teams that seem to do well with lesser QB's. Most of them do not win the super bowl however. We can argue it didn't help GB by having one, and I'd agree. But by and large, excellent QB's are who end up on the winning team more often than not. I think that will continue.

the other part is, those teams that do, are stacked everywhere else. It works when you have very good players at every other position especially on defense. Build a team like that and they will have to be paid, but the problem is, those guys tend to miss more time than QB's it seems. Sure san fran can churn thru QB's, but lose Bosa and a linebacker and see where they go?

Nobody tilts a field like a great QB. The problem is many teams have been paying big bucks for mediocre QB's and in return has skyrocketed QB costs in general. I think the truly elite QB's will always get paid the big bucks because nobody tilts a field like they do. I think the middle of the road QB's will start to see teams saying, see ya, on big dollar contracts.
Someone mention Baltimore and Jackson. They could be doing just that. IMO, he's just a mediocre QB. Yeah he looks great on a team with a great defense and a pounding run game which he can operate behind. Take either away and he has to be a complete QB to tilt a field? I don't think he can do it and the exposure to injury if he has to will come back to bite a team paying him a lot of money. He's makes plenty of highlight reels, that's for sure. But that's because he does one thing really well with a game set up that way and that's it. I don't think that's winning over the long term.

A market correction in the middle class would certainly help a ton.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The thing about the QB market is that it’s not just that the raw number keeps going up, it’s that the number as a percentage of the salary cap keeps getting bigger.

Actually the percentage of cap space allocated towards quarterbacks this season is the second lowest over the past 10 years with only 2013 having a smaller figure.

Here are the numbers having used Over The Cap's positional spending as a reference.

2013: 8.17%
2014: 8.90%
2015: 8.98%
2016: 10.57%
2017: 9.68%
2018: 10.35%
2019: 9.55%
2020: 9.45%
2021: 8.75%
2022: 8.51%

Someone mention Baltimore and Jackson. They could be doing just that.

I don't think the Ravens are actually doing that as according to several reports they offered Jackson a six-year, $250 million this summer. It seems ge turned it down because they didn't fully guarantee it.

 

[PackAttack12]

A bold organization should try investing in the rest of the roster and keep churning QB’s on rookie deals. Probably target players with mobility who can make plays even if they aren’t mature enough to totally pick apart a defense.

The problem with that is that much of a team’s marketability is wrapped up in the QB position. From a business standpoint, it doesn’t make sense to keep turning over at the face of the franchise.

But it’s gonna hit a tipping point eventually.

The other issue with it is that it’s so damn hard to get the quarterback right. Honestly, it’s just more of a stroke of luck than anything else.

Also, not everyone is as good as say, the 49ers, in overall talent acquisition to rely solely on that as well.

 

[Pkrjones]

Also, not everyone is as good as say, the 49ers, in overall talent acquisition to rely solely on that as well.

For 5 of the last 7 years SF has spent their #1's on OL & DL, finding RB's & TE's in mid/late rounds. Good players are available later rounds... just need GM/scouts to see talent/heart even though they may not fit the "ideal" position mold in size/speed.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Here are the details of Jenkins contract:

2023: cap hit of $6.8 million ($1.1 million base salary, $600K per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)
2024: cap hit of $14.1 million ($3.5 million base salary, $5.1 million roster bonus due on the third day of the league year, $600K per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)
2025: cap hit of $17.2 million ($11.7 million base salary, $600K per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)
2026: cap hit of $24.2 million ($18.5 million base salary, $1 million per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)

As expected the Packers prorated his signing bonus over five seasons, resulting in an additional $4.3 million cap hit for this season.

In addition the contract includes Pro Bowl escalators in 2024, '25 and '26 of $2 million each.

 

[PikeBadger]

Here are the details of Jenkins contract:

2023: cap hit of $6.8 million ($1.1 million base salary, $600K per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)
2024: cap hit of $14.1 million ($3.5 million base salary, $5.1 million roster bonus due on the third day of the league year, $600K per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)
2025: cap hit of $17.2 million ($11.7 million base salary, $600K per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)
2026: cap hit of $24.2 million ($18.5 million base salary, $1 million per-game roster bonus, $500K workout bonus)

As expected the Packers prorated his signing bonus over five seasons, resulting in an additional $4.3 million cap hit for this season.

In addition the contract includes Pro Bowl escalators in 2024, '25 and '26 of $2 million each.

The per game roster bonus? Is that game day active?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The per game roster bonus? Is that game day active?

Yes.

 

[PikeBadger]

Yes.

That's good. I'm all in favor of every player under contract having game day active bonuses included as part of their compensation package. Lends some financial protection to future operations

 

[Deleted member 6794]

That's good. I'm all in favor of every player under contract having game day active bonuses included as part of their compensation package. Lends some financial protection to future operations

While there's some truth to it you need to consider that it's only a small portion of Jenkins' contract at a total of $2.8 million over four years.

 

[PikeBadger]

While there's some truth to it you need to consider that it's only a small portion of Jenkins' contract at a total of $2.8 million over four years.

A small portion of 53 contracts makes a nice tidy sum over 17 weeks filled with injuries

 

[Deleted member 6794]

A small portion of 53 contracts makes a nice tidy sum over 17 weeks filled with injuries

You have to realize that only eight players currently under contract for next season have such bonuses included in their contracts for 2023 for a total of $4.25 million though.