Lance kendricks

[sschind]

Don't disagree that AR is underpaid for the burden he carries every week... but he was the highest paid QB when he signed his contract. He's currently #5 on the yearly average, but he's still #1 in amount guaranteed. I don't like the idea of "sweetening the pot" half way through his contract, there ARE much more urgent uses for that $$.

Is all the "Rodgers wants more money" talk coming from that one comment he made on the radio with Wilde and Tausher? I didn't hear it myself I just read about it and I can't find anything where he said anything more than "I think it has to."

I can't believe more isn't being made of this on the forums. Those are the places that tend to blow up over stuff like this. It sure seems like some media experts are trying to get some mileage out of it. Maybe most people are realizing it for what it was, an off the cuff remark with little or no substance.

 

[HardRightEdge]

We didn't have a TE that could get in and out of breaks like this last year.

https://mobile.twitter.com/AaronNagler/status/841131938551353345

There's no doubt Bennett is a better route runner than Cook. Cook is a better vertical threat.

I'm not complaining, mind you. I just don't see a meaningful net-net upgrade over Cook.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Seattle signed Lacy, and now we have this:

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ging-in-free-agent-te-jared-cook-for-a-visit/

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Is all the "Rodgers wants more money" talk coming from that one comment he made on the radio with Wilde and Tausher? I didn't hear it myself I just read about it and I can't find anything where he said anything more than "I think it has to."

I can't believe more isn't being made of this on the forums. Those are the places that tend to blow up over stuff like this. It sure seems like some media experts are trying to get some mileage out of it. Maybe most people are realizing it for what it was, an off the cuff remark with little or no substance.

Florio has been making a big deal over a comment AR made when asked about the contract that the Bears gave Glennon. Rodgers fired back at him with #fakenews and its taken off a bit. I think AR is handling it well and Florio is just being the ****** bag that he can be and trying to get headlines out of it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If Brock "F*cking" Osweiler somehow manages to keep his current contract, he'll be putting $2.4 mil more cash money in his pocket than Rodgers this year.

Same can be said about a lot of Players, look at Clay Matthews. Until the NFL puts more emphasis on incentive based pay, there is always going to be winners and losers on both sides of a lot of contracts. Might be my biggest pet peeve about the NFL and other professional sports, get paid paid based on what you could do, not what you actually did.

 

[bigbubbatd]

Florio has been making a big deal over a comment AR made when asked about the contract that the Bears gave Glennon. Rodgers fired back at him with #fakenews and its taken off a bit. I think AR is handling it well and Florio is just being the ****** bag that he can be and trying to get headlines out of it.

Rodgers still hates florio after that terrible piece he wrote saying Rodgers wouldn't sign an autograph for a cancer survivor

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Rodgers still hates florio after that terrible piece he wrote saying Rodgers wouldn't sign an autograph for a cancer survivor

One thing Aaron Rodgers will never be accused of his biting his tongue when it comes to Reporters and the media. Which is fine when you are playing like Aaron Rodgers, but if there ever comes a day when his game really slips, or he does something he shouldn't have.....some of those reporters are going to come at him with vengeance. Something we have already seen tried when his game dropped off a bit, as well as all the questions pertaining to his family.

Favre was well known for his cavalier attitude on the field, I think Aaron will be remembered for his off the field.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Same can be said about a lot of Players, look at Clay Matthews. Until the NFL puts more emphasis on incentive based pay, there is always going to be winners and losers on both sides of a lot of contracts. Might be my biggest pet peeve about the NFL and other professional sports, get paid paid based on what you could do, not what you actually did.

There may be some prohibitions against incentive provisions in rookie deals, but other than that there's nothing preventing teams from offering such deals. It's a competitive market. Mutual agreement among owners to do so would be illegal collusion. They'd have to build it into the CBA in some kind of structure I can't really envision. Good luck with that.

It could be worse. Baseball pitchers get 9 figure guaranteed contracts, the fate of which hand on a single elbow tendon.

 

[bigbubbatd]

One thing Aaron Rodgers will never be accused of his biting his tongue when it comes to Reporters and the media. Which is fine when you are playing like Aaron Rodgers, but if there ever comes a day when his game really slips, or he does something he shouldn't have.....some of those reporters are going to come at him with vengeance. Something we have already seen tried when his game dropped off a bit, as well as all the questions pertaining to his family.

Favre was well known for his cavalier attitude on the field, I think Aaron will be remembered for his off the field.

He has a special dislike for skip Bayless and florio which makes me like Rodgers even more

 

[Mondio]

Florio needs to attach his wagon to Rodgers because it's one of the only ways he can generate readers and clicks. Rodgers is one of the biggest names in football, so he's looking for a way to exploit that to gain readers for himself and clicks for his advertisers.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There may be some prohibitions against incentive provisions in rookie deals, but other than that there's nothing preventing teams from offering such deals. It's a competitive market. Mutual agreement among owners to do so would be illegal collusion. They'd have to build it into the CBA in some kind of structure I can't really envision. Good luck with that.

It could be worse. Baseball pitchers get 9 figure guaranteed contracts, the fate of which hand on a single elbow tendon.

Oh I never said it WILL happen, but I would love to see it happen and it won't for some of the reasons you stated. I would also love to see a computer generated mock up though of what the 2016 Packer players would have been paid at the end of the year, based on a "base pay" + "incentives". I am pretty sure it wouldn't fully resemble what the actual payroll looked like.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Same can be said about a lot of Players, look at Clay Matthews.

Matthews cash money in his pocket will be $11.1 mil this year, less than Rodgers.

When Rodgers said, "it has to", an unequivocal statement, he was talking about QB pay. This year? Maybe. By next year? How it could not.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Matthews cash money in his pocket will be $11.1 mil this year, less than Rodgers.

When Rodgers said, "it has to", an unequivocal statement, he was talking about QB pay. This year? Maybe. By next year? How it could not.

I was referring more to the flip side of contracts. Players that are underperforming older contracts. Rodgers is definitely being underpaid if compared to today's QB contracts and not the one he signed in what....2013? But he could very well have become Jay Cutler or in the case I mentioned, Clay Matthews and underperforming it as well.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Oh I never said it WILL happen, but I would love to see it happen and it won't for some of the reasons you stated. I would love to see a computer generated mock up though of what the 2016 Packer players would have been paid at the end of the year, based on a "base pay" + "incentives". I am pretty sure it wouldn't fully resemble what the actual payroll looked like.

In their heart of hearts, nobody in the NFL really believes in Money Ball, which is what you're talking about. And you sure as hell would not want to pay somebody in real life based on fantasy stats, which is what this amounts to. I wouldn't want to pay Beckham a plug nickel, to take a glaring example.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

In their heart of hearts, nobody in the NFL really believes in Money Ball, which is what you're talking about. And you sure as hell would not want to pay somebody in real life based on fantasy stats, which is what this amounts to. I wouldn't want to pay Beckham a plug nickel, to take a glaring example.

It's not a new concept and it wouldn't be tied strictly to fantasy stats. So many things could be factored into a player's ultimate "pay day" besides fantasy stats. Will it ever happen? Probably not. If it ever did, the whole Cap concept would have to be completely reworked.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Kendricks will wear #84, the number he wore while playing for the Badgers.

http://gnb.247sports.com/Bolt/Lance-Kendricks-reveals-Packers-jersey-number--51768252

 

[sschind]

I think one reason why teams shy away from big incentive laden contracts comes from the uncertainty of them for future cap hits. If we signed someone like Lacy to a deal that paid him a million dollars each if he had 10 TDs, 1000 yards and 50 catches We wouldn't know how that impacted next years cap until this year was over. Since he didn't get those numbers last season they wouldn't count against this years cap but if he reached them this year it would count against next years cap. You would have to plan for it and have the cap space available or you might find yourself forced to cut people you don't want to cut just to get under the cap. Teams have to do that now but they usually know in advance. It would suck to have to cut one of your core players just because some backup lineman got lucky and hit on several million dollars in incentives that you didn't plan for. In a similar way it would suck to not be able to sign someone who could help because you didn't know how much money you would have next season only to have none of the incentives met and you missed out. Those may be extreme examples but it is possible. What if you had 6 players with million dollar pro bowl incentives and they all hit. That's 6 million you didn't count on having to account for and now one of your best players is a FA and you either have to let him walk or come up with the money elsewhere. Its fine to have a few of them scattered throughout your roster but you wouldn't want too many of them because it could really impact your plans for the following year. I know some people say there is always a way but that doesn't mean that the way is the best way.

Obviously, as Poker said, they could change the rules for incentives and change the cap structure but until revenue starts to drop and the Salary cap goes down I don't see anyone willing to do that.

 

[Mondio]

it's not the teams that shy away from incentive laden deals, it's the players. They want that money, they want it now. They want it guaranteed. Teams know about what every person is going to do. On a personal level they could be way off from time to time, but as a team, they're probably pretty close most years. there's only so much offense that can be produced. So much defense. If you have 3 RB's all signed to the craziest incentive laden contract ever, and all your WR's are as well, if your WR's are scoring TD's, your RB's probably aren't. and if one WR is at 14 TD's for a season, the other 2 most likely are not. and if they are, you're not paying your TE's or RB's any extras because they likely didn't score many at all.

There's only so many defensive and offensive plays to be made in a season and they kind of average out over time. I don't think it would be hard to look at the data and have your base salaries and offer incentives from there and never really be in danger. But it's the players that don't want it, and I can't blame them.

 

[sschind]

it's not the teams that shy away from incentive laden deals, it's the players. They want that money, they want it now. They want it guaranteed. Teams know about what every person is going to do. On a personal level they could be way off from time to time, but as a team, they're probably pretty close most years. there's only so much offense that can be produced. So much defense. If you have 3 RB's all signed to the craziest incentive laden contract ever, and all your WR's are as well, if your WR's are scoring TD's, your RB's probably aren't. and if one WR is at 14 TD's for a season, the other 2 most likely are not. and if they are, you're not paying your TE's or RB's any extras because they likely didn't score many at all.

There's only so many defensive and offensive plays to be made in a season and they kind of average out over time. I don't think it would be hard to look at the data and have your base salaries and offer incentives from there and never really be in danger. But it's the players that don't want it, and I can't blame them.

I agree that players don't want it but its the teams that make the offers. Even when the team has the leverage you don't see it much. Take Lacy for instance. If the Packers Seahawks and vikings all offered him incentive based deals he would have no choice but to accept one of them unless another team were interested but from the way it sounds those were the only three that were. Granted the teams can't get together and agree to do that but they can do it on their own and if incentive based contracts were really the way to go it would go that way. There has to be a reason that teams do not offer more incentive based deals and that reason would seem to be that incentive based deals may not be the best way to go.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's not a new concept and it wouldn't be tied strictly to fantasy stats. So many things could be factored into a player's ultimate "pay day" besides fantasy stats.

Games played, snaps taken, yards gained, etc., etc. etc. It's all fantasy or fantasy-like stats.

What are you gonna do? Contract with an independent third party like PFF and pay players off of a grade?

I can bet you there are many cases where coaches with intimate familiarity of what players are asked to do would laugh at many of those grades.

There are so many ways this is unacceptable. Not the least of which is the problem of staying within the narrow margin between a CBA guaranteed minimum of 90% cash payouts against the cap over a 5 year period and the actual salary cap in each year. Widespread incentives create unpredictability in cap management. You have no idea at the start of the year whether you'd go over the cap or underpay the 90%.

The CBA militates against widespread incentive clauses, and you're not going to get players to agree to a CBA restructuring next time around that would promote incentive pay.

 

[Mondio]

I agree that players don't want it but its the teams that make the offers. Even when the team has the leverage you don't see it much. Take Lacy for instance. If the Packers Seahawks and vikings all offered him incentive based deals he would have no choice but to accept one of them unless another team were interested but from the way it sounds those were the only three that were. Granted the teams can't get together and agree to do that but they can do it on their own and if incentive based contracts were really the way to go it would go that way. There has to be a reason that teams do not offer more incentive based deals and that reason would seem to be that incentive based deals may not be the best way to go.

players make offers too, it's why sometimes teams negotiate and sometimes they don't. It's probably the reason the Packers never offered Hyde a contract because his agent proposed terms and the Packers said go and get it, it's not happening here. So he did.

and if all the teams decided to just offer those contracts, they'd have to decided to do that amongst themselves and they'd find themselves in court so fast their heads wouldn't even have time to spin for collusion and violating the CBA.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Games played, snaps taken, yards gained, etc., etc. etc. It's all fantasy or fantasy-like stats.

What are you gonna do? Contract with an independent third party like PFF and pay players off of a grade?

I can bet you there are many cases where coaches with intimate familiarity of what players are asked to do would laugh at many of those grades.

There are so many ways this is unacceptable. Not the least of which is the problem of staying within the narrow margin between a CBA guaranteed minimum of 90% cash payouts against the cap over a 5 year period and the actual salary cap in each year. Widespread incentives create unpredictability in cap management. You have no idea at the start of the year whether you'd go over the cap or underpay the 90%.

The CBA militates against widespread incentive clauses, and you're not going to get players to agree to a CBA restructuring next time around that would promote incentive pay.

Yup, I didn't say switching to an incentive type pay system would be easy or widely accepted, but it would be a lot more palatable for me to see a guy like Ty Montgomery ($693,000) earn more than Sam Shields ($12M) did last year.

 

[RRyder]

Yup, I didn't say switching to an incentive type pay system would be easy or widely accepted, but it would be a lot more palatable for me to see a guy like Ty Montgomery ($693,000) earn more than Sam Shields ($12M) did last year.

There's nothing prohibiting every contract from being incentive based. Outside of what the market commands though

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

There's nothing prohibiting every contract from being incentive based. Outside of what the market commands though

Nothing but the market and the mindset of course.

Lacy's contract with Seattle is a good example of trying to compete against the current contract structure. Seahawks give Lacy a one year $5.5 million, including $3 million fully guaranteed. If I am TT and the Packers I am offering no guarantees and lots of incentives to earn that $5.5M or more, but hard to compete when you have a team offering a guy like Lacy (and his agent who cashes in on the guarantees as well) fully guaranteed money that he could potentially retire on if need be.

I think it was Ricky Williams back in the 90's that went all in with a fully incentive based contract and lost, guessing that alone set the evolution of such contracts back a decade or two.

 

[HardRightEdge]

There's nothing prohibiting every contract from being incentive based. Outside of what the market commands though

Yeah, there is. It's called the CBA.