NFL Contracts revised

[thequick12]

Once again, the terms of an NFL contract allows the team to release a player whenever they want to move on (or find it fiscally viable) from him but it doesn't allow a player to not show up for mandatory workouts, practices and games. That's why players get fined for doing it.

You left out the part of my comment about leverage...

 

[longtimefan]

No not at all I just posted that record somewhere else on hear...but I also noted he looked like the real deal, passed the eye test etc and that many of those were one score losses

It was clear from his first year as a starter that the Packers had struck gold again with Rodgers

And his 1st preseason games? He wasnt that good

It took a little while for him to pass those tests

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

 

[Half Empty]

I don't think anyone could convincingly argue the Packers lost money by having the best QB ever on the team.

The argument for him making the team money is that, in sports, winning is VERY valuable for the team. Rodgers has been the primary driver of the team winning for over a decade.

I think we're still looking for specifics. Sports being sports, even lousy franchises make big bucks, before and after any specific player.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

So by saying "argument" you are claiming its true? Its a pretty simple question, either you can point to all the extra money Rodgers made the Packers or you can't. Saying Rodgers has helped the team to win isn't the question, I was asking if the claim some have made "Rodgers has made the team more money than they have paid him" is true. I can tell you exactly or at least close to what the team has paid Aaron. I can also point to what Aaron has made in endorsements as a result of being a Packer. What I want is a number saying "Solely due to Aaron Rodgers, the Packer revenues have increased each year by X amount." I have my doubts this number is as big as you might think it is or I wouldn't really be asking it. But if you have some proof, I would love to see it and have it change my hunch.

I will give you a piece of cheese....Title Town. Now THAT makes the organization money outside of the guaranteed share of the pie that they get by being a member of the NFL. Would that have been as successful without Rodgers?

Winning = money in sports. The question is whether Rodgers made more money for the team than the team spent on his contract. I've never seen a great player in any sport that earned more money than he made the team. Until somebody can show me that wins in the NFL don't earn money for the team I can't realistically believe that Rodgers hasn't been a profitable asset for the team.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think we're still looking for specifics. Sports being sports, even lousy franchises make big bucks, before and after any specific player.

Okay but that works but ways. Show me he's been an unprofitable asset for the team. He'd be the first superstar still performing well that ice ever seen be a losing investment for a team though.

 

[PikeBadger]

Closest I could find was a 2018 breakdown that showed how much each team spent for each win; basically just divide the team's salary cap figure by the number of wins. In 2018 the Packers ranked 21st, spending $21.7m per win. The worst team that year were the Cardinals and they spent $47.9m per win. It really comes down to how many games you think the Packers can win with Rodgers at QB compared to someone else. Personally, I think the Packers can win 12-13 games with him vs maybe 4-7 without him. That's a big difference in wins. That's the only way I can think of it right now. While you can find wins added as a stat for NBA players I can't find anything similar for NFL players.

Any way you look at it, the difference is probably rather large although the revenue sharing between teams would probably lessen the impact. The impact I would be more worried about is watching a great team for 12+ years vs watching a mediocre team for 12+ years.

Why would you think we will be mediocre after Rodgers leaves? He has to leave at some point right? I think the team is well stocked with talent right now. None of our division rivals appear to have located the magic bullet.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Winning = money in sports. The question is whether Rodgers made more money for the team than the team spent on his contract. I've never seen a great player in any sport that earned more money than he made the team. Until somebody can show me that wins in the NFL don't earn money for the team I can't realistically believe that Rodgers hasn't been a profitable asset for the team.

Actually, go back and look at my question, you are trying to move the goal posts. I asked:

how that additional money was made and approximately how much less the team would have made had they not drafted Aaron Rodgers.

It seems like a simple answer, since you are saying Rodgers has made the organization more then they have paid him. So you should be able to point me to the source of, as well as the approximate amount of income that Rodgers made the Packers? I'm done asking, because I don't think you can.

I can say that Mark Murphy and Brian Gutekunst made the Packers a lot of money, but I'm not so sure that same amount of money wouldn't have been made with our without them. Actually, Murphy's work on Title Town might be easier to attribute to him VS tying any revenues that the Packers made directly to Aaron Rodgers.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Why would you think we will be mediocre after Rodgers leaves? He has to leave at some point right? I think the team is well stocked with talent right now. None of our division rivals appear to have located the magic bullet.

Because the Packers have no proven QB (most important position), an underwhelming defense, and a shallow receiving group to help a young qb succeed. Plus, they'll be playing a first place schedule which counts a lot in final season results.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Actually, go back and look at my question, you are trying to move the goal posts. I asked:




It seems like a simple answer, since you are saying Rodgers has made the organization more then they have paid him. So you should be able to point me to the source of, as well as the approximate amount of income that Rodgers made the Packers? I'm done asking, because I don't think you can.

I can say that Mark Murphy and Brian Gutekunst made the Packers a lot of money, but I'm not so sure that same amount of money wouldn't have been made with our without them. Actually, Murphy's work on Title Town might be easier to attribute to him VS tying any revenues that the Packers made directly to Aaron Rodgers.

Okay. Go look up EPA and do some math. I don't think the burden of proof is on those that believe an all-time QB is a positive investment for a team. I believe it's up to the doubters to prove all-time QBs are bad investments.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Okay but that works but ways. Show me he's been an unprofitable asset for the team. He'd be the first superstar still performing well that ice ever seen be a losing investment for a team though.

Nobody said he wasn't a profitable asset. He has helped the Packers to win a ton of games. I want to know how you parlay what he does into "he has made the team more money than he has been paid."

Again, you are trying to "win a debate" by pointing out something that isn't being debated as being the truth, so you think that makes your point correct.

Okay. Go look up EPA and do some math.

What does EPA have to do with this. Show me the math you are using to convert EPA into additional revenue that Player made the team. Again, nobody is debating the Value of Aaron Rodgers as a guy who helps the Packers win games, I just asked you to quantify it and you don't seem to be able to?

I believe it's up to the doubters to prove all-time QBs are bad investments

Who said he was a bad investment? I'm just asking you to prove your statement that he has made the organization more money then they have paid him is all. Not sure why you are getting so squirrely?
true.

 

[PikeBadger]

Because the Packers have no proven QB (most important position), an underwhelming defense, and a shallow receiving group to help a young qb succeed. Plus, they'll be playing a first place schedule which counts a lot in final season results.

So that means mediocrity for 12 years???
Did you say the same thing when Favre left?

 

[sschind]

Yes they have made far more off of him than he has been paid but that doesn't mean you shoot yourself in the foot with regard to keeping that going...even if it is just your foot and not your head anymore

Finally, you make it sound so guranteed theyll just move on to the next one but history says it's far more likely the next one may never show up in GB. We can look at the lists of bears QBs during Favre Rodgers era. Not a single good one

That's not what I said and that was not the question unless I misunderstood. Your question, as I understood it, was how much money will the Packers make off of Aaron Rodger after he retires and is it worth risking that by upsetting him. I said they made far more off of him while he played than they will after he retires and I don't think the way he leaves will have a huge impact on how much they make off of him once he does. No one said anything about how much the Packers paid him.

I even think you are overestimating the amount of money the Packers made off of him while he was playing for them. As Poker said, they sell out every year. They were going to sell out no matter who was their QB. They probably made more in jersey sale revenue than they would have off of some other QB but then so did the rest of the teams as that money is all spilt equally as part of the revenue sharing. If Aaron Rodgers was never drafted by the Green Bay Packers I don't know that their financial situation would be all that different than it is now.

As far as guaranteeing anything after Rodgers leaves I will go so far as to say I guarantee the Packers will remain one of the most profitable teams in the league. They will remain near the top in merchandising and in overall revenue. They may fall a bit if they do fail to find a QB that keeps them winning but the fan base will always support them. I'll put it this way. If the Packers fail to be profitable the entire league is in big trouble. Not because the Packers are a driving force but because as long as people support the NFL and it makes money the Packers will get their support and they will make money as well.

Aaron Rodgers leaving the Green Bay Packers will not have a significant impact on their future ability to make money no matter if he leaves now under bad terms or in another 3 or 4 years with another SB win or two. Once he is gone he will be gone and the fans will back the new guy.

I'm not trying to be a smart *** here because I really don't know. I keep seeing people say that the Packers have made a ton of money off of Aaron Rodgers and I need to know just how that additional money was made and approximately how much less the team would have made had they not drafted Aaron Rodgers.

Thanks.

Its as if the only reason people watch the Packers is because of Rodgers.

Winning = money in sports. The question is whether Rodgers made more money for the team than the team spent on his contract. I've never seen a great player in any sport that earned more money than he made the team. Until somebody can show me that wins in the NFL don't earn money for the team I can't realistically believe that Rodgers hasn't been a profitable asset for the team.

When was that ever the question? At least that wasn't the question I responded to. The question was how much money will the team make of off Rodgers after he retires AND, how much money did they make already. Nothing was asked about how much they paid him. The comparison of how much they made off him to how much they paid him was added by quick after my response. He either misunderstood my reply or chose to turn it around by changing the question.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Its as if the only reason people watch the Packers is because of Rodgers.

Who's this Rodgers guy I have been hearing so much about?

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Who said he was a bad investment? I'm just asking you to prove your statement that he has made the organization more money then they have paid him is all. Not sure why you are getting so squirrely?
true.

A guy that doesn't earn money for the team is a bad investment. You're literally trying to imply that his contracts weren't worth the money and, even more insane, trying to force others to prove otherwise. If you truly believe Rodgers wasn't worth his contract then, logically, you have to believe that every elite QB isn't worth a market deal. I'm perfectly comfortable believing that Rodgers, Mahomes, Wilson, etc. are worth every penny they've made.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

When was that ever the question? At least that wasn't the question I responded to. The question was how much money will the team make of off Rodgers after he retires AND, how much money did they make already. Nothing was asked about how much they paid him. The comparison of how much they made off him to how much they paid him was added by quick after my response. He either misunderstood my reply or chose to turn it around by changing the question.

Apologies for not seeing your initial question. In that regard, NFL teams are EXTREMELY tight lipped on financials (since sports teams are basically the best tax evasion tool ever) and it's basically impossible to make accurate league-wide assessments based solely on the Packers financials. However, I think the team won't make much on him after he retires because I don't think any team names much on retired players. I also think the team made boatloads of money off of him while he was here but actual specifics are something I have no clue how to calculate.

 

[Half Empty]

Okay but that works but ways. Show me he's been an unprofitable asset for the team. He'd be the first superstar still performing well that ice ever seen be a losing investment for a team though.

Sorry, I missed the part that said he was a drag on income. I'm certainly maintaining that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A guy that doesn't earn money for the team is a bad investment. You're literally trying to imply that his contracts weren't worth the money and, even more insane, trying to force others to prove otherwise. If you truly believe Rodgers wasn't worth his contract then, logically, you have to believe that every elite QB isn't worth a market deal. I'm perfectly comfortable believing that Rodgers, Mahomes, Wilson, etc. are worth every penny they've made.

Actually, you are the one implying all these things about my simple question and what you think it means. None of your interpretations have even been close to being correct. So keep the Strawman arguments coming, while you try and figure out the real answer to my question.

 

[OldSchool101]

And his 1st preseason games? He wasnt that good

It took a little while for him to pass those tests

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

They’d have Rodgers head stuffed and put on a Silver Platter if he played like that today. He’d be booed right off the field in playing like that.
PS. Boy he was quick running though.

 

[OldSchool101]

A guy that doesn't earn money for the team is a bad investment. You're literally trying to imply that his contracts weren't worth the money and, even more insane, trying to force others to prove otherwise. If you truly believe Rodgers wasn't worth his contract then, logically, you have to believe that every elite QB isn't worth a market deal. I'm perfectly comfortable believing that Rodgers, Mahomes, Wilson, etc. are worth every penny they've made.

Mahomes earned his contract thus far. In just 3 seasons, He’s won a Superbowl, appeared in another SB + a 3rd AFC championship game. He passed for 5,100 yards in his first season as a starter! He’s worth $40+

We (GB) haven’t made a SB in over 10 seasons! We’re not here to put up stats or collect 3rd place ribbons!
we’re here to finish in 1st place.
$40mil dollars should get us to the Super Bowl, if not? one could just as easily debate he’s not earning his $40mil. He had 3 tries from 8 yards! The difference between Rodgers n Brady? is Brady pulls out W’s in those contests. He’s also cheaper than Rodgers and knows how to finish. We need a finisher.

Give me a young 21yr old stud QB making $3.3mil for 3 seasons + 2-3 extra day 1 selections + 1 veteran starter in a trade to help us now (Rodgers will help our trade partner Now, it’s only fair..(I’ll take a stud DT)) = I’ll take my chances starting over.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

They’d have Rodgers head stuffed and put on a Silver Platter if he played like that today. He’d be booed right off the field in playing like that.
PS. Boy he was quick running though.

That was a fun watch. Easy to say it now, but you could see his talent. Lots of dropped passes too. Guessing nobody else in that film, is still playing football today.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Mahomes earned his contract thus far. In just 3 seasons, He’s won a Superbowl, appeared in another SB + a 3rd AFC championship game. He passed for 5,100 yards in his first season as a starter! He’s worth $40+

We (GB) haven’t made a SB in over 10 seasons! We’re not here to put up stats or collect 3rd place ribbons!
we’re here to finish in 1st place.
$40mil dollars should get us to the Super Bowl, if not? one could just as easily debate he’s not earning his $40mil. He had 3 tries from 8 yards! The difference between Rodgers n Brady? is Brady pulls out W’s in those contests. He’s also cheaper than Rodgers and knows how to finish. We need a finisher.

Give me a young 21yr old stud QB making $3.3mil for 3 seasons + 2-3 extra day 1 selections + 1 veteran starter in a trade to help us now (Rodgers will help our trade partner Now, it’s only fair..(I’ll take a stud DT)) = I’ll take my chances starting over.

Okay, so then your answer is to draft an elite QB, build a great team around him and then trade him at some predetermined time while he's still elite? That's certainly a great strategy but it requires impeccable timing that I would argue borders on mystic.

 

[OldSchool101]

That was a fun watch. Easy to say it now, but you could see his talent. Lots of dropped passes too. Guessing nobody else in that film, is still playing football today.

Yeah. That was 3 years of Prep. So We’re likely going to see some sloppiness by Love early in. But I just have a feeling he’s going to be decent by seasons end. Once he gets accustomed to the speed change at the pro level.

 

[OldSchool101]

Okay, so then your answer is to draft an elite QB, build a great team around him and then trade him at some predetermined time while he's still elite? That's certainly a great strategy but it requires impeccable timing that I would argue borders on mystic.

I see your point.
It’s a pickle. Especially if you view just the next 3 seasons and then just outright tank after that for 3-4 seasons .. totally overwhelmed financially to the brink of financial disaster.

But If a QB comes along that I think could be really good fit in our Offense and I believe he just needs 1-2 seasons to be up and showing off? Then I have to look at the mid-long term fiscal aspect.

A) Do I break the bank on Rodgers, who likely expects 40-45mil $$$ and 3-4years minimum and jeopardize other internal FA signings?
Sending a combo of Alexander or ZaDarius or Davante packing?
Do I invest in a QB who doesn’t believe in our approach and wants to play GM+HC+QB?? He doesn’t even believe we’re “people” (I’m playing FO here)

B) Do I balance the books and keep all my other D stars intact
Very Possibly picking up another starting caliber proven veteran ILB or DT or OL (in return for a lesser backup like Josh Jackson or Burks who might get cut anyways)
Then take the equivalent cumulative combo of 5 DAY1 (our 2 plus 3 more) selections in 2 seasons to add to this draft to improve the O and D cast members? Plus my regular 14 other day 2 and day 3 selections in 2022-2023.
Then add 1 extra high caliber veteran FA in the mix by next season?

I’ve weighed this heavily and I don’t prefer plan A.

 

[Schultz]

Yeah but after this year we would not have to play that 1st place schedule, Love would have a year of seasoning and the other young guys would have one more year of experience. I could definitely see being back to double digit wins in 2022.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I guess the Packers making the playoffs in 10 of this 13 seasons as the starter has resulted in the Packers making additional revenue.

It really comes down to how many games you think the Packers can win with Rodgers at QB compared to someone else. Personally, I think the Packers can win 12-13 games with him vs maybe 4-7 without him. That's a big difference in wins. That's the only way I can think of it right now. While you can find wins added as a stat for NBA players I can't find anything similar for NFL players.

FWIW according to PFF's expected points added per play metric Rodgers added a total of 170.8 points to the Packers last season.

You left out the part of my comment about leverage...

Players having leverage still doesn't allow them to not honour their contract.

Why would you think we will be mediocre after Rodgers leaves?

The expected drop-off in quarterback performance makes it realistic to expect the team to be mediocre at best once Rodgers leaves. It will be interesting to see how long it will take the Packers to get back to being a contender after that.

Give me a young 21yr old stud QB making $3.3mil for 3 seasons + 2-3 extra day 1 selections + 1 veteran starter in a trade to help us now (Rodgers will help our trade partner Now, it’s only fair..(I’ll take a stud DT)) = I’ll take my chances starting over.

Unfortunately it's close to impossible to get that young 21 year old stud quarterback. The Packers definitely can't be sure about having one in Love right now.