The Big Choice

[Mondio]

Serious question here. I’m not an NFL contract expert by any stretch.

However, isn’t there an Avenue
(IF NEEDED) whereas the Packers reverse remaining contracts to pay in a heavy Frontload manner to offset the forward push of several big contracts that we’ve just witnessed. Meaning sort of a reciprocal of converting monies to signing bonus’?

I’m asking because one would think a team could play on both sides of the Capital teeter totter in an emergency situation. In effect, reeling back in some of the future risk

how do we front load anything when we're having to push it all back just to get under the cap?

 

[OldSchool101]

how do we front load anything when we're having to push it all back just to get under the cap?

My question is in the unlikely event we trade off Davante and Rodgers. Cut Z and try to take our lumps on several other mid sized moves.

 

[tynimiller]

Serious question here. I’m not an NFL contract expert by any stretch.

However, isn’t there an Avenue
(IF NEEDED) whereas the Packers reverse remaining contracts to pay in a heavy Frontload manner to offset the forward push of several big contracts that we’ve just witnessed. Meaning sort of a reciprocal of converting monies to signing bonus’?

I’m asking because one would think a team could play on both sides of the Capital teeter totter in an emergency situation. In effect, reeling back in some of the future risk

Contracts for sure could be structured with massive front end hit and minimal back end actual cap hits.

 

[OldSchool101]

Contracts for sure could be structured with massive front end hit and minimal back end actual cap hits.

So essentially if the sky fell and rodgers retired or whatever we could rebalance the books with remaining players contracts. Take our lumps now to lessen a future crushing blow so to speak ?
Not that I want that. Just making a point is all. I think GB could not fully know if Rodgers is coming back but making room just in case. Which is smart.

 

[tynimiller]

Contracts for sure could be structured with massive front end hit and minimal back end actual cap hits.

You don't see it a lot due to players not wanting to be disposable so much after the massive frontload BUT guaranteed money slid up higher can for sure make them more likely to take it.

 

[tynimiller]

So essentially if the sky fell and rodgers retired or whatever we could rebalance the books with remaining players contracts. Take our lumps now to lessen a future crushing blow so to speak ?

Fiscally the sky doesn't fall if Rodgers leaves and Adams isn't tagged. Honestly, such a thing would most likely mixed with what has already been done could lead to Campbell and Rasul both back, Jaire extended and future deals to Jenkins after the season and his contract is up easier to do.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So essentially if the sky fell and rodgers retired or whatever we could rebalance the books with remaining players contracts. Take our lumps now to lessen a future crushing blow so to speak ?
Not that I want that. Just making a point is all. I think GB could not fully know if Rodgers is coming back but making room just in case. Which is smart.

As @tynimiller correctly pointed out it's possible to frontload contracts but the Packers most likely won't have enough cap space to make that work no matter what happens with Rodgers or Adams.

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

If Rodgers doesn't come back in my opinion it makes sense to move on from Z, Preston, Cobb, Turner, Lowry, Crosby and Lewis this offseason as well as Bakhtiari and Jones next year while not re-signing any of the free agents that will take a significant amount of money to do so. In my opinion that should be considered a complete rebuild.



First of all I don't think the Packers have an elite defense to begin with. In addition the offense without Rodgers and Adams would struggle mightily, making it all but guaranteed they won't get anywhere near winning 10 games in 2022.



The Packers are 6-11-1 in games Rodgers hasn't started in since 2008. Those teams had more talent that one that would be in a rebuild mode next season though.



The Packers would most likely build around a core of players on defense in Alexander, Clark, Gary and Stokes but aside of Jenkins the offense doesn't feature any player to do the same on offense though.



I don't think the Packers should either pursue Carr or Tannehill to replace Rodgers.

I do tend to think that we should go with Love if Rodgers leaves as well, unless it is a superstar QB, which is not going to happen. He has way more upside and many more years if he turns out to be good. Especially if it is someone like Tannehill, Wentz, or Garoppolo. I do think that Carr is a very underrated QB though, he has played on some bad teams. I have just heard this mentioned as a possibility regarding the Aaron Rodgers trade rumors.

As far as the Packers going 6-11-1 in games Rodgers hasn't started since 2008, even though I don't expect the team to do good if Love plays like most rookie QBs his first season or two, I do think that the franchise is in a much better place than it was that time Rodgers was injured and we had to start Brett Hundley. I think the team is more talented with the exception of the WR corps (assuming we keep the core of the team intact), especially on defense. Plus, I think the offense is built much better and has a better scheme that is more QB friendly under MFL.

I don't think that we are going to need a superstar QB, while it is nice to have and it certainly helps, to win in the future with the type of offensive scheme that MLF runs, the offensive line, and running game, if the defense can keep up the level of play from last year into Joe Barry's tenure (and get better on the d-line and at ILB).

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/...rbacks-jordan-love-aaron-rodgers-matt-lafleur

With all of that being said, I am not eager to move on from Rodgers unless we are at a point were keeping him would force us to blow the team up in a couple of years due to the salary cap (and I have heard conflicting reports as to whether this is true or not).

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I do tend to think that we should go with Love if Rodgers leaves as well, unless it is a superstar QB, which is not going to happen. He has way more upside and many more years if he turns out to be good. Especially if it is someone like Tannehill, Wentz, or Garoppolo. I do think that Carr is a very underrated QB though, he has played on some bad teams. I have just heard this mentioned as a possibility regarding the Aaron Rodgers trade rumors.

The Packers would take a cap hit of close to $20 million by acquiring Carr for next season, close to what they would save by trading Rodgers. I don't consider that to be a smart idea at all.

As far as the Packers going 6-11-1 in games Rodgers hasn't started since 2008, even though I don't expect the team to do good if Love plays like most rookie QBs his first season or two, I do think that the franchise is in a much better place than it was that time Rodgers was injured and we had to start Brett Hundley. I think the team is more talented with the exception of the WR corps (assuming we keep the core of the team intact), especially on defense. Plus, I think the offense is built much better and has a better scheme that is more QB friendly under MFL.

While the Packers might have a better defense compared to previous years the offense lacks talent making it extremely tough for an unproven quarterback to have immediate success.

I don't think that we are going to need a superstar QB, while it is nice to have and it certainly helps, to win in the future with the type of offensive scheme that MLF runs, the offensive line, and running game, if the defense can keep up the level of play from last year into Joe Barry's tenure (and get better on the d-line and at ILB).

I highly doubt the Packers will get better play from the inside linebacker position if they can't re-sign Campbell.