What To Make Of Our WR No-Shows

[Schultz]

Heck, the Packers probably helped those guys write what they said.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Latest now is that Adams and Bhaktiara (sp?) have "Rodgers back". Wonderful, you should have his back on the field, even off of it, now when you go on the air and say you support the guy who basically could care less about the Packers- that is a problem. Wonder what the Packers could get for trading Adams, Bhaktiari and Rodgers????? Might be worth it to get a load of no. 1's, 2's and mid-round.

Smart teams don't trade their blue chip players, not even for a massive amount of draft picks. There's no guarantee prospects end up working out as planned.

It would be worth it just to dump a large portion of their salaries. Draft picks are a bonus

You seem to ignore the drop-off in talent by getting rid of Rodgers, Adams and Bakhtiari.

I haven't really been paying attention beyond anything said on this board, but all I saw BakhT say was, he's not interjecting himself into anything between Rodgers and the team.

The only thing I read was him saying that he would be an idiot for not wanting Rodgers back. He's right about that.

 

[Schultz]

1. Agree
2. Agree
3. Agree

 

[ARPackFan]

Wow. You must be one of those people that thinks the owners are super smart because they’re rich

The only thing rich people have to know is how to manage money and other than that they can be dumb as a box of rocks. Unfortunately about 80% of NFL players are either bankrupt or in financial distress within 2 years after leaving the NFL.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Smart teams don't trade their blue chip players, not even for a massive amount of draft picks. There's no guarantee prospects end up working out as planned.

So what do you do when these blue chip players don't want to play for you any longer?

Rodgers is under contract and choosing not to participate, you let him just sit for 3 years if he refuses to play?

Adams stated that if Aaron isn't playing for the Packers, he would have to reconsider on whether he would want to re-sign or not. So if he tells the Packers this is his final year, just pay him, play him a year and let him walk away and potentially get a late 3rd round pick as your only compensation?

Bahk? I don't get the rationale for trading him, unless he is discontent, which I don't think he is.

While I for the most part agree with your idea that a teams goal should be to not trade away Blue Chip players, sometimes even the "smart teams" as you refer to them run into situations that leave them few choices. In that situation the smart move IMO would be to get something out of those players while you still can and trade them.

 

[Krabs]

Rodgers is under contract and choosing not to participate, you let him just sit for 3 years if he refuses to play?

It will be much easier to trade Rodgers after the end of this season due to the salary cap. He would only sit one year and then they trade him.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It will be much easier to trade Rodgers after the end of this season due to the salary cap. He would only sit one year and then they trade him.

Are you talking about how his salary cap hit will effect other teams? His dead cap for the Packers is what it is, they can't get out of that. IF they traded him today, that hit could be spread out between this season and next season and when you factor in what they saved in his salary, its totally doable either year. If Rodgers refuses to report and the Packers trade him next year, they will have also saved the cost of his 2021 salary and other bonuses.

I think the play Rodgers may try to make in order to try and save face and his salary, will be to try and get the Packers to agree to either reduce his current contract to a 1 year, to give him the freedom to walk away or give him some kind of written assurance that they will trade him next year. I wouldn't take either deal if I were the Packers.

 

[Half Empty]

It would be worth it just to dump a large portion of their salaries. Draft picks are a bonus

Hadn't ever checked it, but I'm surprised at the dead cap implications. According to Sportrac, Adams would only be at 3.6 mil, AR would be 38+, and Bak would be 49+. So the three of them would be around $91,000,000 in dead cap.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hadn't ever checked it, but I'm surprised at the dead cap implications. According to Sportrac, Adams would only be at 3.6 mil, AR would be 38+, and Bak would be 49+. So the three of them would be around $91,000,000 in dead cap.

Interesting part about AR, if you look at what the Packers will have to pay him in Salary and bonuses, it isn't that much worse/more than the dead cap hit if they trade him. Plus, they can spread that dead cap out over 2 years. Bahk shouldn't be traded for multiple reasons and the dead cap hit is one of them. Trading Adams and taking the $3.6M hit wouldn't be popular, but if he isn't resigning and Rodgers is gone, I would do it.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The only thing rich people have to know is how to manage money and other than that they can be dumb as a box of rocks. Unfortunately about 80% of NFL players are either bankrupt or in financial distress within 2 years after leaving the NFL.

Cause most of them are 25 years old. It's a far stretch to just blatantly say a player owned sport would instantly go bankrupt. I'll just point out that sports teams owned by non-players have also failed spectacularly (XFL, AFL, whatever that last one was that shuttered partway through its first season).

 

[Sunshinepacker]

It will be much easier to trade Rodgers after the end of this season due to the salary cap. He would only sit one year and then they trade him.

According to Overthecap, if the Packers traded him now it would cost them $14.3m in dead cap but save them $22.85m for a net gain in cap room.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

So what do you do when these blue chip players don't want to play for you any longer?

Rodgers is under contract and choosing not to participate, you let him just sit for 3 years if he refuses to play?

Adams stated that if Aaron isn't playing for the Packers, he would have to reconsider on whether he would want to re-sign or not. So if he tells the Packers this is his final year, just pay him, play him a year and let him walk away and potentially get a late 3rd round pick as your only compensation?

Bahk? I don't get the rationale for trading him, unless he is discontent, which I don't think he is.

While I for the most part agree with your idea that a teams goal should be to not trade away Blue Chip players, sometimes even the "smart teams" as you refer to them run into situations that leave them few choices. In that situation the smart move IMO would be to get something out of those players while you still can and trade them.

Smart teams manage their players so the best players want to stay.

 

[Mondio]

I bet every single one of them want to play their best for the most money they can get, wherever it is. If GB wants to keep Adams for another contract, he'll be offered a competitive contract. BakhT wants to earn his and get another one. Neither is going to go pout off and quit because there is someone else behind center.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I bet every single one of them want to play their best for the most money they can get, wherever it is. If GB wants to keep Adams for another contract, he'll be offered a competitive contract. BakhT wants to earn his and get another one. Neither is going to go pout off and quit because there is someone else behind center.

You say that and yet plenty of stars on other teams have forced their way out. I doubt it happens but i could also see a scenario where Adams doesn’t want to spend his prime with a QB learning to play in the NFL. A small likelihood that happens but it’s not impossible.

 

[ARPackFan]

You say that and yet plenty of stars on other teams have forced their way out. I doubt it happens but i could also see a scenario where Adams doesn’t want to spend his prime with a QB learning to play in the NFL. A small likelihood that happens but it’s not impossible.

I agree that there is a chance that Davante may not want to go through the prime of his career and likely his last big contract with a QB in development. I would also guess that his immediate concern is how a contract year without Rodgers may affect his statistics and could diminish his value.

 

[Mondio]

You say that and yet plenty of stars on other teams have forced their way out. I doubt it happens but i could also see a scenario where Adams doesn’t want to spend his prime with a QB learning to play in the NFL. A small likelihood that happens but it’s not impossible.

why would he do that? A guy that has gone thru what Adams has doesn't get there because he's mentally weak. He see's himself as a guy that can elevate everyone around him and would love the opportunity to do so.

Heck, he went thru a season with Brett Hundley as his QB and earned himself a nice fat extension at the end of the year. My guess is he'd go out and catch 100+ balls with Love and turn this season into another fat payday from us or someone else. He believes in himself, supremely. He doesn't care who his QB is.

What's going to earn him more money? pouting and wanting a trade because he didn't have his HOF QB and trying to force his way off a team? Or balling out like he did before? He's smarter than that, and better than that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What's going to earn him more money? pouting and wanting a trade because he didn't have his HOF QB and trying to force his way off a team? Or balling out like he did before? He's smarter than that, and better than that.

You would hope that would be the case, but this is what Davante said a month ago, you be the judge.

“Potentially. Potentially," answered Adams Monday on The Herd with Colin Cowherd when asked if Rodgers leaving would affect his future in Green Bay. "That’s my guy, that’s the only guy that I’ve had. Other than that 2017 season, when he got hurt, it’s the only guy that I’ve played with. We built up a special connection over the years that’s put us both in really good positions in our career. Not that he needed me to come along for it, cause he was already in that spot. But we established a lot together. It would change a lot, man. Doesn’t mean potentially I’d be gone, but I’d definitely have to do some extra thinking if my guy wasn’t here.”

I doubt Davante refuses to play this season in Green Bay, but I can see a scenario where he may not want to re-sign.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

why would he do that? A guy that has gone thru what Adams has doesn't get there because he's mentally weak. He see's himself as a guy that can elevate everyone around him and would love the opportunity to do so.

Heck, he went thru a season with Brett Hundley as his QB and earned himself a nice fat extension at the end of the year. My guess is he'd go out and catch 100+ balls with Love and turn this season into another fat payday from us or someone else. He believes in himself, supremely. He doesn't care who his QB is.

What's going to earn him more money? pouting and wanting a trade because he didn't have his HOF QB and trying to force his way off a team? Or balling out like he did before? He's smarter than that, and better than that.

You act like your definition of pouting is some kind of detriment to earning money. There are many NFL superstars who would disagree with you and show that NFL teams will ALWAYS pay top dollar for talent.

 

[Mondio]

He balled out with Brett Hundley and earned a fat extension, why wouldn’t he chose the same path this time? He didn’t quit when almost entire fan base quit on him and boo’d him incessantly.

I don’t think there’s much chance he’d chose the pouting path, it’s not in his make up.

I wonder if Davante thinks he needs Rodgers to look good, my feelings are No, he does not.

 

[Krabs]

Are you talking about how his salary cap hit will effect other teams? His dead cap for the Packers is what it is, they can't get out of that. IF they traded him today, that hit could be spread out between this season and next season and when you factor in what they saved in his salary, its totally doable either year. If Rodgers refuses to report and the Packers trade him next year, they will have also saved the cost of his 2021 salary and other bonuses.

I think the play Rodgers may try to make in order to try and save face and his salary, will be to try and get the Packers to agree to either reduce his current contract to a 1 year, to give him the freedom to walk away or give him some kind of written assurance that they will trade him next year. I wouldn't take either deal if I were the Packers.

It the Packers trade Rodgers this season it will set the record for the most dead money on a salary cap in the history of the NFL. Currently, it stands with Carson Wentz. That's a record I would prefer the Packers not to set. After the 2021 season would be much more doable.

 

[Krabs]

According to Overthecap, if the Packers traded him now it would cost them $14.3m in dead cap but save them $22.85m for a net gain in cap room.

"If traded after June 1, Rodgers' cap hit would be $21.2 million in dead money in 2021 — saving the Packers $16 million in cap space — and push $17.2 million of dead money onto the cap in 2022."

The math says that's $35 million over the next two seasons. Sure, they would save money, but still set a record for the most dead money in the history of the NFL. I'd prefer for the Eagles to keep that record with the Wentz trade.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The math says that's $35 million over the next two seasons. Sure, they would save money, but still set a record for the most dead money in the history of the NFL. I'd prefer for the Eagles to keep that record with the Wentz trade.

With the way salaries have skyrocketed, especially that of QB's, I don't expect that the Went record will last very long in either case.

As far as what it does to the Packers, it is what it is. Whether he plays or doesn't play this year and next year or only one year, the dead cap money has already been "spent" and just needs to be accounted for. Call it the price of continually pushing owed money out into the future. I imagine with all the moves the Packers made in the last year and may make with Jaire and potentially Adams, that $35M is going to just be a drop in the bucket of future money owed.

 

[Krabs]

With the way salaries have skyrocketed, especially that of QB's, I don't expect that the Went record will last very long in either case.

As far as what it does to the Packers, it is what it is. Whether he plays or doesn't play this year and next year or only one year, the dead cap money has already been "spent" and just needs to be accounted for. Call it the price of continually pushing owed money out into the future. I imagine with all the moves the Packers made in the last year and may make with Jaire and potentially Adams, that $35M is going to just be a drop in the bucket of future money owed.

Yes, but those players will actually be playing and producing for the Packers. If Rodgers isn't playing for the Packers they cannot spend that money on players on the roster. You say it is spent. Well, yes it is. On Rodgers who is playing for the Packers. Don't forget that if Rodgers is playing for someone else and we have that dead money we still have to also pay a player to take his spot. Sure, is what it is, but I'd still prefer not to set the record on having dead money on the salary cap.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes, but those players will actually be playing and producing for the Packers.

Or will they? Preston Smith may have saved himself from being axed this season, but if he doesn't step it up, his $7.25M dead cap next year will definitely be more favorable than the $19.75M cap hit they would otherwise face by keeping him. I seriously don't think they will carry A. Jones more than 2 years and will end up taking a dead cap hit of $6.5M instead of a 2023 cap hit of $19.25M

The point I am trying to make is that there are times when you just have to take the hit and be done with a player. The future cap hits are factored into the contracts and upfront guarantees. You just don't hang on to a player to avoid paying the dead cap. In the case of Rodgers, sure it would be nice if he is playing for the Packers, but that brings a total cap hit of $37.202 M in 2021 and $39.852 M in 2022.

 

[Krabs]

Or will they? Preston Smith may have saved himself from being axed this season, but if he doesn't step it up, his $7.25M dead cap next year will definitely be more favorable than the $19.75M cap hit they would otherwise face by keeping him. I seriously don't think they will carry A. Jones more than 2 years and will end up taking a dead cap hit of $6.5M instead of a 2023 cap hit of $19.25M

The point I am trying to make is that there are times when you just have to take the hit and be done with a player. The future cap hits are factored into the contracts and upfront guarantees. You just don't hang on to a player to avoid paying the dead cap. In the case of Rodgers, sure it would be nice if he is playing for the Packers, but that brings a total cap hit of $37.202 M in 2021 and $39.852 M in 2022.

Meh, this is all speculation. Teams take plenty of cap hits. I would prefer to avoid taking the biggest one in NFL history.