QB Carousel Could Be Crazy This Year

[Elmgrovegnome]

Packers waiting on Aaron Rodgers' decision on future, open to trade if QB wants one

www.nfl.com

Packers waiting on Aaron Rodgers' decision on future, open to trade if QB wants one​

Sources emphasized the relationship between the Packers and Rodgers remains positive 11 months after the club signed him to a massive contract extension that seemed to all but secure his stated goal of playing his entire career with one team. For much of the season, Rodgers played through injuries, including a fractured right thumb and a rib injury that opened the door for Love, and kept playing even amid fading playoff hopes.

Whatever happens from here, the Packers and their star QB will work on it together -- but the first move belongs to Rodgers.

If Rodgers decides he wants to continue his career elsewhere, there figures to be no shortage of suitors, with the Jets (who recently hired Rodgers' friend and former coach Nathaniel Hackett as offensive coordinator) and the Raiders among the most logical potential suitors.

Rodgers is due $59.515 million in 2023, including $58.3 million structured as an option bonus that lowers his cap number to about $31.6 million if he's on the Packers next season. If Rodgers is traded, the Packers would need to rework the deal for cap purposes prior to any trade.

All of which is moot if Rodgers emerges from the darkness and decides to turn out the lights on his Hall of Fame-caliber career.

The clock will soon be ticking, with the new league year and free agency set to begin in a little over a month on March 15.

So Rodgers will hold the Packers hostage once again. I think he loves the power trip and plays it off as something else.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I wouldn’t give up 2 firsts if the packers weren’t gonna eat some of the guaranteed $$—just like the Stafford/Goff trade.

The Rams had Goff too. The Jets have nothing. They have less leverage.

Don’t look now, but it looks like another Brady in the NFL in 10yrs.

View: https://twitter.com/SavageSports_/status/1623472499676643328?s=20&t=Hu3FC4bQ1QP9zDuDSYQL5A

I had a friend that was an NCAA wrestling Champion. I expected his boys to follow in his dads footsteps, but neither did. Another person said, “How do they live up to that?” He’s right imo. If they aren’t as good as their dad would they feel like they failed? Would his reputation be a huge weight following them around.

I guess if Brady’s kid loves football, then he’ll try, but living up to those expectations would be tough. I know the Mannings did it but their Dad wasn’t considered the goat or possibly even the best of his era.

 

[RocknRam29]

View: https://twitter.com/jasrifootball/status/1625307577918554113

 

[CGI_Ram]

View: https://twitter.com/jasrifootball/status/1625307577918554113

The NFL needs a solution for salary capping QB’s in a different class, or something.

The cap differential between teams paying a QB and those on a rookie deal is getting larger and larger, each year.

True…One could argue, it didn't hurt the Chiefs… but the QB salary expectations seems to be outpacing other positions and that doesn’t feel sustainable.

 

[kurtfaulk]

.

what has derpert done to get that kind of money? they can go 500 with any qb out there.

.

 

[Allen2McVay]

View: https://twitter.com/jasrifootball/status/1625307577918554113

The average-per-year of almost $50M is high but that has been rumored for Herbert and Burrow.

The Guaranteed-$ at signing (less than 50%) seems low to me.
Most of the big-$ QB-deals have had guaranteed-$ between 65%-70% of the contract.

If accurate, Lamar Jackson ain't going to be happy. It's been speculated that he wants a Watson-like fully-guaranteed-deal.

I have been expecting that the Burrow and Herbert contracts to be in the $50M-per-year range, with a higher percentage of guaranteed-$ (75%-80%); and Jackson to eventually be traded to an NFC team desperate enough at QB to give him a mostly guaranteed contract. I am often correct on this stuff about 6%-8% of the time.

 

[dieterbrock]

The NFL needs a solution for salary capping QB’s in a different class, or something.

The cap differential between teams paying a QB and those on a rookie deal is getting larger and larger, each year.

True…One could argue, it didn't hurt the Chiefs… but the QB salary expectations seems to be outpacing other positions and that doesn’t feel sustainable.

Yup. It's fine to pay your QB top dollar when he's a franchise type guy, maybe 3-5 of them in the league.
Just looking over 10-15 years of salary cap vs top contract (not exactly accurate) and the top contract typically runs in the 16-18% of total cap. Only twice did it exceed 20% of cap, but it sure sounds like 20%+ is going to become the norm
I've always said QB salaries shouldnt count against the cap, or at least only a % should. Imagine if teams were allowed to spend decent $$ on a backup QB without cap implications?

 

[kurtfaulk]

I've always said QB salaries shouldnt count against the cap, or at least only a % should. Imagine if teams were allowed to spend decent $$ on a backup QB without cap implications?

people keep saying this but how would it work? the owners are not paying a penny more to the players than what was agreed to in the cba. each team gets the same cut and has to spend the same amount on player's salaries. where's this extra money coming from for the qbs?

.

 

[AvengerRam]

Carr released.

Raiders…

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

View: https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1625600774058409984?s=20&t=2wZZB79l4KRU1Cg5u55PQw

 

[CGI_Ram]

Saints Are 'Team To Watch' For Free Agent QB Baker Mayfield

On the search for a quarterback this offseason, the New Orleans Saints could be a fit for Baker Mayfield in free agency.

www.nflanalysis.net

Saints Are ‘Team To Watch’ For Free Agent QB Baker Mayfield​

 

[dieterbrock]

Raiders should have released Carr back in December, there was never a chance he was going to get traded

 

[dieterbrock]

people keep saying this but how would it work? the owners are not paying a penny more to the players than what was agreed to in the cba. each team gets the same cut and has to spend the same amount on player's salaries. where's this extra money coming from for the qbs?

.

Well yeah, obviously there isnt a suggestion being offered that wouldnt require a new agreement with the CBA. Kind of a silly question to ask? How could it work? Only if it benefits the players and the owners. How does it benefit the players? Easy, 1 player absorbing 25% of the salary cap means less $$ for everyone else. For owners? Easy. They want to win, and the way each team manipulates the cap to get an advantage is proof positive of that. I believe if given the option to go over the cap number to get/keep a certain player, most owners would do it in a heartbeat.

 

[kurtfaulk]

Kind of a silly question to ask?

is it? funny how you didn't provide any answers.

.

 

[dieterbrock]

is it? funny how you didn't provide any answers.

.

Huh? What answer to what question? Your take is that there is a CBA and nothing can change. So why bother entering a discussion about what they need to change? Bizarre.
Suggestions that could *fix* the issue?
- Remove QB comp from salary cap equation. That way teams can spend/overspend on position without sacrificing rest of roster. Could reduce overall cap in advance by a determined % to offset what current spend is.
- Institute an MLB-like "luxury tax" for teams going over the CAP to sign/re-sign QB, again allowing teams to go over CAP
- They could institute an NBA-like "Max contract" for QB's (Which is an idea I dont personally like though it could be an option)

 

[Tano]

Huh? What answer to what question? Your take is that there is a CBA and nothing can change. So why bother entering a discussion about what they need to change? Bizarre.
Suggestions that could *fix* the issue?
- Remove QB comp from salary cap equation. That way teams can spend/overspend on position without sacrificing rest of roster. Could reduce overall cap in advance by a determined % to offset what current spend is.
- Institute an MLB-like "luxury tax" for teams going over the CAP to sign/re-sign QB, again allowing teams to go over CAP
- They could institute an NBA-like "Max contract" for QB's (Which is an idea I dont personally like though it could be an option)

On number 2 - I would say they could spend up to 85% on other players and the remaining 15% plus on the QB

 

[dieterbrock]

On number 2 - I would say they could spend up to 85% on other players and the remaining 15% plus on the QB

That would be like option 3 though, putting a cap on QB. Based on 2023 cap, 15% of 225 mill leaves only 34 mill for QB, which is basically the franchise tag value

 

[kurtfaulk]

Huh? What answer to what question? Your take is that there is a CBA and nothing can change. So why bother entering a discussion about what they need to change? Bizarre.

it doesn't matter what they change. the last time the owners thought they gave up too much money to the players they locked them out. so the players will only get a certain cut of the money and that's it.

owners aren't going to give qbs more money than is allocated to the players as a whole. so the qbs will always take a larger slice of that allocated money. there's no way getting around it.

.

 

[Tano]

That would be like option 3 though, putting a cap on QB. Based on 2023 cap, 15% of 225 mill leaves only 34 mill for QB, which is basically the franchise tag value

15% AT 34 million then anything more is a luxury tax

Now to get around the luxury tax the team can make a choice to keep their cap hit lower for the other players

Completely up to the team

For example - Snyder would never pay a luxury tax whereas Kronke probably would

Edit - I would keep the franchise tag amount at whatever the 15% calculates out to be

 

[CGI_Ram]

This is what I’d do.

Fields will win you games, but I don’t see “it”. Recoup the losses and try again in this draft.


View: https://twitter.com/jasonlacanfora/status/1625889412956536836?s=61&t=7FHOlvsN7fS8nfNGBHW9PQ