I think it was used because it's an even number for each year. 1,025 for the four years, gets him wanting to get more than just the 1,000 for that incentive. It adds another incentive.


Are my calculations right though am I understanding that correctly that he could be making more than 10 million this year?

---

Looks that way to me as well, but hey, he would have had to earn it!

What I don't get is 2 million for hitting 3600 and 4099 yards...is the 3,600 a 3 year total based on possibility of injury?!? This may be a really dumb question, but in the words of a fellow poster - I'm flummoxed!

With Grant's contract being up next year I think we may either try harder to keep Jackson or draft a RB this year. It's hard to see him staying here.

Weren't they talking about it a few weeks back that if they figured out the whole CBA that 2011 would be an un-capped year? Or was that just speculation?

---

Why would ever get rid of Grant? Make him the workhorse back and save on Starks for the future. Grant has a lot of incentives, I'm sure he'll bust his ass to make them. If Brandon Jackson won't sign, then find another 3rd down back/return man. Running back is not a position of concern right now.

---

if he gets 1600 yards i am fine with paying him however much he wants

if he doesnt get 1600 yards then he only costs around 6.5 which im still perfectly fine with

---

Honestly I don't know and it's a bit too late to look stuff up for me... maybe some other time...

But you're the first person I've read to have added it up more then 6 million... I've read a couple of stories in the media (no I didn't bookmark them so I don't have links) that said if he plays all 16 games he'll get about 5.5 million

But Thompson has respected his players contract more than almost any GM has... other than Hawk but Brandt (who did the deal for the Packers) come out and said that was part of the deal when they signed Hawk... but sides knew that 10 million in the last year was gonna force a new contract or for them to cut ways...

Also I think it's a bad idea to cut Starks or Grant... both have injury history and unless you want Jackson/Kuhn going again (assuming their back... if not it might be Nance)... then I'd say bring them both back just in case...

---

Nothing personal, although I'll trust my own addition over any writer, other than Jason Wilde. If Grant plays 16 games, I can see the 5.5, but that doesn't include the incentives of being in the top five in NFC, getting 4100 yards for the four years, etc ... did those articles mention that?

---

lets face it, the odds of him getting anywhere close to 1600 yards this season are slim to none. We're more of a passing offense, plus we discovered James Starks so assuming he stays healthy he'll probably take more carries away from Grant than Jackson did in previous years. Odds are he will max at 6.5 million.

---

Let's face it, Aaron Rodgers had two concussions last season and with the new emphasis on them, he might be held out longer and hopefully it doesn't happen, but he could go down for half the season. We'd still pass, but that'd open up the opportunity for Grant to get a lot of yards.

Since the coach says James Starks and Ryan Grant will be battling for carries, I'm thinking the under on even 1200.

6.5 for a back that's splitting carries feels like a lot to me.

---