My comments on it were with regards to timing and tone.. it is honestly a brilliant timed comment for him.. but not indicative of a team player.

July 25th, 2006 he signs a 4 year deal worth 2.85 Millions over the 4 years... obviously he out played those numbers.

June 23rd, 2009, mind you over a year prior to the end of that deal, the Packers renegotiated that deal, basically buying out 2 of those value years for the Packers to be fair to Jennings. That deal increased his 2009 pay to 8.122 Million with a balance paid out each season of 5.36,7.53,7.33 Million per season.

The Packers could have rode out that first deal and franchised him or what not under the CBA that was in play at the time because he would have been a RFA.

The Packers didn't do that, they were fair and loyal to Jennings. So why take the approach of stating it as such, a very pinpointed PR wording to prompt focus on his situation.

I have been critical of Aaron Rodgers at times for statements he has made, but one thing you cannot brow beat him for is the way he is dealing with his contract today which is way below market value. He knows that it will take care of itself one way or another, so why try and make a point of it in any fashion.

Jennings is going to get paid.. whether it is here or elsewhere, so why the need to say anything other than to draw attention to it?

RP.. I disagree, that statement has a PR move all over it.. sure he probably didn't have a presser to discuss it, but he certainly had a prepared method to answer the question that was sure to be asked. And we know the agents feed the reporter story angles all the time, I would not put it past an agent to prompt the question.

I am not mad at him.. or really disappointed in him, but I think the timing and tone of the response isn't something that is going to benefit the Packers this season. Nothing more.. nothing less.

Greg has been taken care of.. but by the tone, it is apparent he doesn't remember the Packers were "loyal" to him at one point as well.

It is a business.. no doubt about it, but business relationships are not just one sided. That statement had a one sided slant to it.. all about taking care of Greg.

And the first alligator arm attempt, it will lead to a question of whether it is just Greg taking care of Greg.

---

I totally see where you're coming from, Pack93z. And yes, I'd like much better from one of my fave players.

However, football players are young and stupid. I'm thinking of myself at 28, and had I had his talent, it would have been EASY to be manipulated by an agent for everything I'm worth. Keep in mind, these agents get paid on commission basis. The more money they can squeeze out of a man, the better.

There's a special place in Hell for people like Drew Rosenhaus. I just did a google search for Eugene E. Parker and guess what I found out about him...

He's Mr. Rookie Holdout. He had Suh holdout and also had Michael Crabtree holdout. He's also the long-time client to Deion Sanders (one of my favorite all-time players to watch, and admittedly, a guilty pleasure as Sanders is a head case) and even inducted Sanders into the Hall of Fame, which is pretty scary. Don King, anyone?

The more I read about Parker, the more he seems like Drew Rosenhaus. I don't like him already. It's a shame that he's Gregorious' agent.

Now I take back what I said up above. Gregorious won't be a Packer in 2013. Let's keep our fingers crossed and hope that Cobb or Boykin develop into something special.

EDIT: Great. Just found out that he's also Cedric Benson's agent too. So I wonder if Parker's using Gregorious to get back at 🇹🇹 for the "crappy" deal he had to make to get Benson a Packer.

And yes, I DO believe some agents are that assholish.

---

I really don't think it is a poor move for him on a personal level.. for himself I think the timing is brilliant.

I just think it colors him as a me first players and if we struggle may become something to pine against.

More or less.. I think there are times to make personal agenda statements for a team that has Superbowl aspirations.

Now is not one of them.

He has made more than 30 million for his career.. it isn't like he doesn't have security. So what is enough?

Someone like Grant coming into the 2008 season.. where a holdout was the only way he was going to secure financial security for himself.. fine. A UDFA that really hadn't been paid yet.

Greg, other than a major injury, is going to get paid. I just don't see the value in making this statement now.

That is if your real goal is winning a championship. My view.

---

Oh I completely agree. I'm just under the impression he's being played like a marionette by his agent.

---

Wait, there's "Loyalty" in the NFL? That's news to me.

Why SHOULDN'T Jennings pursue as much money as the market allows him to get away with? I may wish he wouldn't do so, but I can't blame him for it. He has every right to do do. It has nothing to do with loyalty, imo. More power to you, Jennings.

Completely hypothetical situation...

Would you rather have?
A. $100 million and 1 SB Ring
B. $30 million and 3 SB Rings


Guys in their 20s would often pick A. Guys in their 40s (long retired) would often pick B.

---

If I had no kids, Option B. Being father to several girls and helping family and friends out quite a bit, I'd side with Option A because of what I'd be able to offer many family and friends.

---

Greg already has one Super Bowl ring, and may have another after 2013 and after being tagged. Also, who's to say he's going to go to a team that has no chance to compete? If he's a free agent, that's his choice. There could be a team like the Panthers, Saints, Ravens, Seahawks, etc. etc. that would be willing to pay him and may be serious contenders at that time. It's not that black-and-white.

Yes, it's not that black & white, but losing teams are more often than not desperate for superstars and are more willing to pay the big $$$.

Zero - I understand. But tell me, what will you have to give up if you only had $30 million? Or is it because people with money have to feed their starving relatives? (This isn't being sarcastic. The second question is very common among lottery winners).

---

No one expects me to give them anything, so it's not like that. I have one cousin who actually does, but have since stopped talking to her. I'm open to help any family member, but when it becomes "expected" that I drop everything for them and bail them out... I kind of feel taken advantage of.

Honestly, I really cannot quantity $30 million vs $100 million. I've had a dream for years if I won the lottery I'd spend a year or two going from city to city donating portions of it to establishments that help less fortunate kids. In my mind, $100 million would do that better than $30 million because I could even build a place for less fortunate people to live in and maintain and help teach them trades for them to earn employment. I don't feel we do enough for our own citizens in this country and rather than being someone who whines about it, I want to be someone who does something about it.

So, I see it more or less like this. Are two Super Bowl wins worth $70 million if I have one already? What can I do with the two rings vs what can I do with $70 million?



I wouldn't blame Greg Jennings for leaving for more money. He's a father of several girls and he's a huge fashion freak. Do I want him gone? No, because then I have to make a new signature and the Packers lose a solid weapon. I used to consider him a top 10 receiver, but I feel he's more top 20 now and if he's demanding $10 million or more per season ... see ya later buddy. Of course, if the Packers pay him that much, I'll still have my favorite Packers player on the team and won't complain. Then again, if we lose someone like Raji or Matthews because of it ... I won't be happy. I'd rather the latter two than Jennings.

---