dfosterf
12 years ago
We have to stockpile money and expect to lose beloved players. Aaron Rodgers is not going to re-sign for friggin' Dhazer money.

There is no reason to think Rodgers will not be the highest paid player ever, as this is written. We have a cap. I don't see how we don't lose many players we would love to keep. I gotta shrug my shoulders and hope this works out. I like Greg just fine.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
12 years ago
I don't see Greg as demanding the top shelf WR money. he will want to be well paid but not hold them up.

Aaron's contract will impact how much they can pay Gregorious.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
12 years ago
Dodd - Players have careers after football.

Let's just say hypothetically you go into Sales, as a lot of former NFL players do. You WILL make more money if you're a multiple SB winning Hall of Famer than if you're just a really, really good player.

Let's take a look at Terry Bradshaw. I don't think anyone would list him in their top 5 QBs of all-time. However, no doubt he makes TONS of money as an announcer on Fox. I don't think anyone would put Bradshaw ahead of Marino on their best QBs list. Yet, where is Marino? He's making ads for weight loss. How pathetic is that?

Let's hypothetically say Marino won 4 SBs and Bradshaw won 0. Is there any doubt that their post-NFL roles would be completely reversed?

See what I'm getting at?

There are still a lot of working years after the NFL.



http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--prominent-nfl-agent-drew-rosenhaus-scrutinized-for-relationship-with-former-financial-adviser-.html 

I hope you all will now take me seriously when I say agents have too much power over a player. I think Gregorious may be getting shafted by his agent. From what I've read about the guy, he seems like a Rosenhaus. I don't like him.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
12 years ago
looks like Greg was too smart to get involved in a gambling operation.
UserPostedImage
doddpower
12 years ago

Dodd - Players have careers after football.

Let's just say hypothetically you go into Sales, as a lot of former NFL players do. You WILL make more money if you're a multiple SB winning Hall of Famer than if you're just a really, really good player.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



I would think someone that made many millions would have PLENTY of options for a career after football, all of which are likely pay better than a broadcaster. Think of the investments that would be possible. The possibilities are limitless. Dan Marino has also spent some time in the booth, I believe. He also has dabbled in Nascar ownership, has appeared in movies, etc. Terry Bradshaw has personality first and foremost. He's not simply on the air because he won a lot of super bowls, but admittedly that doesn't hurt. The point is, that example doesn't prove anything to me, as both are still successful. Obviously winning 3+ super bowls doesn't hurt, but I don't see that as a big deal as far as making money after football.

Also, life after football for someone who has made $100+ million throughout their football career would have to be more about occupying their time than the money, right? As high as the salaries in the NFL are now, especially for QBs, wow. Favre won a super bowl, but he will never need to work. I'm sure he'll find something to do, perhaps in broadcasting eventually, but it won't be because he needs to. The $22 million or whatever the Vikings paid him guaranteed that, as if it wasn't already. I can't see any job outside of actually playing football being about the money at all for the modern day super star players. Perhaps 20 years ago, sure, because the contracts weren't as absurd. The only way it should happen to a super star today is if they mis-manage their money, and that's a different story entirely.

Zero2Cool
12 years ago

Let's hypothetically say Marino won 4 SBs and Bradshaw won 0. Is there any doubt that their post-NFL roles would be completely reversed?

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



The Super Bowl rings have nothing to do with this example. Dan Marion is a loose cannon and has no on screen charisma. Terry Bradshaw might be a halfwit, but at least he's entertaining on the tv screen.

Some people are just good on the screen and some aren't, it doesn't have anything to do with Super Bowl rings. If it did, why isn't Tiki Barber on our screens or countless others who have come and gone?

Your point is definitely valid in Sales because former NFL player does not sound as good as Super Bowl winning player. But then again, multiple really doesn't have a sales ring to it either.

Drew Rosenhaus is useless and agents control players too much, both things I've been pounding that drum since you were in diapers. Agents are right there with Lawyers and Journalists.
UserPostedImage
porky88
12 years ago

Not the way that I read it, carefully crafted to include fan friendly words as loyalty and using the illustration that the 20 weeks and that is it picture. Maybe over reading it, but opening week prior to his contract year and openly stating he has a number in mind and nothing else is worth talking about.

Nah, I buy it as a PR statement crafted to maximize his play. I just think if a Superbowl is his focus, this is a poorly timed statement in that regard, but brilliant for his contract goal. Heard this on ESPN and Bill Micheals already, it is getting notice for his cause. Another week or so.. probably gets less run, but everyone is chomping at the bit, so it gets overplayed.

Now, lets really discuss what used to be the overvaluing of Running backs which now seems to have shifted to the receiver position. Guys are simply getting overpaid in a passing league currently that is looking at past production in situations where receivers can succeed on less talent.

The game has morphed where almost all the advantage has shifted to the receivers and you don't see 1 or 2 superstars, many are putting up inflated numbers and looking like superstars. Guys like Laurent Robinson once washed out, rises to semi stardom in a single season.

Routes don't have to be as clean, guys can cross the middle with less risk due to increased protection rules, less contact everything allows these cats to produce more with less talent. The contract this offseason scream of desperation from struggling teams in this passing league looking for a spark. Spending big on good, yet not great wide outs isn't going to solve the problems. This league now one offense revolves around QB play. Don't have it.. you better bring a defense and a running game to the table. Both dominate units as well.. either that or continue to struggle. A good offensive coordinator with the ability to maximize the advantages to the rules helps as well.

So does it make sense to spend 12 million of a 120 million dollar cap on a single receiver.. probably not unless he is an elite talent. Sorry but when I see Jennings, I don't see Megatron, Fritz or a healthy Johnson. He just isn't in that tier IMO. Neither is a guy like Vincent Jackson.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 


I don't necessary disagree on his value or the value of wide receivers.

However, I don't see anything here. Nobody will remember these comments five weeks from now. The rest of the league isn't worried about Greg Jennings' contract. They're worried about their opponent on Sunday or Monday.

I also can't imagine Jennings or his agent believing this could scare Green Bay into caving into his demands down the road. Let’s assume this is a leverage ploy. It’s a stupid one. This same team traded Brett Favre. They’re not afraid of making the hard choices.

Plus, let’s not overstate the impact this has on the game or the season. San Francisco can beat Green Bay with or without Greg Jennings talking about his contract. This has no impact on the game or the focus of the long-term goal, which is a Super Bowl championship. It’s also unrealistic not to expect a player to think about his contract. They all do it regardless of whether their team is 15-1 or 1-15. Not to mention what he says is 100% true.

The Packers have enough depth at receiver that the position isn’t a priority. For example, Clay Mathews, Aaron Rodgers, B.J. Raji, and even Bryan Bulaga have contracts worth extending the next two off-seasons. They're probably a higher priority, but I'm not a cap czar. I'm sure the team could fit Jennings into their plans as well.
PackerTraxx
12 years ago
Weird time for this to come up. My guess is those involved will just ignore it. Greg is not a top tier talent but he is important to our team so I hope we can keep him. But those mentioned above are more important. So, let's hope for the best and plan for the worst.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Pack93z
12 years ago

I don't necessary disagree on his value or the value of wide receivers.

However, I don't see anything here. Nobody will remember these comments five weeks from now. The rest of the league isn't worried about Greg Jennings' contract. They're worried about their opponent on Sunday or Monday.

I also can't imagine Jennings or his agent believing this could scare Green Bay into caving into his demands down the road. Let’s assume this is a leverage ploy. It’s a stupid one. This same team traded Brett Favre. They’re not afraid of making the hard choices.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



I care less about what the rest of the league has to say about this, nor if they remember it. My opinion is that the reporters are going to ask just about every player now on the roster about Greg's comments. Maybe they all answer it without causing a stir, but maybe they don't.

The point is simply this, not trying to overstate the importance, but why if your goals are to win a Superbowl do you open the door for something that may become a distraction inside the Packer locker room. That is it.. I expect Rodgers, Finley, Nelson, Raji, Matthews, Woodson all to be asked probably today. Then the reporters will dig into the next wave of players until they find a soundbite that they can use.

Again, it was a self serving statement that does nothing positive for the Packers. It may turn into nothing, but it certainly may grow legs, especially if this team struggles for any stretch this season. Just doesn't appear to be the type of statement a team player makes. Simply put.


"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
12 years ago
Luckily, I don't see Greg Jennings pulling something similar to what we seen in 1994.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (1h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (1h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (1h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (1h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (1h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (1h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (1h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (2h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (2h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (2h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (3h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (3h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (3h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (3h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (3h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (4h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (4h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (4h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (5h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (5h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (5h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (6h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (6h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (7h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (7h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (7h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (7h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (7h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (7h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (7h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (7h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (7h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (7h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (7h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (7h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (7h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (8h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (8h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (8h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (8h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (8h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (8h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (8h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (8h) : Packers will get in
beast (8h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

6h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.