As far as I understand it, it's a new 5-year contract on the books (technically 7-year with 2 void years). The "new money" portion of the deal (years 2-5) is 47/y, but the actual contract he signed in total is 42/y. Any time a player signs an extension, the old contract is void and replaced with the new one, so he's not playing under two deals (1yr + 4yr), but a single 5-year contract.
This is mostly semantics, though, it's the same result either way. But the agent usually puts out the "new money" number to make it look like it's a bigger deal than it really is.
There are a few ways to look at this, and only two of them are correct:
1. Micah signed a 4-year extension that averages $47m per year - yes (what you said)
2. Micah signed a 5-year contract that averages $42m per year - yes (what I said)
3. Micah’s contract with the Packers averages $47m per year - no
Originally Posted by: earthquake