Polian on the cost of JG today

[didshereallysaythat]

I don't get that either. Seems like the least logical move for both parties.

There are people like Hub who think the Bears are not far away from contending.

 

[FirstTimer]

Lol, in my example, I gave a 5 year contract so in referring to that contract, I said the SB has to be spread over the life of the contract. Do you guys honestly just read stuff without thinking about what it means.

Lol, there is no post from me where I said the above.

JG's agent would be stupid to let JG play under the franchise tag given the uncertainty around whether he is actually a good QB or not and this is without considering the fact said agent would be passing on the commissions he would get from a long term deal

Your above statement was Special person. It became even more Special person once it was found out that his agent advising JG to not play while under the tag would also kill JG getting a year of service time and getting a year closer to a second contract.

I repeat:

JG's agent would be an idiot to advise him to not play under the tag regardless of circumstances.

 

[iueyedoc]

Lol, in my example, I gave a 5 year contract so in referring to that contract, I said the SB has to be spread over the life of the contract. Do you guys honestly just read stuff without thinking about what it means.

Signing bonuses by definition have to be allocated evenly over the life of the contract. If you want to play with the allocations you would have to do a roster bonus or something else. So JG nor the team has control over SB allocation so your point about them is irrelevant. The CBA controls the allocation.

This is a complete stand alone statement, not taken out of context. You are incorrect and now you are just lying about it. You could just edit it to make yourself "correct." Not sure which is the more pathetic act, probably the edit, so, on the bright side, you could still stoop lower.

 

[remydat]

Pfffft!! LOL. Ok I should have said guaranteed money and not SB, big whoopee. Do you seriously want to argue such a trivial thing? I can allocate as much as I want to the roster bonus the first year, and deduct that from the SB, but it still gets paid to the player the first year, so the player could care less.

You said it's the team's choice and I simply said that it isn't. Is it a big deal. No. Am I going to point it out particularly when you try to claim I don't understand things? Yes.

That is a useless point. The argument centers around which scenario is in JG's best interest long term, and the best would be a scenario in which he can earn the most money over a specified period of time.

No it's not useless at all because his desire to earn the most money over a specified period of time is balanced against he also wants to secure himself against the risk of injury or sucking balls. That is why players accept long term deals that are likely less than if they had just done a series of 1 year deals.

The crux of your argument is you were going to come up with a contract over 4-5 years that only had 40 mill guaranteed, but was cost preventative for the team to cut him early on in the contract. And that was somehow beneficial to Jimmy G. I am waiting for an example of such a contract. Spare me the vague BS and give me hard numbers please, and then go on to explain how it is better than him earning 25 mil in the first year and testing FA again in 2018. That alone should net him 40 mil in two years, and anything he can make after that icing on the cake.

Are you following. I already gave you an example in my response to you. 35 million singing bonus with base salaries of 7,8,9 in the first 3 years. If you can't follow along, the salaries in the 4 and 5 years would be 10 and 11. I even made the guaranteed money less but let's bump that up to 40 million since you seem confused by the fact I already gave you an example.

In that scenario he gets 47 million in the first year and is pretty much guaranteed to get 15 million in the second and third years even if he sucks balls or is injured. So that's 62 million in the first 3 years of the contract.

Contrast that with a 1 year 25 million deal which if he gets injured or sucks donkey balls, his value falls off a cliff because he doesn't have enough games under his belt for someone to continue throwing money at him if he sucks.

So what don't you understand about that scenario. All you are going to do is try and argue but they can do this as roster bonus or they can do that or that his value won't decline that much if he gets injured or sucks balls on that 1 year deal but that is all just speculation that in the end I don't buy. JG is in a unique situation where IMO he can't afford to such balls before he's secured a big contract because all he has right now upping his value is his perceived potential. 16 games of struggles or another injury and I think his value declines considerably.

It's a classic Remy re-direct of his original asinine argument that it was somehow in the Pats best interest to not trade JG this year, but to hang on to him and franchise tag him next year. He was losing that battle badly, so now he will try to move the argument to something else to make it appear he actually had a point, which he did not.

Lol, no you said something wrong and I corrected you. If I had said something wrong you would have done the same so you are just crying now. I am not the one that always changes the subject and starts making ad hominem attacks. That's you guys.

 

[remydat]

You really don't understand the cap. I didn't know that a team held perpetual rights to a player after they sat out a year. One, its never happened before...no agent would be dumb enough to have his client sit out a 'franchise tag' year, regardless of service time accrual. Two, I was too lazy to look it up; I'd rather you cite such an obscure rule.

I did some more research on the topic, and the negative for a team like Denver having Von Miller 'sit out' a franchise tag year is that even though Miller hasn't signed, it counts as the one franchise tag that Denver can use that year. So, if a team like Denver wants to retain the rights to Miller even though he isn't playing, they'd have to waste their franchise tag designation year-after-year. Seems kind of pointless all the way around.

But props to you for finding the initial information...I think I am the lone person in this 300+ post thread that can say they have indeed learned something.

Lol, I never said a player should sit out a franchise tag year. You have completely created this argument out of thin air.

Here is what I said. Feel free to address what I said instead of making things up.

JG's agent would be stupid to let JG play under the franchise tag given the uncertainty around whether he is actually a good QB or not and this is without considering the fact said agent would be passing on the commissions he would get from a long term deal.

 

[remydat]

Your above statement was Special person. It became even more Special person once it was found out that his agent advising JG to not play while under the tag would also kill JG getting a year of service time and getting a year closer to a second contract.

I repeat:

Opps, and another 1.

 

[FirstTimer]

Lol, in my example, I gave a 5 year contract so in referring to that contract, I said the SB has to be spread over the life of the contract. Do you guys honestly just read stuff without thinking about what it means.

Lol, there is no post from me where I said the above.

JG's agent would be stupid to let JG play under the franchise tag given the uncertainty around whether he is actually a good QB or not and this is without considering the fact said agent would be passing on the commissions he would get from a long term deal

Your above statement was Special person. It became even more Special person once it was found out that his agent advising JG to not play while under the tag would also kill JG getting a year of service time and getting a year closer to a second contract.

I repeat:

JG's agent would be an idiot to advise him to not play under the tag regardless of circumstances.

 

[WindyCity]

Ben Albright

Asked an NFL source about Jimmy Garoppolo this morning.

"Bears or Browns"

 

[iueyedoc]

Ben Albright

Asked an NFL source about Jimmy Garoppolo this morning.

"Bears or Browns"

Was the question," what type of kinky gay sex was he into?"

 

[remydat]

This is a complete stand alone statement, not taken out of context. You are incorrect and now you are just lying about it. You could just edit it to make yourself "correct." Not sure which is the more pathetic act, probably the edit, so, on the bright side, you could still stoop lower.

The previous post I clearly gave an example of 5 years and 35 million. That was the context of the discussion. It's not a stand alone statement because it's part of a larger discussion.

I was not thinking about a 6 or 7 year contracts because in the example the poster asked for I gave him a 5 year contract. But sure I could have been more precise in my statement so if you want to think I was wrong then do you bro. No skin off my back.

 

[remydat]

Your above statement was Special person. It became even more Special person once it was found out that his agent advising JG to not play while under the tag would also kill JG getting a year of service time and getting a year closer to a second contract.

I repeat:

 

[FirstTimer]

Lol, in my example, I gave a 5 year contract so in referring to that contract, I said the SB has to be spread over the life of the contract. Do you guys honestly just read stuff without thinking about what it means.

Lol, there is no post from me where I said the above.

JG's agent would be stupid to let JG play under the franchise tag given the uncertainty around whether he is actually a good QB or not and this is without considering the fact said agent would be passing on the commissions he would get from a long term deal

Your above statement was Special person. It became even more Special person once it was found out that his agent advising JG to not play while under the tag would also kill JG getting a year of service time and getting a year closer to a second contract.

I repeat:

JG's agent would be an idiot to advise him to not play under the tag regardless of circumstances.

 

[Enasic]

Please.....make it stop.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

Please.....make it stop.

That's what she said.

 

[nc0gnet0]

You said it's the team's choice and I simply said that it isn't. Is it a big deal. No. Am I going to point it out particularly when you try to claim I don't understand things? Yes.



No it's not useless at all because his desire to earn the most money over a specified period of time is balanced against he also wants to secure himself against the risk of injury or sucking balls. That is why players accept long term deals that are likely less than if they had just done a series of 1 year deals.



Are you following. I already gave you an example in my response to you. 35 million singing bonus with base salaries of 7,8,9 in the first 3 years. If you can't follow along, the salaries in the 4 and 5 years would be 10 and 11. I even made the guaranteed money less but let's bump that up to 40 million since you seem confused by the fact I already gave you an example.

In that scenario he gets 47 million in the first year and is pretty much guaranteed to get 15 million in the second and third years even if he sucks balls or is injured. So that's 62 million in the first 3 years of the contract.

Contrast that with a 1 year 25 million deal which if he gets injured or sucks donkey balls, his value falls off a cliff because he doesn't have enough games under his belt for someone to continue throwing money at him if he sucks.

So what don't you understand about that scenario. All you are going to do is try and argue but they can do this as roster bonus or they can do that or that his value won't decline that much if he gets injured or sucks balls on that 1 year deal but that is all just speculation that in the end I don't buy. JG is in a unique situation where IMO he can't afford to such balls before he's secured a big contract because all he has right now upping his value is his perceived potential. 16 games of struggles or another injury and I think his value declines considerably.



Lol, no you said something wrong and I corrected you. If I had said something wrong you would have done the same so you are just crying now. I am not the one that always changes the subject and starts making ad hominem attacks. That's you guys.

Are you severely mathematically challenged or what?

For starters, if he has a base of 7 mil in the first year, a signing bonus of 35 mil, his guaranteed contract has to be at least the sum of the two figures for a 42 mil guaranteed. You can't take any of the signing bonus back dufus (seeing how your so quick to point out itty bitty details). Any contract written, even with your 35 million dollar SB original example, has to include at least the first year base salary, in the guaranteed money.

Second of all, a 35 mil signing bonus if virtually unheard of for a player of JG caliber. To my knowledge the highest signing bonus to date is Aaron Rodgers at 33 mil. But continue to pull numbers out of your ass to try to make a point.

Next is the fact that over the five years of your fictitious contract JG will only make 80 mil, or, 16 mil a season, avg. Congratulations, you have just had your client possibly sign the absolute worst contract (relative to earning potential at that time frame) in the History of the NFL. In your effort to make it cost preventative to cut your client, you have also made it a terrible contract should your client be worthy in the future of a top 5 contract.

By comparison, Matt Stafford, after his new contract is settled, should be making close to 25 mil a season. Now, I don't think JG deserves Matt Stafford money yet, but good lord, your locking him into the next five years at 16 mil? LMFAO.

So, this leaves us with the fact that no GM in his right mind would ever write that contract, and no agent would have his client sign that contract either.

Jimmy would still be much better off playing under the tag for 25 mil in 2018, and testing the FA waters (or maybe a second tag for 30 mil) in 2019, over your insane example.

 

[remydat]

Are you severely mathematically challenged or what?

For starters, if he has a base of 7 mil in the first year, a signing bonus of 35 mil, his guaranteed contract has to be at least the sum of the two figures for a 42 mil guaranteed. You can't take any of the signing bonus back dufus (seeing how your so quick to point out itty bitty details). Any contract written, even with your 35 million dollar SB original example, has to include at least the first year base salary, in the guaranteed money.

Second of all, a 35 mil signing bonus if virtually unheard of for a player of JG caliber. To my knowledge the highest signing bonus to date is Aaron Rodgers at 33 mil. But continue to pull numbers out of your ass to try to make a point.

Next is the fact that over the five years of your fictitious contract JG will only make 80 mil, or, 16 mil a season, avg. Congratulations, you have just had your client possibly sign the absolute worst contract (relative to earning potential at that time frame) in the History of the NFL. In your effort to make it cost preventative to cut your client, you have also made it a terrible contract should your client be worthy in the future of a top 5 contract.

By comparison, Matt Stafford, after his new contract is settled, should be making close to 25 mil a season. Now, I don't think JG deserves Matt Stafford money yet, but good lord, your locking him into the next five years at 16 mil? LMFAO.

So, this leaves us with the fact that no GM in his right mind would ever write that contract, and no agent would have his client sign that contract either.

Jimmy would still be much better off playing under the tag for 25 mil in 2018, and testing the FA waters (or maybe a second tag for 30 mil) in 2019, over your insane example.

What the fuck are you talking about. The SB is the only thing guaranteed. The base salary technically is not guaranteed. He just is sure to get it because they won't cut him after just signing him but it's not considered guaranteed money. Like holy fuck. That's the entire point. the 7, 8, and 9 million in the first 3 years are non guaranteed base salaries but since it would be cost prohibitive to cut him that early in the contract, they essentially are money he is sure to receive even though technically they are not considered guaranteed money. That was literally my point from the start of this discussion. They are not contractual guarantees.

Second, Rodgers contract had 62.6 million guaranteed so your point is stupid.

Third, not sure why you think JG deserves more than 16 million a season with his 1.5 starts. Osweillers deal was 4 years for 72 million and most of the base salary at the end he will never see. It's money added at the end of the contract just to make the total value look pretty. This happens all the time in the NFL as we can see in Cutler's contract. All JG is really going to care about is that he got 62 million in the first 3 years or 20 million per year. I would agree that you probably should goose up years 4 and 5 to higher base salaries to encourage the team to come back to the negotiating table by making the cap hit higher but that doesn't the amount of guaranteed money. So great make years 4 and 5 14 or 15 million.

So no Jimmy wouldn't be better off passing on 62 million dollars in 3 years because he has an injury risk and a suck risk that is much higher than most guys given he has only played 1.5 games and got injured.

 

[FirstTimer]

Lol, there is no post from me where I said the above.

JG's agent would be stupid to let JG play under the franchise tag given the uncertainty around whether he is actually a good QB or not and this is without considering the fact said agent would be passing on the commissions he would get from a long term deal

Your above statement was Special person. It became even more Special person once it was found out that his agent advising JG to not play while under the tag would also kill JG getting a year of service time and getting a year closer to a second contract.

I repeat:

JG's agent would be an idiot to advise him to not play under the tag regardless of circumstances.

 

[nc0gnet0]

What the fuck are you talking about. The SB is the only thing guaranteed. The base salary technically is not guaranteed. He just is sure to get it because they won't cut him after just signing him but it's not considered guaranteed money. Like holy fuck. That's the entire point. the 7, 8, and 9 million in the first 3 years are non guaranteed base salaries but since it would be cost prohibitive to cut him that early in the contract, they essentially are money he is sure to receive even though technically they are not considered guaranteed money. That was literally my point from the start of this discussion. They are not contractual guarantees.

Second, Rodgers contract had 62.6 million guaranteed so your point is stupid.

Third, not sure why you think JG deserves more than 16 million a season with his 1.5 starts. Osweillers deal was 4 years for 72 million and most of the base salary at the end he will never see. It's money added at the end of the contract just to make the total value look pretty. This happens all the time in the NFL as we can see in Cutler's contract. All JG is really going to care about is that he got 62 million in the first 3 years or 20 million per year. I would agree that you probably should goose up years 4 and 5 to higher base salaries to encourage the team to come back to the negotiating table by making the cap hit higher but that doesn't the amount of guaranteed money. So great make years 4 and 5 14 or 15 million.

So no Jimmy wouldn't be better off passing on 62 million dollars in 3 years because he has an injury risk and a suck risk that is much higher than most guys given he has only played 1.5 games and got injured.

Your an idiot. Plain and simple. Let me repeat this, your an idiot. Base Salary is not guaranteed....okaaaaaaayyyyyyyy!!!!!! moron. Lets sign JG to a contract with a 35 million dollar sigining bonus, and then release him before we have to pay him the base salary for the first year. Yup, happens all the time.

Come on man!

 

[nc0gnet0]

I just glossed over this and didn't read it, but now that I've digested it...HUH?

$35M signing bonus (NFL record), spread out over the first 5 years of contract = $7M guaranteed/yr

Year 1 base: $7M...+ $7M signing bonus = $14M
Year 2 base: $8M...+ $7M signing bonus = $15M
Year 3 base: $9M...+ $7M signing bonus = $16M
Year 4 base: $10M...+$7M signing bonus = $17M
Year 5 base: $11M...+$7M signing bonus = $18M

Contract: 5yr/$80M
Signing Bonus: $35M
Average Salary: $16M
Guaranteed: $35M


IS THIS CORRECT?

Well, he is after all, an idiot. What he fails to realize is that contract would carry a 45-50 million dollar guarantee. He just wants to pull 35 mil out of his ass to suit his argument. You can't release him after the second year, as it would cost you more money than it would to keep him ( 9m + 7m = 16m compared to a dead cap of 21m). It's a poison pill contract that no GM would ever sign.

 

[nc0gnet0]

What the fuck are you talking about. The SB is the only thing guaranteed. The base salary technically is not guaranteed. He just is sure to get it because they won't cut him after just signing him but it's not considered guaranteed money. Like holy fuck. That's the entire point. the 7, 8, and 9 million in the first 3 years are non guaranteed base salaries but since it would be cost prohibitive to cut him that early in the contract, they essentially are money he is sure to receive even though technically they are not considered guaranteed money. That was literally my point from the start of this discussion. They are not contractual guarantees.

In the real world, base salary counts towards the guarantee. Brock got a 12 mil signing bonus, and 37 mil guaranteed. No Gm in their right mind would ever write that contract, nor would any agent tie their aspiring QB to a 5 year contract with an average salary of 16 mil. Fuck your stupid.