Rodgers contract doesn't really make cents to me

[Brew Crew Buster]

So Rodgers is 35 and signed for the next two years at $21 M. After that the team can franchise him for this annual amount plus 20% for a year. That would bring him through his age 38 season. Think about that: He is essentially signed through his age 38 season.

 

The Green Bay Packers added years and boosted his average annual salary to an average of $33M a year.

 

So for the next couple of years the Packers are paying $12 more a year and in year three it is $8 M more a year.

 

So that is an additional $32 M over the next three years.

 

After that, the 39 year old quarterback will be a free agent. I don't care who you are, your skills as a quarterback will be diminishing by age 39. He won't warrant a $33M a year contract on a 2 year contract at that point. And even if he does, The Packers could use the savings from the previous 3 years to pay the guy.

 

The Packers are doing some smart pre-loading which may alleviate some of the pain but these are real world dollars.

[/The Packers seem to be spending $32 M which they don't need to spend over the next 3 years. Or am I missing something?

color]

[jerichoholicninja]

That's just how the NFL works. Especially with QB's.

[Baldkin]

"His annual average salary" is completely different from his salary cap number.

 

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2018/08/30/how-aaron-rodgers-new-contract-affects-packers-salary-cap/

 

The important numbers to know: Rodgers’ deal includes a $57.5 million signing bonus and $66.9 million paid out during the entire 2018 season. Signing bonuses are prorated over five years, so Rodgers’ bonus is distributed out into five $11.5 million cap hits. Adding in his $500,000 roster bonus, which has already been paid, gets us to $58 million paid and $12 million on the cap.

 

A base salary of $8.9 million is required to finish out the $66.9 million payment in 2018. So tack on $8.9 million to the $12 million calculated above and Rodgers’ cap hit becomes $20.9 million.

 

Overall, the Packers added less than $400,000 to their cap in 2018 by extending Rodgers, who will account for only 11.8 percent of the Packers’ cap.

[tmwiese55]

Sure they could've played hardball with him but they chose this route instead rather than risk alienating the best player in the league and the one player that makes them a SB contender ever year. Basically you did it to eliminate the bad PR that would come with a public contract dispute which GB would be on the bad side.

[OldHeidelberg]

It is interesting that they have that option, it's almost like arbitration years in baseball, but I don't think that is the intent of the franchise tag and if teams started just using it without negotiating to save money it would get killed in the next CBA. For a player like Rodgers such a move would be disastrous, he would hold out, declare he will never play for GB again and demand a trade. Heck the NFL would probably step in and facilitate the trade to avoid all the negative publicity.

 

Rodgers is worth way more than whatever he is paid to the franchise. I am not sure why a non profit is so hell bent on maximizing profits, either they just have to spend the boatloads of cash they have or just good old capitalism, but I think they overextended with the last stadium expansion and Lambeau Land or whatever it is. As long as Rodgers is around to keep them in contention the windfall will continue, but if we go through several down years I think you will see attendance drop and many of the people who bought these bad seats are going to give them up and the eternal season waiting list may come to end.

[PeaveyFury]

If the wait list didn't get eliminated in the 70s and 80s when the team was uber-crappy, I can't see 100,000+ people suddenly walking away if the team has several down years.

 

I'd also argue that the Titletown district has helped the team rather than hurt it, as it has made the stadium and the area around it more of a destination beyond the 10 days a year they actually have a game. As someone who visits family in Green Bay regularly, we almost always make a trip to or near the stadium when we're there. Is your opinion on that based on financials? Legitimately curious.

[OldHeidelberg]

If the wait list didn't get eliminated in the 70s and 80s when the team was uber-crappy, I can't see 100,000+ people suddenly walking away if the team has several down years.

 

I'd also argue that the Titletown district has helped the team rather than hurt it, as it has made the stadium and the area around it more of a destination beyond the 10 days a year they actually have a game. As someone who visits family in Green Bay regularly, we almost always make a trip to or near the stadium when we're there. Is your opinion on that based on financials? Legitimately curious.

 

They were in some trouble back in the 80's, I remember an SI article about it, not the season ticket list but I think just general poor revenue although I don't remember the details. People kept their seats but attendance wasn't that great and that affects revenue. That could be what is still driving the search for more revenue and the "rainy day" fund. I am a season ticket holder for about 15 years, used to go all the time when I got them and they are pretty good seats. But the Lambeau mystique has worn off for me, I am 4 hours away, and would rather watch them on my HD TV then drive over and deal with all the stuff. I always have fun when I do go it's just not something I want to do 3 times a year. I keep them as a friends still use them but they give the same feedback and don't always want them. I have considered giving them up. So I guess personal experience is why I think the expansion was a bad idea, I look up at those seats and thank god I am not way the hell up there in the end zone, I would give them up the first year. I think the competition with better television is something all pro sports teams deal with but for the Packers getting people to the games is critical. There were not near as many seats and hardly any bad ones in the 80's, so I am not sure the fact that the season ticket base held up then is proof that it will now. Time will tell if the turnover is as bad as I think it will be. I think the ticket market dived pretty badly last year after Rodgers got hurt if you want some recent evidence.

 

For Titletown I am not sure as I don't live there, it would work in a bigger city but I don't know if the Fox Valley will support it all year round. But there isn't much in downtown Green Bay so maybe it becomes the entertainment center for the city. Honestly I haven't been to a game since it was completed.

[sveumrules]

How many of those 100,000+ are going to want to pony up the necessary cash when they finally do get called?

 

The only reason the phone will be ringing in the first place is because whoever had the tickets before was be fed up with lousy play on the field and/or the hassle they had to go through to witness said lousy play. Throw in the fact that the NFL arrow has been pointing down for some time now & they seem completely oblivious to it.

 

Would love to know the breakdown of fan sentiment after Rodgers injury last year. It seems like the three main camps were (a) good, they'll finally be as bad as I've been saying they were for all these years (b) my Sundays just opened up and © wait? This is what football is like without an elite QB? This is really boring. How did the NFL ever get so popular in the first place if most of the games are like this?

[PeaveyFury]

They were in some trouble back in the 80's, I remember an SI article about it, not the season ticket list but I think just general poor revenue although I don't remember the details. People kept their seats but attendance wasn't that great and that affects revenue. That could be what is still driving the search for more revenue and the "rainy day" fund. I am a season ticket holder for about 15 years, used to go all the time when I got them and they are pretty good seats. But the Lambeau mystique has worn off for me, I am 4 hours away, and would rather watch them on my HD TV then drive over and deal with all the stuff. I always have fun when I do go it's just not something I want to do 3 times a year. I keep them as a friends still use them but they give the same feedback and don't always want them. I have considered giving them up. So I guess personal experience is why I think the expansion was a bad idea, I look up at those seats and thank god I am not way the hell up there in the end zone, I would give them up the first year. I think the competition with better television is something all pro sports teams deal with but for the Packers getting people to the games is critical. There were not near as many seats and hardly any bad ones in the 80's, so I am not sure the fact that the season ticket base held up then is proof that it will now. Time will tell if the turnover is as bad as I think it will be. I think the ticket market dived pretty badly last year after Rodgers got hurt if you want some recent evidence.

 

I don't think any of that's unfair or unreasonable from an individual fan's perspective. But I guess I'd argue just that- it sounds like a lot of this is situational in your case. Some would certainly agree with you if the team got bad for a long period of time, but I'm equally certain you'd find a vast number of people that live four hours away that still make their trips in happily. I suppose the issue I take is with the last part of your post- you're criticizing the Packers for buying/developing all of the land around the stadium, but haven't been there to see what it actually entails? I've been there in the heart of the offseason, and have seen many of the areas jam packed on a random non-gameday afternoon. Maybe that'll wear off, but again I'd argue that it's creating a destination that allows for additional revenue beyond the 10 days a year that the stadium serves its intended purpose.

 

I'm a bit surprised by the premise of your additional post, I guess. There is no indication that the Packers are struggling financially whatsoever, and their development probably helps them weather some of the rough patches that may come. Their rainy day fund should further insulate them from issues as well.

[homer]

They release their numbers publicly every year. They are profitable.

 

"On Monday, the organization reported $34.1 million in profit from operations and $38.6 million in net income for the fiscal year that ended March 31."

[OldHeidelberg]

They were in some trouble back in the 80's, I remember an SI article about it, not the season ticket list but I think just general poor revenue although I don't remember the details. People kept their seats but attendance wasn't that great and that affects revenue. That could be what is still driving the search for more revenue and the "rainy day" fund. I am a season ticket holder for about 15 years, used to go all the time when I got them and they are pretty good seats. But the Lambeau mystique has worn off for me, I am 4 hours away, and would rather watch them on my HD TV then drive over and deal with all the stuff. I always have fun when I do go it's just not something I want to do 3 times a year. I keep them as a friends still use them but they give the same feedback and don't always want them. I have considered giving them up. So I guess personal experience is why I think the expansion was a bad idea, I look up at those seats and thank god I am not way the hell up there in the end zone, I would give them up the first year. I think the competition with better television is something all pro sports teams deal with but for the Packers getting people to the games is critical. There were not near as many seats and hardly any bad ones in the 80's, so I am not sure the fact that the season ticket base held up then is proof that it will now. Time will tell if the turnover is as bad as I think it will be. I think the ticket market dived pretty badly last year after Rodgers got hurt if you want some recent evidence.

 

I don't think any of that's unfair or unreasonable from an individual fan's perspective. But I guess I'd argue just that- it sounds like a lot of this is situational in your case. Some would certainly agree with you if the team got bad for a long period of time, but I'm equally certain you'd find a vast number of people that live four hours away that still make their trips in happily. I suppose the issue I take is with the last part of your post- you're criticizing the Packers for buying/developing all of the land around the stadium, but haven't been there to see what it actually entails? I've been there in the heart of the offseason, and have seen many of the areas jam packed on a random non-gameday afternoon. Maybe that'll wear off, but again I'd argue that it's creating a destination that allows for additional revenue beyond the 10 days a year that the stadium serves its intended purpose.

 

I'm a bit surprised by the premise of your additional post, I guess. There is no indication that the Packers are struggling financially whatsoever, and their development probably helps them weather some of the rough patches that may come. Their rainy day fund should further insulate them from issues as well.

 

Sorry, saw this yesterday but was heading out of town and didn't have time to respond. My original post was related to Rodgers impact on the teams revenue, I didn't mean to imply that I thought the Packers were in financial trouble and even mentioned the boatloads of cash they have and the current windfall. But with my follow up on the 80's troubles I guess I can see how you took it that way. I agree they are well set to survive several down years but not so sure about 20 but that gets into a lot of other issues the NFL has not directly related to the Packers.

 

We may have to agree to disagree on the impact of the seat expansion but I will try to expand on my opinion there. There is a number, and it is not 180,000, where the availability of tickets starts to work against them. One of the reasons teams don't always just build 100,000 seat stadiums is because they want to have some some demand for season tickets, otherwise everyone will just wait and buy tickets when they want them which can be problematic in losing seasons. I brought up the ticket market dive last year, if you paid a $1500 deposit on an upper end zone seat and found that these seats sold for about face value(or less in a bad year) you might want to reconsider your investment and just buy your tickets a la carte on the market. I don't sell my seats online but I would guess they are worth less now than what they were before the expansion. That's why I think they over extended, they made a tough ticket easy. The struggle to sell out playoff games after the expansion may be another red flag.

 

I don't consider myself an atypical out state fan, I take the Packers waaay to seriously. I felt like I won the lottery when I got season tickets(my Dad had put in for them years ago). I brought up my friends feedback before but I can tell you it's the same with most fans I know in La Crosse and the twin cities, you have to give up more than a day to go to the game and it gets expensive. Once a year is just about right for most. I would go to every game if I lived in GB but I am guessing a lot of these new ticket holders are from out state and are not as committed as you may think. Again, time will tell.

 

As for Titletown, the last time I was there it was nearing completion and I think there was already some stuff open. I don't think I need to see it to voice an opinion on it, I don't need to go to Mall of America to know its just a big mall with an amusement park in the middle. I don't mean to sound snarky here, I think it is a legitimate analogy as isn't the Titletown district just a Packer themed mall? I am just not sure what could be there that would make me go wow but you are right, I probably need to check it out, it's not like I wouldn't like Packer themed mall.

 

Anyway Go Pack!

[MrTPlush]

“I don’t need to go to the TitleTown district to voice an opinion.”

 

No, but you should probably learn what it actually is because it is about as far from a mall as you can get. It is mostly activity areas for children for all seasons (they charge for some stuff from what I have heard). It also features a brewery and a hotel. Long term it is expected to also include offices, townhomes, and some entertainment/retail. Hardly a mall.

[Jenkins5]

I greatly enjoy driving up from Fondy to take my daughter to title town district during the winter. There really is no stores. It’s an activity park. Her & her friends sled, ice skate, play on playground, and etc. It’s part of giving people more to do around the stadium, making it even more family oriented, and drawing more people.

 

I’m not concerned with tickets & think Packers are fine. A waitlist over 80k people so if someone doesn’t find worth in them, plenty people will jump on wagon. Team good or bad, fans show up. Our tickets usually sell for 100 or more per ticket above face value. Even pre season tickets get taken very quick. People just love the experience. Win, lose, you tailgate, drink, have great time, things to do after game. It’s just fun to be up there on game day. Winning always makes it better but myself and most people I know would pay the prices just goes it’s Lambeau, we love the Packers, & it’s a blast.

 

In my eyes, Packers have had good business model and enhanced fan experience greatly over the years. Going to need into the Browns for decade or two with no more upgrades to fan experience to put them into any danger

[OldHeidelberg]

“I don’t need to go to the TitleTown district to voice an opinion.”

 

No, but you should probably learn what it actually is because it is about as far from a mall as you can get. It is mostly activity areas for children for all seasons (they charge for some stuff from what I have heard). It also features a brewery and a hotel. Long term it is expected to also include offices, townhomes, and some entertainment/retail. Hardly a mall.

 

Fair enough, I knew about the kids activities but the cynic in me assumed that it was populated with sports bars, restaurants, and pro shops to keep the adults spending while the kids play, sort of like Camp Snoopy. If it is more of a giving back to the community endeavor than your are correct, I am very mistaken and that is exactly what I think the Packers should be investing their money in. What is it like on game day?

[superfly]

Tom Brady says hi with regards to dimishing skills in 40 year old QBs.

[Point Beer Is Best]

A waitlist over 80k people so if someone doesn’t find worth in them, plenty people will jump on wagon.

 

I added each of my kids to the list the week they were born. My 7 month old daughter is in the neighborhood of #133,000 on the list. I think my 7 year old son is around 60k and my 6 year old son is 88k (note: they won the Super Bowl 3 months after I added my oldest son when he was born, and my second son was born 15 months later. The list grew considerably in that time frame as well). And I'm #251 on the list for single seat season tickets. I added myself to that list about 10 years ago.

 

So yeah - there's plenty of legitimate actual people wanting those tickets if anyone gives them up. My problem is with the people who appear to have signed their ticket rights over to ticket brokers and treat them as an investment vehicle.

[nodakfan17]

I’m kicking myself for not getting my 2 year-old son on the list sooner. I finally added him 4 months ago and he’s in the 134,000 range. Waiting the extra year and a half probably cost him 10,000 spots. I did get life insurance with GPOs on him when he was 3 days old to lock in his insurability, so I’m not totally negligent.

[pacopete4]

I am about the 16,000 mark. Wondering how long it will take me to get there still. Probably will be dead.

[homer]

My brother got on in 1992 and was #3000. We got our tickets in 2013 when the new south end zone opened up.

 

So for those of you who are in the 100,000's make sure to include that in your will.

[nodakfan17]

Those under 10,000 can pray for a North end zone expansion.

 

I didn’t add myself to the list until 2015 and I’m now in the 114,000 range. This was about the time my wife and I were talking about starting our family and my intention was to effectively give my future grandchildren a 30-year head start. For those not already on the list, I say go ahead and add yourself just so you can get a postcard from the Packers every year and watch yourself move up a few spots. It’s fun.

[MrTPlush]

Lets be real people. Aaron Rodgers disappears, we finally suck, and that list will fizzle so fast.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Lets be real people. Aaron Rodgers disappears, we finally suck, and that list will fizzle so fast.

 

That is almost verbatim what many fans said when Favre was getting near the end of the line. It may not be probable that yet another All-World QB will succeed Rodgers, but it isn't impossible either.

[pacopete4]

Lets be real people. Aaron Rodgers disappears, we finally suck, and that list will fizzle so fast.

 

That is almost verbatim what many fans said when Favre was getting near the end of the line. It may not be probable that yet another All-World QB will succeed Rodgers, but it isn't impossible either.

 

The chances are very slim though. I even question if GB has a team if the Favre era doesn't happen. That wave of good teams help build Lambeau to present day and Rodgers era teams are building a mini city around it. Hopefully that helps stabilize it if we do have some down years.

[TURBO]

I'm not a Packers fan, but when my son was born in 1995, I added him to the list. He is now in the 9,000's.

 

When he was added, the ridiculous seat tax wasn't in effect yet.

[nodakfan17]

Part of me wishes they’d charge another seat license fee just to get tickets out of the hands of the thousands of ‘fans’ who get their season tickets and immediately run them over to a third party distributor for a quick profit. But yes, the concept is rediculous - charging someone for the right to buy something.