2020 NFL Draft Round 1 Discussion

[CheezWizHed]

Trades are "simple" for cap hit. The signing bonus is accelerated to the trading team (i.e. Packers) while the new team is responsible for base salary and during the year bonuses. I just googled for Rodger's contract info. The site I used, had the signing bonus, base salaries and other bonuses broken out nicely.

[brewcrewdue80]

Teams just aren't winning Super Bowls with QBs taking up massive percentages of their cap.

San Francisco was about ~8 minutes away from winning the Super Bowl last year with Garoppolo ($26.6M cap hit) taking up 12.87% of their cap.

 

In 2016 Tom Brady signed a contract that was worth an average of over $20M/year when the salary cap was $155M. I don't have the info of exactly what the cap hit was each year, but that average salary was over 13% of their cap. That's not much different than a $30M cap hit on a $200M cap. In 2015, Manning was taking up about 12% of the Bronco's cap.

 

Last year Garoppolo's cap hit represented just 8.65% of SF's cap and Maholmes took up just 2.36% of KC's cap...

 

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/2019/quarterback/

 

In the salary cap era, the highest percentage paid to the Super Bowl winning QB came in the first year of the cap, 1994, when Steve Young accounted for 13.1% of the 49ers cap...

 

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/02/nfl-quarterback-salaries-salary-cap-kirk-cousins-free-agency

 

The record for the highest cap hit percentage remains Steve Young’s 13.1% in that first season, when teams were still getting used to building rosters under a budget. Only four quarterbacks have ever won a Super Bowl while accounting for at least 11% of their team’s cap room: Young, Peyton Manning (twice), Tom Brady and Eli Manning.

 

The article is 2 years old so here are the cap percentages spent on QBs for the past 2 Super Bowl winners...

 

2018 - NE - Brady - 12.4%

2019 - KC - Mahomes - 2.36%

 

Here's what percentage of the cap Aaron Rodgers will eat up in the coming seasons...

 

2020 - 11.28%

2021 - 17.77%

2022 - 16.11%

 

Rodgers is under the historic max threshold of Super Bowl winning QBs for 2020 and there's nothing that can be done about 2021's ugly percentage. But if they trade him after this coming season that ugly number in 2022 and the also ugly 2023 number goes away.

 

There's pretty compelling evidence that you're chances of winning a Super Bowl are much better if you're allocating under 10% of your cap to your QB. The average cap percentage by Super Bowl winning QBs is around 7%. It allows you to field a better overall roster. And it definitely shows that the percentage of the cap that Rodgers will consume from 2021 through 2023, will make it very hard for the Packers to put together a deep roster. That goes away and opens a window of low QB cap dollars from 2022-2024 if Love pans out and allows Rodgers to be moved after this coming 2020 season.

 

Brady cap hit is a result of being team friendly with his contracts.

Mahomes is on a Rookie deal and you have gotta know within 2 or 3 years his contract will exceed 12%.

Same can likely be said in terms on Philly's win. Manning's SBs with Denver on cap hits over 12%. Newton his opponent in the SB win was over 12%

Matt Ryan in 2017 loss to Brady was 14.2% cap hit. Goff was a rookie contract in 2018. Garoppolo was 10.6% last season. 20+% for '18 and 13.5, 12.6, 11.9 these next 3 seasons.

Russell Wilson was in Rookie Contract years of his SBs and now is making 14% or more 2019-2023.

Salary cap has increased yearly by 10+mil since 2013. When you figure Rodgers cap hit does it consider the 10+mil the cap will increase for 2021 and 2022, if not more than 10mil? (I did just project and it seems to do so if not a little higher.)

 

The percentages on the site I'm looking at has Rodgers over your 12% argument for '21 and '22. but not '20 or '23.

 

It's just nitpicking imo. QBs are being paid for their Super Bowl potential. The list that got there but didn't win is ignoring to your argument on pct paid. Or the fact on Rookie contracts. From the looks of this research 12-14% is the new norm on pay for elite level QBs. Occasionally it creeps above.

[HiAndTight]

The percentages on the site I'm looking at has Rodgers over your 12% argument for '21 and '22. but not '20 or '23.

What site are you looking at? The NFL salary cap is as up in the air right now just as revenue is in question for all major sports. If the NFL doesn't have fans in the stadium, I've seen speculation the cap could drop 75 million, even 100 million. Before Covid the cap was expected to make a much larger jump to 240 or 250 in 2021. So it's next to impossible to have an exact number for what the cap is going to be right now. Either way, Rodgers is going to make up a disproportionately high pct of it.

 

It's just nitpicking imo. QBs are being paid for their Super Bowl potential. The list that got there but didn't win is ignoring to your argument on pct paid. Or the fact on Rookie contracts. From the looks of this research 12-14% is the new norm on pay for elite level QBs. Occasionally it creeps above.

 

The debate isn't about what the top paid QB's in the NFL are making, the debate is about how likely teams are to be able to pay a QB 12+ pct of the cap...1 of the 54 players on the roster and still win a SB.

Mahomes is on a Rookie deal and you have gotta know within 2 or 3 years his contract will exceed 12%.

 

Mahomes is a particularly unique talent, as Rodgers was. And if he goes on to win multiple SB's once he's making 40+ million a year, the equation will change.

Brady cap hit is a result of being team friendly with his contracts.

 

And this allowed the Patriots to spend money elsewhere.

Russell Wilson was in Rookie Contract years of his SBs and now is making 14% or more 2019-2023.

 

And when he was in the rookie years of his contract...again, the team was able to spend money elsewhere. They'd be able to sign an impact defender like Clowney for example if he was making less.

 

 

These high cap hits can work obviously if everything is going right. You mentioned Matt Ryan. He was the MVP that year, you had a couple of RB's on cheap contracts, they had a deep WR'er core that hadn't all gotten paid and they were a couple years into Shanahan's offense. And of course they still didn't win. And they dropped off immediately after and haven't been a contender since.

 

 

Of course it's possible to win with a QB who is the highest paid in the league...it's just going to be tougher and tougher, especially as we have to extend Clark, Bahktiari, Jones and any free agents.

 

And if we're going to win, Rodgers will have to play at a higher level than he has in the past couple seasons. Something that becomes increasingly unlikely in his later 30's...though obviously not impossible.

[LouisEly]

If the NFL doesn't have fans in the stadium, I've seen speculation the cap could drop 75 million, even 100 million.

It's possible this could happen, but I'm having a hard time picturing it simply because of all of the signing bonuses and guaranteed money that's been given out the last couple of years. With signing bonuses you can't just cut those high priced guys because of the cap hit, and roster bonuses were paid back on 3/20; actual cash salary per year has shrunk in lieu of signing bonuses and roster bonuses. Even with post-June 1st cuts you'd have huge cap hits carrying over to 2021. And then there's the issue of the 89% minimum spend per team, which I'm sure the union will have something to say about slashing the cap.

 

If they had to get down to that level, teams would have to cut so many good players and then it would be a free-for-all to try to sign as many guys as you could for league minimum, if they would even sign - many of the really good players might sit out a year feeling like the injury risk isn't worth playing for league minimum or greatly reduced salary. Quality of play - with so many good players cut and/or moving to different teams and/or sitting out - would suffer horribly. It would be a terrible on-field product.

 

I think the NFL would look to obtain some type of financing first before taking on that magnitude of salary cap cut simply because a drop of that much would have so many negative consequences. To give each team $60M would require financing of just under $2B; the league took in almost $9B in national revenue last year, so they could easily get financing for that especially with interest rates so low. Then just drop future caps by whatever the repayment is each year (say, $10M/year/team for seven years accounting for interest).

 

The Packers are sitting on something like $300M in cash, so they could be a beneficiary if it did happen and choose to lose money for a year without taking a big financial hit and/or cutting good players.

[brewcrewdue80]

Hi and Tight:

Without quoting the long response the site and Aaron Rodgers is this:

 

https://overthecap.com/player/aaron-rodgers/1085/

[adambr2]

Even if the NFL had to permanently conduct operations with no fans in the stadiums, it would still be a highly profitable organization from TV contracts alone. Players would just have to get used to $15-$20M annual top contracts in place of the current $30-$35M ones *gasp* and the league would have to become accustomed to several hundred million in annual profits rather than billions *oh the humanity.*

 

Of course rather than accept that new reality they would probably be focused on how to operate as a PPV type business going forward.

[HiAndTight]

Even if the NFL had to permanently conduct operations with no fans in the stadiums, it would still be a highly profitable organization from TV contracts alone. Players would just have to get used to $15-$20M annual top contracts in place of the current $30-$35M ones *gasp* and the league would have to become accustomed to several hundred million in annual profits rather than billions *oh the humanity.*

 

Of course rather than accept that new reality they would probably be focused on how to operate as a PPV type business going forward.

 

Nobody's talking about the humanity of it or any such nonsense. We're talking about what the ACTUAL impact on the salary cap could be moving forward. A factual discussion of what COULD happen and how that COULD impact the NFL in the future. Nobody ever presented it as a "oh, the poor NFL."

[HiAndTight]

If the NFL doesn't have fans in the stadium, I've seen speculation the cap could drop 75 million, even 100 million.

It's possible this could happen, but I'm having a hard time picturing it simply because of all of the signing bonuses and guaranteed money that's been given out the last couple of years. With signing bonuses you can't just cut those high priced guys because of the cap hit, and roster bonuses were paid back on 3/20; actual cash salary per year has shrunk in lieu of signing bonuses and roster bonuses. Even with post-June 1st cuts you'd have huge cap hits carrying over to 2021. And then there's the issue of the 89% minimum spend per team, which I'm sure the union will have something to say about slashing the cap.

 

If they had to get down to that level, teams would have to cut so many good players and then it would be a free-for-all to try to sign as many guys as you could for league minimum, if they would even sign - many of the really good players might sit out a year feeling like the injury risk isn't worth playing for league minimum or greatly reduced salary. Quality of play - with so many good players cut and/or moving to different teams and/or sitting out - would suffer horribly. It would be a terrible on-field product.

 

I think the NFL would look to obtain some type of financing first before taking on that magnitude of salary cap cut simply because a drop of that much would have so many negative consequences. To give each team $60M would require financing of just under $2B; the league took in almost $9B in national revenue last year, so they could easily get financing for that especially with interest rates so low. Then just drop future caps by whatever the repayment is each year (say, $10M/year/team for seven years accounting for interest).

 

The Packers are sitting on something like $300M in cash, so they could be a beneficiary if it did happen and choose to lose money for a year without taking a big financial hit and/or cutting good players.

 

 

I'm sure they'll figure something out so teams are able to fill their rosters and the best players aren't left taking massive paycuts.

 

My point is that it's impossible to guess what the cap is going to look like in the immediate future or the years to come based on the unknown right now.

[adambr2]

Even if the NFL had to permanently conduct operations with no fans in the stadiums, it would still be a highly profitable organization from TV contracts alone. Players would just have to get used to $15-$20M annual top contracts in place of the current $30-$35M ones *gasp* and the league would have to become accustomed to several hundred million in annual profits rather than billions *oh the humanity.*

 

Of course rather than accept that new reality they would probably be focused on how to operate as a PPV type business going forward.

 

Nobody's talking about the humanity of it or any such nonsense. We're talking about what the ACTUAL impact on the salary cap could be moving forward. A factual discussion of what COULD happen and how that COULD impact the NFL in the future. Nobody ever presented it as a "oh, the poor NFL."

 

I.. .never said that they were. I am not sure why you went here as I wasn't addressing it at anyone. I was just taking a little tongue-in-cheek jab at the NFL and the concept of then having to operate under a significantly smaller revenue model, nothing more.

[True Blue Brew Crew]

There will be no shortage of interest among teams with a need at QB for the services of a 37 or 38 year old Aaron Rodgers. Especially in places where the team's owner has any large say...

 

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1263146766477733889/photo/1

[nate82]

There will be no shortage of interest among teams with a need at QB for the services of a 37 or 38 year old Aaron Rodgers. Especially in places where the team's owner has any large say...

 

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1263146766477733889/photo/1

 

I am fairly certain Rodgers will end his career in San Francisco the team he actually wanted to be drafted by and play for.

[adambr2]

There will be no shortage of interest among teams with a need at QB for the services of a 37 or 38 year old Aaron Rodgers. Especially in places where the team's owner has any large say...

 

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/1263146766477733889/photo/1

 

I am fairly certain Rodgers will end his career in San Francisco the team he actually wanted to be drafted by and play for.

 

I could definitely see this happening. However the 49ers are a pretty well-run organization and I'm not sure how big of a premium they would pay to get Rodgers. Nor will they likely be picking in the early part of any round anytime soon.

[homer]

Packers should piggyback Rodgers, Boyle, and Love.

[HiAndTight]

 

I could definitely see this happening. However the 49ers are a pretty well-run organization and I'm not sure how big of a premium they would pay to get Rodgers. Nor will they likely be picking in the early part of any round anytime soon.

 

They are also a team that doesn't hesitate to trade picks for players. They had a 1st rounder heading into this draft and then I believe they didn't pick again until the 6th round prior to their trade with the Colts.

 

If Garappolo doesn't produce like they expect in the next year or two and the Packers DO make Rodgers available, I don't think they'd have much hesitation to make a move.

 

But go back 2 years and imagine talking about Brady ending up in Tampa? People would have thought that was a ridiculous idea. Tampa...much like SF, has used early 1st round picks to build a very talented roster.

 

How about the Chargers? 2 years from now, maybe Herbert has looked awful, they've still got a ton of talent up and down the roster and need just a QB. Hell, maybe the Browns will make sense. It's next to impossible to project where these teams will be in a year or 3 from now.

[CheezWizHed]

I think we should trade him to the Jets.