- Congrats: 2 These Raider Fans gave Jeremyturner1976 high fives (total 2):
- Raiders Baby • chucker
-
chucker » Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:07 pm
In a few years that Mahomes' contract won't sniff the top 5. And it's a 10 year deal so it's going to seem much cheaper as the years go on, barring a catastrophic injury.Jeremyturner1976 wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:02 pm:They added so many rookies last year and seemed to come out of it well. I definitely think Mahommes/Reid/Their GM are the most likely to see success while footing a top 5 cost QB contract.
I really needed them to miss on those rookies.
Jeremyturner1976 » Mon Feb 06, 2023 2:28 pm
It is already reasonable except for a couple of of years down the road when it gets closer to 60.chucker wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:07 pm:In a few years that Mahomes' contract won't sniff the top 5. And it's a 10 year deal so it's going to seem much cheaper as the years go on, barring a catastrophic injury.
signal » Mon Feb 06, 2023 2:30 pm
One can only hope that he fires his agent and then decides he needs more money as soon as others pass him by. It does happen, and hope he bleeds the Chiefs dry.chucker wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 12:07 pm:In a few years that Mahomes' contract won't sniff the top 5. And it's a 10 year deal so it's going to seem much cheaper as the years go on, barring a catastrophic injury.
chucker » Mon Feb 06, 2023 2:37 pm
That's the kicker with long term contracts - players and agents so often muscle their way to new deals early so they are not really the long term financial certainty for the team that they seem to be when signed. There have been a number of guys who've been on solid veteran deals that still strongarmed their way to new deals with 2 years or more left on the existing contract. Rodgers did that at least once. Donald did it. Waller got a new deal with 2 years left.signal wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 2:30 pm:One can only hope that he fires his agent and then decides he needs more money as soon as others pass him by. It does happen, and hope he bleeds the Chiefs dry.
HesterLayes » Mon Feb 06, 2023 2:47 pm
There is zero chance plays on that contract forever barring a major major injury.IdaRaider » Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:23 pm
I sure hope soJRaider17 wrote Sun Feb 05, 2023 3:00 pm:I think all this Rodgers smoke is complete bs.
heavyD » Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:59 pm
I expect Mahomes will as well once his salary is surpassed by several QB's, all of which are not as good as he is. He really has all the leverage as well because if he sits out the Chiefs aren't going to go far with their backup which is always a veteran on the cheap.chucker wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 2:37 pm:That's the kicker with long term contracts - players and agents so often muscle their way to new deals early so they are not really the long term financial certainty for the team that they seem to be when signed. There have been a number of guys who've been on solid veteran deals that still strongarmed their way to new deals with 2 years or more left on the existing contract. Rodgers did that at least once. Donald did it. Waller got a new deal with 2 years left.
HesterLayes » Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:27 pm
I agree..pfish57 wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:25 pm:Cowterd said GB wants two first & two seconds....Hell to the Noooooo!!!!
Officerrob » Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:31 pm
If Rodgers decides he wants to be traded, he will hold the "trade me where I want or I'll retire" card over the Packers. They won't get close to 2 first and 2 seconds. A QB of Rodgers age and stature doesn't need a no trade clause, he still has leveragechucker » Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:35 pm
This is why the no trade clause concept doesn't really matter much - players can just refuse to show up, and it's as good as a no trade clause.Officerrob wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:31 pm:If Rodgers decides he wants to be traded, he will hold the "trade me where I want or I'll retire" card over the Packers. They won't get close to 2 first and 2 seconds
HesterLayes » Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:38 pm
You copied my thoughts..Officerrob wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:31 pm:If Rodgers decides he wants to be traded, he will hold the "trade me where I want or I'll retire" card over the Packers. They won't get close to 2 first and 2 seconds. A QB of Rodgers age and stature doesn't need a no trade clause, he still has leverage
BlackShield » Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:42 pm
lolpfish57 wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:25 pm:Cowterd said GB wants two first & two seconds....Hell to the Noooooo!!!!
Ordos » Mon Feb 06, 2023 5:10 pm
...or you could just offer that to Chicago to go get Youngpfish57 wrote Mon Feb 06, 2023 4:25 pm:Cowterd said GB wants two first & two seconds....Hell to the Noooooo!!!!
rich72 » Mon Feb 06, 2023 5:18 pm
I wrote it earlier in another thread.16 to 88 wrote Sun Feb 05, 2023 10:06 pm:Where is it written that we can't draft a QB and have Rodgers as our starter.
This is not mutually exclusive. Rodgers/Love.
Of course they have a few QB's on there big board and it would just depend on if they are there when we select or close enough to them for a trade. I just wouldn't want to acquire him if that means giving up a boatload of picks and mortgaging the future. Giving up a pick, as in one, or a couple, as in a 2nd and a 5th and having out's in the contract would seem reasonable to me...