Packergeeks to mediate Grant talks?

by

Ok, just kidding, but it seems someone ought to help us all get past the Packers’ apparent frugality and what may be posturing by Grant’s agent. While I do think the Packers offer was low and seemingly unfair if Grant’s agent is being truthful, I also think it is sort of silly for Grant’s agent to not come back with a counter-counter-offer, if you will. (If 4-5 offers are made, technically, shouldn’t the first offer be the first offer, the 2nd offer be the counter-offer, the 3rd be the counter-counter-offer, the 4th the counter-counter-counter-offer, etc?). Negotiations rarely end after 1 or 2 offers, there is usually some back and forth. Now, I can understand the agent’s frustration with not hearing back from the Pack until apparently one week before training camp – that’s ridiculous as the team has had 6 months to take care of this and waiting so long to me, is a clear indication that signing Grant is not the priority for the team that it should be. But still, it is the agent’s job now to come back with a counter-counter-offer, even if it’s the same as his first offer.

Here is my crack at mediating here (keep in mind, I recommend this at the risk of revealing that this particular Packergeek is decidedly not well-schooled in the world of contracts):

  • $4million signing bonus – guaranteed
  • Base salary (5yrs) =  $1.5 million 2008, $2M 2009, $2.5M 2010, $3M 2011, $3.5M 2012 (Grant would only get this annual $500,000 raise if he rushes for 1000 yards the previous year)
  • Incentive of $500,000 additional per year for going over 2000 yards combined rushing/receiving
  • Incentive of $500,000 per season for going over 1500 yards rushing
  • Incentive of $500,000 additional per year for making the Pro Bowl
  • Incentive of $1 million additional per year for being a top 5 NFL rusher
  • Incentive of $100,000 additional per year for having fewer than 3 lost fumbles
  • Incentive of $100,000 additional per year for having more than 15 touchdowns
  • Incentive/bonus of $100,000 per year the Packers make the playoffs and he’s been the starter
  • If injured, he keeps signing bonus and prorated salary for that year

This would enable him to earn a total of over $4 million in his first year if he has a really good season, which would be about right. He could earn quite a bit more, however, toward the latter years of the contract. He wouldn’t be earning LT money here, which he shouldn’t, but he would have the ability to earn quite a bit of money if he plays well, so he wouldn’t be poor (though Latrell Sprewell might beg to differ).

Now again, this is obviously simplistic and for some of you more familiar with player contracts, this may in fact look ridiculous. To comfort you people, I’ll add this:

Therein, herewith both parties have reached an accord, howwith, whereas thine knoweth the aforementioned said dollar amount should heretofore be agreedeth upon and thou hath signeth on this the 29th day of July, ‘Julio’ in Spanish, in the year Two Thousand and Eight as witnessed by the esteemed, Packers-GM-in-waiting, Packergeeks.

Get in there and get it done guys!

About these ads

30 Responses to “Packergeeks to mediate Grant talks?”

  1. Ron La Canne Says:

    Andy,

    Back at the “Sign Grant” post I answered your last response. The $4 mil and incentives make sense to me. Ryan Grant is too good and too important to the team to allow that moron, Russ Ball, to do this alone. It is time for us, the wise and knowing sages to take over this issue.

    By the way, Russ Ball is an IDIOT!

  2. Aaron Says:

    An idiot? He got all the draft picks in with the specter of an uncapped year in 2010. Not exactly something an idiot could navigate..

  3. Ron La Canne Says:

    No offense, but signing the draftees with position/round selected benchmarks already established by other teams doesn’t equal real negotiating. Dealing with a valuable player who has shown talent over that of virtually all other RB’s in the NFL during the period he had significant playing time does. This is a real test of his skill. His, what seems to be, inflexible offer is insulting to a good RB. A good negotiator would have found common ground to keep the negotiations amicable while they worked through the hard issues. Yes, agents like to go to the press, but that is not the tactic Grant’s rep uses ordinarily. In an interview on 1250 Sports in Milwaukee, he was obviously upset by the treatment he and Grant are receiving. Whether you think the Packers are right in playing hardball with Grant, the negotiations should at least prevent more negatives. Especially now.

    My opinion still is – Russ Ball is an IDIOT!

  4. Eric Mortensen Says:

    I think the offer that you came up with is a great idea and I think the contract will eventually end up a lot like that. The contract will be worked out eventually. While it sucks not having Grant for the beginning of camp I think it will all work out. Remember last season Grant wasn’t even with the team in training camp and he still had a good season. I think this will all be worked out in a week or two. At least Grant is a running back who in my opinion doesn’t need quite as much practice as other positions on the team. He obviously is pretty familiar with the scheme or he wouldn’t have done so well last season. I think the whole Grant situation will work out. The one positive out of this situation is that Jackson will get more practice. I think Jackson will be a very good #2 RB this season.

    At this point I think our biggest concern is the DT position. No one seems to be able to stay healthy. At this point the only DTs that aren’t hurt are Muir and the undrafted free agents brought in this offseason. If we can’t get over these injury problems at the DT position I think the Packers are in for a bad season since we won’t be able to stop the run and the pass defense will crumble next.

  5. Corey B Says:

    This post exemplifies the new level of blogging you guys have brought to the greatest team in the history of sport. Seriously.

  6. Aaron Says:

    Ron -
    Why is Ball’s offer inflexible? It’s an initial offer, one that would no doubt have been increased, before an idiot, desperate agent started whining about it to the press. As for “signing the draftees with position/round selected benchmarks already established” – please. Did you see Brohm’s contract? A pittance, and hardly close to what his peers signed for in the second round. Plus, you missed the whole point of my comment. You can dismiss the specter of an uncapped year, and no one seriously thinks it will happen – but if you think it was not part of every contract discussion Ball had with every rookies agent, you’re deluding yourself. Calling him and idiot is dismissive and small minded, and your other comments here at PackerGeeks show you are not that.

  7. Aaron Says:

    And yes – I plead hypocrisy in calling Herman an idiot as well. He is just pissing me off with his whining to the press.

  8. Ron La Canne Says:

    Sorry Aaron we will sill disagree. An uncapped year is only an issue when you have to spend it. It’s the same as my portfolio, it isn’t anything but paper untill it’s sold. All an uncapped year means to me is the Packers better lock up their future now. They will never compete with the big market teams.

    Actually, it is not the initial offer. The going in position Ball had was the minimum offer as a conditional (not sure this is the correct term) free agent and a promise to negotiate later. Talks broke down when the Packers held firm on the guarentee.

    Didn’t see or hear the actual numbers on Brohm.

  9. Aaron Says:

    We’ll agree that the Packers are the best then. ;)

  10. Mac G Says:

    My head is spinning just reading this post. Too much ESPN Favre/Manny/Titletown crap on TV. Thompson is a cheap ass, Grant’s agent is a dumbass for talking in the press and the Packers need to pay the man a fair market rate.

  11. sfhayes Says:

    Seriously, this is actually very smart. I like it. I’m working on a companion post that looks at the contract Atlanta gave Michael Turner. We’re thinking along the same lines here. And I agree with Aaron that Herman shouldn’t be complaining in the press. But I did a cursory look back at his press mentions over the years and this does seem to be the exception, as he contends, rather than the rule.

    If Grant’s final contract looks anything like this Andy should get 5 percent.

  12. Aaron Says:

    See, I keep hearing people wanting to use Turner’s contract as a jumping off point, but I think it’s completely off base. Turner has done it year in and year out for the last four years. Every week? No. But he’s done a hell of a lot more than sit for two and a half years and then had 8 good games.

  13. sfhayes Says:

    Really? I haven’t heard anyone wanting to use Turner’s contract as a comparison, but I’m with whoever has made that point. Turner has 1257 yards on 228 carries for a very solid 5.5 yards/attempt average. Grant has 956 yards on 188 carries for 5.1 yards/attempt. It’s not true that Turner has done it “year in and year out for the last four years.” He had 20 attempts as a rookie and just 57 as a second-year player.

    What’s more, his yards often came on third down in passing formations or late in the game, after the NFL’s top running back had worn down defenses and the Chargers were attempting run out the clock. That’s not to take anything away from him. He’s a good back.

    But Grant compares favorably. The Packers had no running game before Grant. As I’ve pointed out ad nauseum, he was the 2nd leading RB in the league during the time he started — behind only LT. And some of his good games came against stout running defenses — Minnesota (119 yards), Dallas (6.7 yards/carry), Seattle.

    Ryan Grant produced, week in and week out, when he was THE GUY. How many games was Michael Turner THE GUY? He started once in four years.

    Honestly, given the zone blocking scheme the Packers run, if you gave me the choice of Ryan Grant or Michael Turner today, without regard to salary, I’d take Ryan Grant without a moment’s hesitation.

    Anyway, I’ll work a lot of this into the post and you can pick at my reasoning there, too.

  14. Aaron Says:

    Yes, Grant has produced, as did Turner when given a chance. Did Turner say it was an ‘insult’ when the Chargers didn’t trade him last year to any of the several teams that inquired, ensuring a huge pay raise? No. He shut his mouth and did his job.

    I understand Grant produced, but this rushing to pay him a kings ransom is ludicrous.

  15. awhayes Says:

    Aaron – do you think Grant should play this year for the $370,000 tender – and not negotiate a new contract? I’m not sure how you could make a reasonable argument for that.

    I don’t think my proposal at all is a “Kings Ransom”. It would be a fairly modest contract that would reward the guy for producing and not break the bank if he doesn’t pan out. To me, taking a risk on Grant, someone who produced at an easy Pro Bowl level in his only NFL action, makes more sense right now than taking a long-term contract risk on a veteran (who, by the way, is already 28 years old), who is competing for his starting job.

    Wouldn’t you agree that Grant’s contract should be at least as valuable as Poppinga’s contract?

  16. sfhayes Says:

    Turner wasn’t underpaid nearly as much as Grant, knew he was going to be an unrestricted free agent, and hadn’t turned around his team’s running game by performing at a Pro-Bowl level for more than half of the season. Turner was a luxury for the Chargers — maybe the 8th or 9th most important offensive player on the team. Grant was, at worst, the third most important player on the Packers’ offense last year (to Favre and, if we’re stretching, to Clifton).

    And no one is suggesting Grant should be paid a king’s ransom. Ahman Green got $23 million ($7 million guaranteed) for four years with Houston. I think they overpaid for an aging and oft-injured RB, but someone who had done it for several years. Turner got $34 million for six years.

    No one is suggesting Grant should get LT money — $60 million ($21 guaranteed) for eight years — or even Clinton Portis money ($50.5 over eight years).

    But maybe Chester Taylor money? ($14.1 over four years with $5.6 guaranteed.) Or Julius Jones money? ($11.8 over four years w/$4 million guaranteed and a possible $4 million in incentives).

    If what Herman says is accurate, the Packers have offered Grant only $1.75 in guaranteed money. Insulting.

  17. Ron La Canne Says:

    Aaron,

    On the team you’ve got it. We need the Packers to minimize damage being done by the Favre insanity and play ball (to use a baseball term),

    Grant is needed in the RB position. It will be questionable without him. Jackson (big risk), Wynn (Still an unkown quantity) and Morency (injury prone – so far). The incremental difference in dollars berween Grant and the Packers should be the negotiating focus. $4 mil guarentee sounds good to me. Putting an arbitrary top is doing nothing to bring the sides closer. That’s fine if you don’t care if you lose him. (And Steve is right, Herman is not an agent who usually goes public) Herman’s complaining because Ball is not negotiating he is dictating and he is now officically frustrated, And so am I. Hence, do I need to repeat my feelings about one Russ Ball? I think not.

  18. Aaron Says:

    Agree that 4 mil guaranteed makes sense. What’s to say the Packers wouldn’t go there eventually? But Herman spouting of about Devin Hester just makes me think he is being completely unrealistic.

  19. Aaron Says:

    Andy -”do you think Grant should play this year for the $370,000 tender – and not negotiate a new contract? I’m not sure how you could make a reasonable argument for that.” – No, I think he deserves a new deal, but I don’t consider the Packer’s offer ‘insulting’. That statement in and of itself is preposterous. http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/i-hope-to-be-as-insulted-one-day

  20. sfhayes Says:

    Prediction: Within two days we will be hearing about how great Brandon Jackson and DeShawn Wynn look in camp.

  21. Ron La Canne Says:

    Steve,

    Check the last question in Mc Carhy’s press conference yesterday.

    http://www.packers.com/news/releases/2008/07/28/1/

    I think I am witnessing the rebirth of Jim Taylor.

  22. Ron La Canne Says:

    P.S. on RB’s

    I realize I left Noah Heron (no speed, questionable power) and Kregg Lumpkin (Who?) off my depth chart opinions. Both are crap shoots. Unless Grant doesn’t sign, then one of them has a rooster spot.

  23. Aaron Says:

    Recollection: Jackson looked great the last month and a half of last season… ;)

  24. sfhayes Says:

    Jackson looked “great” but Grant is unproven? Hmmm…

  25. Ron La Canne Says:

    Much like Travis Jervey spelling Dorsey Levins?

  26. Aaron Says:

    Huh? Link to Jackson’s holdout where his agent insults the Packers?
    Notice the smiley? It was a joke – one that made you reach…

  27. Aaron Says:

    Link to where Jackson is refusing to sign a contract and his agent is lambasting the Packers in public? Did you happen to notice the smiley in my last comment? It was a joke, one that made you reach rather badly…

  28. sfhayes Says:

    Nah, I was smiling when I typed, just forgot the smiley. It was a joke. (Truth is, I don’t know how to do a smiley.)

  29. joshywoshybigfatposhy Says:

    i’ve got a contract offer.

    i’ll beef up on protein shakes and steroids, begin a heavy (but only pre-game and halftime) coke habit, and run through/over defenses for 3 or 4 games until my blood test results come back and i get suspended for the year.

    i’d do all that for a lifetime supply of milwaukee’s best kosher dill midget pickles. and the chance to put the hurt on sharper in a drug-crazed touchdown run.

    i think that’s more than reasonable — like $15,000 in pickles for 25 touchdowns in three games, gives them time to work out a deal with Grant, helps local business, etc.

    okay. here are my attempts at a smiley. let’s hope one of ‘em works:
    :) (: ;) (;

    (yes, this was a deliberate attempt to bring the ‘level of blogging’ back down to earth)

  30. joshywoshybigfatposhy Says:

    RESULT!!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: