Jimmy G reportedly gets his deal:

[rochrist]

I can see how the quarterback would always be the highest paid, but I mean, why does the ceiling of what "highest" is keep rising, in a insular league that can cap the maximum it'll pay for services, particularly when that league has no competitors. In other words, why wouldn't the league decree the highest salary per year allowable for any of its franchises is $8 million per position. It's not as if the players would have any choice but to accept it, as there is no alternative market for their skills outside the NFL.

Because revenues keep rising and the cap keeps rising. And the league is made up of 32 competitors.

 

[rochrist]

How the hell do you pay anyone else???
What's up with these dummies?

Ok : QB= Check
Everyone else, Uh we broke.

When will they learn.

It can work, just not a lasting formula. IMO

Groom your sons to become an NFL QB... And rob these idiots

They still have close to 100 million in cap room.

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

He won't be the next tom brady. c'mon it's going to be a LONG time before we ever see somebody like Tom. However I've seen enough of Jimmy to know he's going to be a damn good qb in the NFL, the type of guy you pass the torch to like Montana to Young, Favre to Rodgers. It just wasn't meant to be for us.

But how do you afford a team to support him?

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

They still have close to 100 million in cap room.

We know it's a recipe for disaster.
You think he's the only one who want to get paid?

Who knows, maybe?
I don't see it. Greed, breeds greed.

Let's see how it works out.
Coach's want to get paid, receivers, RB's...

You think Grop is the only one who wants to get paid?
I guess we'll see.
I don't expect a miracle, money cure.

 

[chumpchange]

Because revenues keep rising and the cap keeps rising. And the league is made up of 32 competitors.

Yes, but why not "cap" the cap, and keep the revenues? I get that the teams are in competition with each other, but they're also parts of a single corporate entity which has no peers in market. McDonald's franchisees are also in competition with each other, but that doesn't stop the governing corporation from deciding the minimum and maximum cost for the product.

 

[Gronk]

I mean, ok. Whatever. I can’t say he “earned” it, but I understand why they’re paying him on potential. There was certainly no world in which they didn’t sign him and if front loaded this makes all the sense in the world even if they obviously “overpaid” based on production or any other conventional metric of contract negotiation.

As the salary cap era inches towards its 3rd decade, there are things we assume to be true that won’t be soon. Numbers get inflated, they get hard to follow, and it all seems outrageous. It’s happened in MLB and started to correct itself with a slooow “hot stove” as visible this year, it’s happening in NBA with the “max” deals that can make or kill you, so of course it’s happening in the NFL too and will correct itself somehow soon.

What the Pats have done in this nearly 2 decade run is a unique mastery of the economics of their era, and I don’t think that mastery is necessarily transferable to what comes next. Their inclination to dump players early and replace thru the draft and/or targeted veteran deals could fade while these big time “early” deals for potential dominate the post-draft deal contracts as the cap escalates and the rookie deals don’t keep up. It’s complicated, and having the guy that understand the 2020-2030s economics the same way BB has understood the 2000-2010s NFL will determine who dominates next.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Hey Jimmy, do us a favor over there. Stomp a hole in Philly in the playoffs

(Then sorry what we do to you in the SB... but that would be a hell of a SB!)

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I mean, ok. Whatever. I can’t say he “earned” it, but I understand why they’re paying him on potential. There was certainly no world in which they didn’t sign him and if front loaded this makes all the sense in the world even if they obviously “overpaid” based on production or any other conventional metric of contract negotiation.

As the salary cap era inches towards its 3rd decade, there are things we assume to be true that won’t be soon. Numbers get inflated, they get hard to follow, and it all seems outrageous. It’s happened in MLB and started to correct itself with a slooow “hot stove” as visible this year, it’s happening in NBA with the “max” deals that can make or kill you, so of course it’s happening in the NFL too and will correct itself somehow soon.

What the Pats have done in this nearly 2 decade run is a unique mastery of the economics of their era, and I don’t think that mastery is necessarily transferable to what comes next. Their inclination to dump players early and replace thru the draft and/or targeted veteran deals could fade while these big time “early” deals for potential dominate the post-draft deal contracts as the cap escalates and the rookie deals don’t keep up. It’s complicated, and having the guy that understand the 2020-2030s economics the same way BB has understood the 2000-2010s NFL will determine who dominates next.

In the 2000s-2010s economics, Brady has been an enormous advantage.

He's not the only QB in the league who's always been willing to work with the team to win, but there are plenty just about getting paid too.

Business cycle is overdue for the downturn, and it might have begun -- players should grab with both hands before people are ready to crucify them and the league* is asking them to "share the pain" of down revenues again.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

He needs to get at least one Super Bowl and one MVP to justify that money.

I'm doing what I always do when a Pats QB goes elsewhere, making SF my #2 team. Distant #2. And I guess tied with the Saints.

Bottom line if your helmet ain't metallic you ain't ****.

 

[bbobbo]

Yes, but why not "cap" the cap, and keep the revenues? I get that the teams are in competition with each other, but they're also parts of a single corporate entity which has no peers in market. McDonald's franchisees are also in competition with each other, but that doesn't stop the governing corporation from deciding the minimum and maximum cost for the product.

the 2011 CBA specifies that the players' share of revenue has to average 47% over the 10-year span of the agreement. if revenues keep going up, the salary cap follows.
.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

if revenues keep going up, the salary cap follows.
.

Big if there. Tellin' you guys, the league's got its problems, the economy's been on a winning streak that won't last forever, and those Jimmy G numbers aren't "percentage of team cap space"

But when have the 9ers ever been in cap trouble?

 

[MainePatsFan26]

5 years 137 million

And we only got a 2nd. ************

Well... San Francisco just sold themselves down the river. Jimmy G. has to play like Tom Brady or this contract devastates their chances at being competitive.

 

[MainePatsFan26]

Just remember guys: he’s way away from us now. Would rather have gotten a little fleeced in a trade than have him stay in the AFC.

One of the nice things about him being far away is that all the young talent is still over in the NFC.

Let's consider the group of talented younger(-ish) quarterbacks in the NFC: Wentz, Jimmy G., Goff, and Prescott. In the NFC, you've also got established veterans like Rodgers, Wilson, Newton, Ryan, and Brees around for at least a few more seasons. In the AFC, you've pretty much only got Brady and the rapist as legitimate quarterbacking powers. With some work, maybe throw Carr, Watson, or Luck into that top tier.

By dealing Jimmy G. to the NFC, we can continue to face few real threats in the AFC while also ensuring we have decent odds to restock when Brady retires. If Jimmy G. were in our conference, we'd likely be losing to that team year after year once Brady retires. As it stands, there aren't any standout young quarterbacks in the AFC.

With all this in mind, I hope we get a few more championship runs with Brady and then go into full blown tank mode so we can get a top pick and draft the quarterback of the future. If we get someone even halfway decent, they might be enough to climb back to the top of this very middling conference.

Over in the NFC, though, teams struggling are basically boned since there is a whole cavalcade of talent over there.

 

[bbobbo]

Big if there. Tellin' you guys, the league's got its problems, the economy's been on a winning streak that won't last forever, and those Jimmy G numbers aren't "percentage of team cap space"

But when have the 9ers ever been in cap trouble?

the NFL's current contracts with CBS, Fox, and NBC don't expire until 2022. those three networks pay the NFL about $3B per year.

ESPN pays about $2B per year for MNF (talk about overpaying). that contract ends in 2021.

DirectTV pays $1.5B per year for sunday ticket, and that ends in 2022.

Fox just signed a new 5-year deal to show TNF for $650M per year--that's up from the $450M per year that CBS and NBC were paying.

this year, Amazon paid the NFL $50M to stream TNF on Prime Video. that's up five-fold from last year, when twitter paid $10M.

so pretty much the NFL is guaranteed television revenues of around $7B per year through 2021. 2022 is the big question, when ESPN's MNF contract comes up for renewal. almost certainly they're not going to renew for $2B/year. however, that could be offset by increased streaming revenues.

jimmy g's contract ends in 2022, so the 49ers are fine for it salary cap-wise for most of it.
.

 

[Guts]

The NFC is a bloodbath the 49ers going to need to place pieces around Jimmy to get far. Their division alone is going to be crazy.

 

[Gronk]

In the 2000s-2010s economics, Brady has been an enormous advantage.

He's not the only QB in the league who's always been willing to work with the team to win, but there are plenty just about getting paid too.

Business cycle is overdue for the downturn, and it might have begun -- players should grab with both hands before people are ready to crucify them and the league* is asking them to "share the pain" of down revenues again.

I agree, and I’d certainly never begrudge any player for getting as much as he can in any negotiation while they still can.

I think the “Brady takes less” angle is a bit oversold...they hit on him at the perfect time in the sense that he was a late round pick making relative peanuts compared to other similar* (IMO he has no peers) players early on. The deal he got after ‘01 as a one year starter (5/32.5) was fair but also skewed any career long earnings compared to the top draft pick Mannings who had monster rookie deals larger than that before the rookie scale era. Brady’s restructures have typically involved large conversions of salary to up front bonuses that in any calculation put him near the top of the heap. His willingness to make his contract payouts malleable to the yearly needs of the team is what makes him unique. He’s at worst the 3rd highest paid player in NFL history. Like LeBron or Jordan, is he worth more? Sure! But he’s not exactly taking it on the chin in these deals.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Yes, but why not "cap" the cap, and keep the revenues? I get that the teams are in competition with each other, but they're also parts of a single corporate entity which has no peers in market.

Because the cap framework is set by the CBA with the NFLPA. Nothing about the how the cap works can change without the NFLPA agreeing to it.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I think the “Brady takes less” angle is a bit oversold...they hit on him at the perfect time in the sense that he was a late round pick making relative peanuts compared to other similar* (IMO he has no peers) players early on. The deal he got after ‘01 as a one year starter (5/32.5) was fair but also skewed any career long earnings compared to the top draft pick Mannings who had monster rookie deals larger than that before the rookie scale era. Brady’s restructures have typically involved large conversions of salary to up front bonuses that in any calculation put him near the top of the heap. His willingness to make his contract payouts malleable to the yearly needs of the team is what makes him unique. He’s at worst the 3rd highest paid player in NFL history. Like LeBron or Jordan, is he worth more? Sure! But he’s not exactly taking it on the chin in these deals.

Exactly. I once went to SportTrac (I believe that was it) to get the actual cash received figures for Manning and Brady. If you start with each guy's second contract, Brady's average annual cash received was only about $1 million less than Manning's average annual cash received (something like $13mil vs. $14mil). So the idea of Brady taking some sort of massive discount (at least relative to Manning) is very overblown.

 

[Flash]

I want to punch all the "Jimmy G isn't worth a first rounder! Patriots fans are deluded" crowd in the face...

 

[Gronk]

I want to punch all the "Jimmy G isn't worth a first rounder! Patriots fans are deluded" crowd in the face...

Equating his contract to his trade value is trafficking in fallacy. The 49ers had less leverage in contract talks with JG than the Pats did in trade talks. There was zero chance they dont sign him, and he balled out when they played him so there was no option but to pay him, It's a big deal but its one that's a "some info" gamble, no more no less. BB may have done him solid by sending him to a good spot, but the idea that we left picks on the table and ****ed up will always be pure speculation. CLE couldn't even trade for McCarron properly, so JGs contract means nothing in terms of trade compensation.