Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

printable version

Extra Points

Articles from around the Web



25 Jun 2009

Packers, Jennings Agree to $27 Million Extension

The Packers have extended receiver Greg Jennings’ current contract in a major way, adding three years and $27.535 ($16 million guaranteed) to what was a four-year, $2.85 million rookie deal. If you want to know more about the rookie contract, look up the word “bargain” in the dictionary, as Jennings has put up elite numbers in the last two years. In 2008, he averaged 16.2 yards per catch and 4.2 YAC, which was emblematic of his transition with Aaron Rodgers to more air yards and potentially bigger plays (2007 numbers: 17.4 average, 7.7 YAC). Jennings ranked second in DVOA in ’07, “regressing” to 12th in 2008. The good news for Jennings is that his extension will expire after  2012, leaving him in line for a rare second big contract before he’s 30– usually for superstars, the progression goes something like: Rookie Deal/(Possible Franchise Tag)/MegaBlowoutSuperDollars!!!/Pre-Retirement Backslide, unless you’re DeAngelo Hall and you can just keep fooling teams. Jennings isn’t in line to fool anyone – this is a good deal for everyone involved.

Posted by: Doug Farrar on 25 Jun 2009

25 comments, Last at 29 Jun 2009, 10:59am by Eddo

Comments

1
by Temo :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 11:40am

I'd go so far as to say the Packers got a great deal here. They just locked up a Pro-Bowl caliber receiver through his prime years for less than market values.

2
by Dean :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 12:01pm

If this was Philadelphia, everybody would say that the Eagles were cheap and ripping off/taking advantage of their players, and that the contract will cause disharmony in the locker room in a few years when Jennings realizes he's underpaid.

I think it's a great deal for both sides, and if Jennings is a baby about it in a few years, then that's his problem. Hopefully, he'll be more intelligent then the Lito Shepherds and Sheldon Browns of the world.

5
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 3:00pm

This is a 3-year extension, not one of those 7-year fleecings the Eagles like to pull off. This deal actually makes very good sense for the player, in both the short and long terms.

6
by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 5:56pm

Yes, one of those fleecings the Eagles pull off.

You know, the ones where they replaced a contract where a guy's earning ~$200-300K/year with 3 years remaining with one where he's earning 5 times as much.

Why is it the Eagles get criticized for "fleecing" a guy when the Packers kept Jennings until the last year of his rookie contract, earning basically the NFL minimum, before giving him serious money? Why haven't the Packers been "fleecing" Jennings for the past two years (*)?

(*: note, CBA changes prevented long term extensions until a player's third year, but prior to that, the Eagles had signed rookies to extensions as early as their second year. Reggie Brown, for instance, essentially never played under a rookie contract.)

12
by tuluse :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 11:54pm

The contracts aren't fleecing, but they are stupid in a way. Which is almost no player who plays at a pro-bowl level will be happy with the deal he signed 5 years into it. It's more of a perception problem than actual value problem, but it's still a problem.

15
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Fri, 06/26/2009 - 8:46am

The Eagle get criticized for this while the Packers don't for the exact reason I said -- this deal actually makes good long-term sense for the team and the player. The loooong-term extensions that the Eagles like to do are almost guaranteed to cause dissention if the player turns out to be good. Not even great, just good.

The Packers made Jennings play 3 years of his rookie deal. I'm not sure what's so out of the ordinary about that. As you said, they can't even do a deal much earlier than this. Negotiating a deal prior to that means that both sides are dealing with incomplete information as to how good the player is likely to become. And that's how bad deals get struck.

18
by Pat (filler) (not verified) :: Fri, 06/26/2009 - 2:54pm

The loooong-term extensions that the Eagles like to do are almost guaranteed to cause dissention if the player turns out to be good. Not even great, just good.

As a note, the "loooong" extensions aren't actually that long. They seem long because they're being done way early into a contract. They're typically 5 or 6 year extensions, which is the equivalent of signing someone to their next contract. The Jennings extension here is actually really short, which is surprising.

Really? Then why have they done so many of them, and yet the only guys who've really complained are Sheldon Brown and Sheppard? You don't hear Greg Lewis or Reggie Brown complaining. Shawn Andrews has said he doesn't care, and if he does well at tackle this year, his contract will almost certainly be revisited.

Honestly, the thing to remember about the Sheppard/Brown contracts is this: Both Sheppard and Brown believe they are better corners than they actually are.

The Packers made Jennings play 3 years of his rookie deal. I'm not sure what's so out of the ordinary about that.

There's nothing "out of the ordinary" about it, but it wasn't fair. Jennings has been playing at an elite level, and being paid peanuts. Had they extended him last year, it would've been more fair for Jennings.

Negotiating a deal prior to that means that both sides are dealing with incomplete information as to how good the player is likely to become

You always are dealing with incomplete information. That's how Jevon Kearse gets signed to a huge contract by the Eagles. That's how LeCharles Bentley gets a ton of money without playing a down for the Browns. That's how TO gets an extension from the Cowboys and gets released a year later.

Honestly, everyone talks about the Eagles signing guys early to ultra-long extensions as "rare," but it's not exactly rare. Most teams do it with quarterbacks,

19
by DrewTS (not verified) :: Fri, 06/26/2009 - 4:31pm

Of course you're always dealing with incomplete information. That doesn't mean that all levels of incompleteness are equivalent. Looking 2 years out is not the same as 10. Doing a 6 year extension for a player with 3 years left on his contract means you've now locked him in for the next 9 years. No one can possibly guess what the state of the market will be in 9 years, or what the player's overall performance will be in 9 years. Whoever guesses wrong is going to be unhappy. The team can back out of the deal and cut its losses; the player can't.

If I had to guess why Reggie Brown and Greg Lewis aren't complaining, it's probably because they're not very good. So basically, the system the Eagles are using keeps the bad players happy and the good players ticked off. Obviously, what they're doing as a whole works up to a point, because the Eagles have been pretty successful this decade. But I still don't see how setting yourself up for these conflicts is a net gain.

25
by Eddo :: Mon, 06/29/2009 - 10:59am

Let's close this tag...

3
by Keith (not verified) :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 2:02pm

Yay!

That is basically all I have on this subject.

4
by knappster :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 2:34pm

I second that.

7
by Theo :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 7:17pm

Michael Jackson has died.
That's just sad.
The idea that a so talented person was so... what's the word... so... damaged.

That guy deserved better.
Hm. Not that anyone 'deserves' any better than the other, but this guy was so messed up by childhood, I just felt sorry.

8
by Anonymouser (not verified) :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 8:45pm

So, how about football?

9
by Rufus Ruffcutt (not verified) :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 10:53pm

Michael Jackson?

played WR for the Browns and Ravens?

wow, and so young too. about 40 y.o.

16
by Noah of Arkadia :: Fri, 06/26/2009 - 9:49am

The Eagles fleeced him

10
by justanothersteve :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 11:15pm

Woo woo! One happy Pack fan here.

11
by Raiderjoe :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 11:45pm

why does one poster wriite about Michale Jakcosn? Is poster dfunk? Aask about me and wuestion is yes I am. But not write about Jakcosn. hear to talk about football. good move by Pakxcers getting Greg Russell here. Goiod Wr. Nice signing here. Good Wr to draft is playing fnatatsy football in the 09 good. take him before Driber. Parker going to be good again

13
by Dan :: Thu, 06/25/2009 - 11:59pm

Wow.

14
by Raiderjoe :: Fri, 06/26/2009 - 12:06am

whoopps meant to wite Jennikns

17
by chubbypuppy (not verified) :: Fri, 06/26/2009 - 12:24pm

Congrats to the Packers and Jennings.

Side note:

Eagles fans slay me. This all encompassing persecution complex is becoming the football equivalent of Cubs fans.

You have a winning team! A great organization! Enjoy it!

20
by justanothersteve :: Sat, 06/27/2009 - 12:18am

Maybe because the Eagles, like the Cubs, can't win a championship. Last time they won one was in 1960. Hang in there, Eagles fans. It could be worse. You could be Lions fans.

21
by vague (not verified) :: Sun, 06/28/2009 - 12:29am

Lets leave MJ off this site...but more importantly lets leave the Cubs and Cub fans off of here. Now I have to go watch my dvd of Woods' 20k game and cry.

Now on topic as a Bears fan this jennings re-signing makes me very sad. I see the NFC north becoming a very strong division and all Favre's TD passes to Briggs might not be enough to put us on top!

23
by Raiderjoe :: Sun, 06/28/2009 - 2:26pm

Eagles last win champtionship of nfl in 2960 season and Liosn last won they one in 1957, so not much of a difference between two teams when yolu looking at titles. Eagles make playoffs more times in Superbowl error so probably cause they fans more heartburn than Lions cvause for Lions fans,.

22
by I am excellent at making love (not verified) :: Sun, 06/28/2009 - 1:39pm

The reason that this contract won't cause dissent in the Packers locker room in a few years is that there currently aren't any young players on the team who will be worth the average salary for a starter at their respective position.

Thank you Ted Thompson!

24
by Anonymous* (not verified) :: Mon, 06/29/2009 - 10:45am

Gonna try to end any unended italics tags. The Packers usually have a policy of not signing a renewal until a year before the contract ends (with an exception made for the starting QB, like most teams). That was why they had to trade Javon Walker, because he didn't want to wait that long.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
To skip this, please log in.