-
Big Decision: Quarterback contracts
What should the Bears do?
LINK to the article Big Decision: Quarterback contractsFirst in a series of important offseason issues facing NFC North teams: Quarterbacks are the most important players in the game. They're also, on average, the highest paid. Those undeniable facts could make for a significant offseason of contract news in the NFC North.
As we discussed in the fall, and as the chart documents, three of our starting quarterbacks are nearing the expiration of their contracts. I would classify two of the situations as urgent, albeit for different reasons. The third is the most undervalued of the bunch.
NFC North QB Contracts
| Player | Year signed | Years | Total | Guarantee | Expires after |
| Matthew Stafford | 2009 | 6 | $72M | $41.7M | 2014 |
| Aaron Rodgers | 2008 | 6 | $65M | $20M | 2014 |
| Jay Cutler | 2009 | 5 | $49.9M | $20M | 2013 |
Could Aaron Rodgers, Jay Cutler and Matthew Stafford all sign new contracts before the start of the 2013 season? I wouldn't rule it out and, no matter how you look at it, all three must have new contract parameters -- even if it means a franchise tag -- over the next 26 months.
I've tried to minimize the focus on contract issues in recent years because, for the most part, teams have kept the players they wanted most. The cash matters only to the owners, players and agents. As third-party observers, financial specifics are relevant only if they present a unique challenge to the salary cap.
The sheer size of contracts for starting quarterbacks, combined with a projected flat cap during much of this collective bargaining agreement, makes these situations quite relevant. Stafford and Cutler are in urgent situations, requiring franchise-altering decisions to be made perhaps before they throw their next pass, while Rodgers' contract is so outdated that his annual average is about half of what the New Orleans Saints paid Drew Brees last summer.
We'll start with Stafford, who was drafted No. 1 overall in 2009 -- two years before the NFL dramatically lowered the ceiling on rookie contracts. The Detroit Lions have already renegotiated his original six-year, $72 million deal twice to delay the accompanying salary-cap headache, but it probably will come to a head this offseason.
Stafford is projected to count at least $20.32 million against the Lions' 2013 cap, close to the figure that forced the Lions to give receiver Calvin Johnson a record-breaking extension last spring to relieve the cap hit. Lions general manager Martin Mayhew is already on record saying he would like to get Stafford extended as well, and the question is how much of a premium the Lions will have to pay.
Stafford's rookie contract averaged $12 million annually and included $41.7 million in guarantees. Regardless of the CBA changes, agent Tom Condon will want to build on the original deal. Considering that Stafford will turn 25 next month, you wonder if he will finish his career with more on-field earnings than any player in NFL history. Even if he signs a six-year contract this offseason, he'll be only 31 when it expires. Brees was 33 when the Saints signed him to his five-year, $100 million deal.
Brees' deal will serve as the benchmark for Rodgers, who just turned 29. Rodgers' contract runs through the 2014 season, and he has expressed a desire to sign one more contract before he retires. His situation isn't exactly comparable to Brees, whom the Saints made their franchise player prior to the agreement, but a $20-million annual average isn't out of the question if the sides hold discussions this spring.
Rodgers is due to earn $9.75 million in 2013 and $11 million in 2014. From the Green Bay Packers' perspective, the only urgency is the assumption of a rising price tag over time. The longer they wait, the more expensive the deal probably will be.
The Bears, meanwhile, can't wait too much longer on Cutler. Usually a team doesn't want to enter the season with an established quarterback entering his final contract year, but Cutler's situation is complicated by the arrival of new coach Marc Trestman -- who will make Cutler better and more expensive if he is the quarterback guru the Bears believe he is.
In that sense, it might make sense for Cutler to be patient for a deal in hopes an improved 2013 season enhances his value. The Bears, in turn, might want to see how the Cutler-Trestman dynamic plays out before making a long-term decision.
At some point -- maybe in a few months, definitely with two years -- the futures of all three quarterbacks will be addressed decisively. We'll be waiting.
-
-
If Trestman likes Cutler, I think we should extend him NOW. Under Trestman, in a contract year and with a better OL, his price could end up way higher.
-
High Fives / Like - 1 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
I really believe that Emery is already working on an extension
-
High Fives / Like - 1 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
you extend him immediately. I feel like Cutler is in no position of leverage. Trestman I am sure wants to work with Cutler, but would probably have no problem starting fresh with a new QB. And no other team is gonna open up their checkbook and give Cutler a monster contract. He's probably stuck here until he proves he's a franchise QB and he better hope the Bears are feeling generous.
Last edited by AtomicTommy; 01-23-2013 at 11:57 AM.
-
Junior Member
Wouldn't surprise me if they had a contract sitting waiting in the wings to be offered to Cutler and they're waiting on the nod from Trestman to show it or not.
-
I dont think its hard to say Lions and Pack want to lock up their qbs long term. Rogers is just amazing and Lions need stability at the position and Stafford is very young. I think Cutler is the one we will have to let play out this season before selling the farm for him. I love Cutler but new coach, new gm=new expectations. Since he has been here, some fault on him and some on gm mismanagement on offense, offense is still a black hole. He has to get us into a top 15 offense before I show him the money
-
High Fives / Like - 1 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
If you let JC play out the final year and the Bears don't sign / TAG him,cause he WAS JAY AGAIN, better pray for an 0 - 16record so they can draft a QB ( who ?). Really, what QB in the leauge that a team lets go would be an upgrade? Flynn? Really who would it be? Now if the Bears wait and JC has a very good year, it could be a Forte type of thing. He doesn't sign, they TAG him, which will be ALOT. Don't know what a TAG price will be then, but it's alot. Best thing that could be done is extend him now, and develop a QB for the future. Say 2 to 4 year extension. But no matter what, the Bears NEED to find and develpo a QB for the future.
The passion of a few, to rule the many, that's Washington D.C.. Where else was that said before, about whom?
-
High Fives / Like - 2 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
I said it in a prev thread, if Cutler isn't capable of bringing playoffs/SB's to the Bears there is no reason to resign him. What's the difference of Cutler/Orton? Cutler a better qb yes, did either get the team to a playoffs more then 1 x; no. Bring in a qb that trestman thinks he can build up if Cutler isn't the answer.
Guys like Rivers/Romo/Cutler put teams in a bad situation b/c they are good/franchise guys that seem to find a way to prevent the team from going deep into the playoffs. So what is the real value, what is the teams real goals, and how do the two sync up?
-

Originally Posted by
yttocs
If you let JC play out the final year and the Bears don't sign / TAG him,cause he WAS JAY AGAIN, better pray for an 0 - 16record so they can draft a QB ( who ?). Really, what QB in the leauge that a team lets go would be an upgrade? Flynn? Really who would it be? Now if the Bears wait and JC has a very good year, it could be a Forte type of thing. He doesn't sign, they TAG him, which will be ALOT. Don't know what a TAG price will be then, but it's alot. Best thing that could be done is extend him now, and develop a QB for the future. Say 2 to 4 year extension. But no matter what, the Bears NEED to find and develpo a QB for the future.
how many number one over all pick qbs are playing in the superbowl?
-
I BELIEVE ( my take) if Orton was the QB this year (12) the Bears would have had a worse record, but hence, a better pick. With the O that the Bears had last year, you need a Scrambler for a QB to play QB with the O that was displayed.
The passion of a few, to rule the many, that's Washington D.C.. Where else was that said before, about whom?