Packernet Podcast: Daily Green Bay Packers Podcast
Jul 21, 2026 · 41 min · 9 segments
Devonte Wyatt Gets a New Contract
No clips generated.
Available on Business plans.
Sign up to unlockLadies and gentlemen, welcome once again to the Packernet Podcast.
I am your host and resident panelist, as always, Ryan Schlipp.
Check us out online, packernet.com. Find me on Twitter, pack underscore data app.
So we're going to kind of just jump in the middle here for an odd reason, and that reason is...
I'm recording this several days early.
It's Sunday, and I have Monday's podcast already recorded, but something popped into my head, and I want to get it off my chest before I forget.
So this is going to be kind of an isolated thing, and then we'll be done with it.
And again, I'm stuck on the same general topic, but it is what it is.
It's fine.
I don't care.
So I kind of had this thought in regard to...
Because I'm seeing all these things, and I guess I just think of different ways to kind of say the same thing.
There are certain things where I feel like I come across as supremely arrogant.
And on one hand, I don't care, and on the other hand, you're just kind of wrong and not understanding.
So let me explain kind of both.
Number one is I am supremely confident in things that I'm supremely confident in, and I display that.
In other words, if I if I feel very confident in what I'm saying, I'm going to say it very confidently.
If I don't know, I'm probably going to put way too many caveats in there that are necessary explaining everybody.
I don't know.
I'm just guessing.
I'm just messing around.
Probably more than I need to do that.
Um, similar to, for example, if I say I know what my name is, it might not be a hundred percent.
Maybe I was kidnapped as a baby and my real name is something else.
I don't freaking know, but I'm going to be much more confident in telling somebody what my name is than telling somebody what, uh, you know, I don't know my freaking eyesight is.
I don't know.
It's, it's not 2020, but outside of that, I couldn't tell you.
Um, So that's number one.
There are certain things that are stats that I feel comfortable saying, and I'm going to say it without apology.
There's this feeling that everybody's views need to be treated equally, and that's just not true.
Some things are correct and some things are incorrect.
And that's just the way that it is.
And I don't have to pretend that people who are saying things incorrectly, I have to give them equal weight and equal time as though what they're saying is somehow profound.
I don't have to do that.
And I'm not going to do that.
And that sounds arrogant, but it's not.
It's just, you know, again, if somebody says one plus one is two and somebody says, I think one plus one is eight.
Yeah, I'm going to sound pretty arrogant in my dismissal of what you're saying.
So that's number one.
Number two is when it comes to other things, for example, and maybe I'll just play this because we're...
It's been sitting here as a tab forever.
I might as well get it out of here at some point.
And it's not a terrible demonstration.
So let's go ahead and play.
for the life of me i cannot figure why the packers are getting this much love and quite frankly this much glazing we're going to talk about it here make sure you guys subscribe and follow for more content
make sure you subscribe and follow first of all i disagree that they even are but let's see what he has to say
the pff has ranked jordan love as the sixth best quarterback in the nfl ahead of justin They got Caleb Williams all the way down at 13.
Jordan Love's a good player, but sixth best in the NFL.
We can't just rely on the advanced analytics.
We got to use eye tests.
He's still too inconsistent to be that high.
All right.
Now, I'm not going to go down that road.
I've done it a thousand times.
He's not inconsistent,
whatever.
But this is an area where, again, I could come in and I could say, here's some stats.
Here's this.
Here's all these different things.
And it would be.
So again, it could certainly sound condescending and all these different kinds of things.
While at the same time, somebody could come back with stats are extremely unreliable.
They, you know, in terms of they don't give you the full picture, the full context and all that kind of stuff.
Do you remember what I was saying about the NFL draft? And it's part of the reason why I give much more grace to Brian Gutekunst and all GMs for that matter.
Um, obviously there is some kind of a test, but the idea that you can ever do it perfectly is nonsense.
And so what I've, what I've essentially said is, I don't remember exactly what it was that I was saying back in the day, but it was, it was, you know, I get stuck on things.
So I said it numerous times at that time, it was my thing.
Um, But it was something to the effect of we can only know a certain percentage of all there is to know and everything else is essentially luck and guessing.
And so if you're if you're let's just say for an example, and I think this is maybe overly gracious, but let's let's just use this.
Let's say you are a perfect GM and you have scouted every single person, you know every single thing and how to weight it and all these different kinds of things.
You can only know perfectly, let's say, 50%.
So let's say a perfect GM knows 50% of the information and an imperfect GM knows 40% of the information or 30% or whatever.
Whereas we view it as perfect GMs or a really good GM would know 100%.
You can perfectly scout this guy and know exactly what they're going to be.
No, you can't.
The amount that we can't ever figure out is going to be a significant portion that I would argue is at least 50%.
It could be wrong, but let's just say for argument's sake that it's 50%.
This is kind of the same thing.
What I'm confident in, what I'm arrogantly confident in, isn't necessarily the percentage.
I'm not saying that the statistics are giving me a 100% picture, necessarily.
I think we could argue that it's a pretty high percentage.
especially if you're using the statistic properly in understanding what specifically it's telling you, as well as looking at multiple different statistics all kind of pointing in the same direction.
But even beyond that, the confidence isn't so much that the stats are giving me 100% of the picture.
It's that my clarity on this and how much I understand, I'm confident is much higher than his.
It's less to do with how brilliant I am or how much I know.
That's not the case at all.
This is why it might seem like a contradiction, because on one hand I sound like I'm an arrogant person who's talking like he's a genius, and on the other hand I'm calling myself an idiot all the time.
I'm not making a statement on my intelligence when I say I know X, Y, and Z. I'm simply stating what is and what can be known.
And then beyond that, what everybody else is saying that I can see as far as an argument is less than what I'm saying.
So you can say I'm... 90% an idiot, 80% an idiot, 20% an idiot, whatever it is you want to say, it doesn't really matter to me because all I can tell you definitively is that my clarity on this issue surpasses yours.
So when I say here is a very well thought out, fully formed opinion on a player, not based on my bias, but removing my bias and saying, what could I strip away? and try to nail down as clearly and as cleanly as I possibly can as an accurate picture here.
What could that look like? And I apply it to all the quarterbacks and all the other players, to various, you know, however it is you choose to do that.
And then you get a picture back.
For him to say stats can't tell you everything, you have to use the eye test.
And then he says, for me, he's too inconsistent.
I can tell you with absolute certainty that what I've done to evaluate quarterbacks surpasses what he's done.
And here's the other...
Let me introduce one additional thing that I've said in the past.
I think watching film, which everybody, every single stat is watching film.
The stat is just the recording of that.
So watching film and stats are really not different things, even though we say that they are.
Grades are just stats.
They're just different kinds of stats.
A grade is essentially trying to take full...
In other words, not...
Stats are usually blind or trying to be blind, which I know is a contradiction because you can't be blind.
And then, you know, how do you how do you know how many yards he threw? But it's meant to be somewhat context lists.
And then we kind of work backwards using the stats and trying to to strip things out so that it's more.
I guess.
But the other way to do it is just start from full context, which is watching it and then grading every single throw, every single run, every single block.
So what I've always said, essentially, in one way or another, is that the best stats are watching film.
The problem is you can't just say watching film and then say it's better than stats.
Number one, again, I don't think it's different than stats.
Number two, how you do it, it makes a huge difference.
Again, if you're just sitting down full of bias as a Bears fan saying, I watched Jordan and I wasn't impressed...
That's not watching film.
Okay? That's not how that's done.
Beyond that, the only reason why watching film would be the perfect stat, or I should say can be theoretically the perfect stat, assumes a perfect film watcher which doesn't exist.
And that includes, for example, Matt LaFleur going back and watching.
He has...
Almost perfect clarity, but even he's not going to get it perfectly right.
Even he's not going to fully understand everything.
There is no perfect film watcher.
There is no perfect grading system for watching film.
It's not just that PFF doesn't know the play calls and all that stuff.
It's beyond that.
It's that there's so much nuance to football, it's hard to properly grade every single situation with exactly the right amount of weights to determine how good a player is.
So even if you wanted to argue that watching tape is theoretically better than statistics, that's fine, but that's just theory.
Because in reality, there's almost no individual...
In fact, it's not almost.
There is no individual person... that is qualified, in my mind, to watch tape and adequately grade anything.
I shouldn't say anything.
What I'm describing is anyone who can speak broadly about the NFL because they're not watching tape on every single player.
You can't.
And that's also where stats become more beneficial because stats are better when you're talking in broad terms.
Which of the 32 quarterbacks was best? The only way you can answer that, it's not even 32, let's call it 40 quarterbacks, because there's going to be multiple that played a significant amount of time.
Which of the 40 quarterbacks was best? You have to watch every snap of every play of all 40 quarterbacks in full context.
I mean, I just don't trust a lot of people to be able to do that perfectly.
Now, if somebody wanted to, if Aaron Rodgers said, I want to be a film grader, and he went back and graded all these different people based on every single throw, would I take his input over PFF? I probably would.
Again, I'd like to know more about it, but I probably would.
Yeah.
You know, I don't know how unbiased he's going to be.
For all I know, he's going to go in there and still kind of vibe it.
Like he's just got such a, you know, the way he plays is so cool and all that.
The way a lot of players like to grade things or whatever.
But if he was going to be completely objective and take all that out of it, I would certainly consider it.
Yeah.
But that's not what we're talking about.
And that's certainly not what this guy's talking about when he says, you've got to watch the film.
So I'm sorry.
No, this is, I am perfectly confident that my process to coming to my determinations is better than his.
I'm not supremely confident that I'm 100% correct, and that's always the thing levied against stats people.
You think that they're perfect.
You think it can tell you everything.
No, I don't.
But I know that my clarity on this issue is relatively high, and I know that the people who are saying I watch film – their clarity is shockingly low, potentially even negative.
And I don't even think that's hard to demonstrate considering you could get two fans of two different teams in there.
One says the quarterback's good.
One says they're bad.
If the quarterback's good and you say he's bad, Your clarity on this is literally negative.
And it's not hard to demonstrate why that would be, because as we went through, all the stuff that happens in your brain pulls you in all kinds of incorrect directions.
And it has so much power over the way we think about things.
Yeah, I'm sorry, I don't take anything you say seriously.
And if you want to take that as condescending, that's fine, because it kind of is.
It's condescending in the same way that I would condescend to somebody that says 1 plus 1 is 8.
I don't have to pretend that what you're saying is a legitimate argument.
I don't have to pretend that what you're saying is wise or that we should have a serious discussion about which one is correct or that you could do.
No, I don't have to play that stupid game.
I don't.
what you're saying is dumb.
It's provable.
It's known.
I've, I've demonstrated that thoroughly.
And so, yeah, I, at this point I have supreme confidence in what I'm saying and, and it's why also, and I will say one of the other benefits of doing all this as I'm less impacted by a lot of the stupidity that's out there.
I saw, and it's not even really a thing, but, um, There was one of the Packers content creators.
I don't remember who, but they were just obviously talking about it or whatever.
You know, ESPN did said what kind of thing.
And I mean, I'm obviously look, I'll get on here and I'll rant and rave about how stupid they are and all that kind of stuff.
But in reality, if anybody were to like if somebody from ESPN wanted to talk to me about this, it's very I'm not upset.
It's just a very simple situation where I'm going to sit here and say, okay, demonstrate that to me, prove it to me.
And I am just unbelievably confident that there is nothing that anybody would say that would surpass what I've done.
The best they could possibly do is trot out, again, a former quarterback that said, I literally did sit down and I graded every single throw of every single quarterback.
And even then, I would be skeptical.
And again, it's, well, now you're saying nonsense.
No, it's not.
Because it's not about how much you know as a quarterback.
We're talking about different things.
setting up a criteria for grading a quarterback is not necessarily something a quarterback is expert in.
I would rather have somebody that is more of a scientist or a mathematician work with a quarterback on developing a system and then using the quarterback because what the quarterback's value is is understanding what was supposed to happen on this play.
Their ability to sort of grade it That is to say, how much of an impact it was is a different thing.
And again, even if you think that this is taking it too far, again, explain to me why, if that's the case, you have quarterbacks on social media arguing with each other.
If they know what they're talking about, why are they arguing? What is there to argue about? I thought that they knew how football worked.
I thought they knew what was going on.
You see that all the time.
Former football player says this was the problem.
He should have done this.
And then another former football player will come out and say that's not true because you should have read this and done this and blah, blah, blah.
Wait a minute.
I thought they knew.
They don't know.
So not only can I not even necessarily trust them to break down the play properly, but again, the system that determines what grades you put where, is it a two-point scale, a ten-point scale? Is that positive play a plus two, a plus five, a minus four? All those kinds of things are very separate questions, and that system being set up, again, is not something I would ask if I wanted to set something up, like a grading scale, You don't ask a quarterback, what the heck do they know about that? I want to talk to somebody who is a mathematician.
And this brings us back to stats, and it's why they're so reliable, because you don't have all of these.
And that's why you start from one end as opposed to the other.
You start from one end, which is, what do we know concretely? And then we work backward toward context while still staying concrete.
We can take... completions, which is a concrete number, and we could subtract drops and throwaways, which are concrete numbers, to come up with a now new, still concrete, more contextual number, giving us an answer to a question.
Does it bring us all the way to who's the best? No.
But you see what I'm saying? You start from concrete and work backwards, as opposed to starting with zero concreteness, complete I'm blanking on the word that I want to use here, subjectivity, and trying to work toward concreteness.
And that's, again, the structural part of that is the part where I wouldn't trust a quarterback.
If you want to have somebody build the structure and then employ a quarterback to fill in the blanks, that would be ideal.
But we're talking about nonsense because nobody's doing that.
And everybody who's saying things like, you got to use the eye test, This kind of nonsense?
They got Caleb Williams all the way down at 13.
Jordan Love's a good player, but sixth best in the NFL? We can't just rely on the advanced analytics.
We've got to use eye tests.
He's still too inconsistent to be that
high.
Okay.
That's not a thing.
That's not a metric.
That is...
He's looking at the concrete numbers.
They're all pointing in one direction, and he's saying, okay, but...
I would rather rely on the subjective.
And this is why people love the watching tape thing because it's the subjective side.
And it's so easy to be flexible in the subjective side and make things up on the subjective side.
It's why people like him like to live over there.
It's the only place where you can live where Caleb Williams is actually better than Jordan Love.
The place where I can go and create fantasy land and nobody can really push back on it.
All right,
that's it.
I got that off my chest.
We'll take a break.
We'll be
right back.
All right, so just got the breaking news just now on Devontae Wyatt.
I don't have the details.
I'll talk my way through this as I kind of reason through this and see what more details come out in the meantime.
I'm guessing I won't have everything probably until tomorrow.
But with that, let's throw out the obvious caveats here.
Well, Devontae Wyatt, let's start with this.
Via Ian Rappaport, the Packers and standout defensive tackle Devontae Wyatt have agreed to terms on a three-year, $57 million contract extension with a $20 million signing bonus, a big-time payday.
The deal was negotiated by Wynn Sports Group.
Now...
This was always one that was potentially getting done.
I was obviously on the side of, I think I would wait.
But we'll see what the deal looks like and whatnot.
I've kind of laid...
I hate to immediately contradict myself here, but when you look at the age...
Again, I hate to just spout off because this is brand new and I haven't really thought it through.
There is a part of me now that kind of looks at it and says, he's got like three years left.
You know, he's 28, maybe three, four years.
Let's pay him and get through the remainder of the contract.
And that was always kind of the complication.
If you waited, next year it just becomes very difficult to pay him, kind of no matter what.
In fact, am I sure that I said don't pay him? Because the more I think about it, the more that doesn't really make sense.
Because next year, if he plays well, now it's like, well, do we want to pay a 29-year-old that... had a great year and he's going to be asking for a ton of money because he was very, very good and he was healthy the whole year and all that stuff, it's going to be hard to pay him, especially when we have a billion other people that we need to pay.
Again, paying people this year makes sense when we can because next year there's going to be a good amount of people, Wyatt obviously being one less now, but a good amount of people looking for money next year.
Obviously, if he doesn't perform well, then he's gone.
But the bottom line is, there's almost no scenario where if we don't pay him this year that he comes back.
I shouldn't say no scenario, but it just becomes complicated.
Whereas now, we just say, look, we don't have a very good defensive line.
We don't have a long-term plan here.
Our number one...
Ish is a guy that is a short-term veteran, old guy.
That's not going to be here for very much longer.
Our number two is Wyatt.
You could maybe say he's number one, but he, you know, whatever our number two is Wyatt.
And, um, Whether or not we sign him determines whether we have him for one more year, meaning we have no defensive tackles basically next year, depending on what happens.
Maybe in, let's say in two years, we have no defensive tackles or we pay this guy and we maybe have at least one defensive tackle for the next three-ish to four-ish.
If he plays out this entire contract, it would be four years this year plus three on the extension.
Um, plus you, you would obviously get him for cheaper because again, if he breaks out now, he's a year older and he wants more money in years that you don't want to give him, et cetera, et cetera.
So from that point, it does make sense.
So the average, if you haven't whipped out a calculator or couldn't do it in your head, is 19 million on the nose.
It's 19 per year.
And I do want to go through that as far as what that is, because I'm sure a lot of people will see what, in fact, there's two comments.
Let's see already what people are saying.
I'm guessing there's going to be a lot of not liking it.
Let me look.
No negative on mine, but let's check the comments here.
I just, well, let's see.
Are there a bunch? 45.
Huge.
Hell yeah.
He's been a standout.
The best photo we can get of him is Justin Fields on the Bears.
Okay.
I mean, that came from the agent, so I don't really care about the phrasing of it.
Here we go.
Holy overpay for an injury-prone player.
Is that a Bears fan, I think? Either way, there's the first one that calls it an overpay because you're going to look at roughly $20 million and everyone's going to freak out.
I haven't even looked at it yet, but I can tell you right now that When we do the two things that you have to do for every contract, number one is get the details.
How much of this money is real money? And then number two, actually look at what $19 million means in 2026 and beyond.
Actually, number three would be to remember that it's an extension, not a contract.
So it's not a three-year, $19 million per year deal.
It's a four-year deal.
That is 57 plus whatever he already had divided by four, which is already going to bring it down.
Then you subtract out the fake money.
Then you remember that 2026 is not 2023.
And suddenly there's basically no money here.
That's the process of stripping this thing down.
But, you know, wholly overpay for an injury prone player.
Let's go.
Devante's wallet got thicker.
Wyatt earned every penny.
W.
Everybody seems pretty excited.
That's good.
I'm happy that people are excited.
It's pretty rare.
And I'm actually surprised because I would say I don't really know where Packer fans fall on Wyatt.
You know, usually you kind of know where Packer fans fall on a player and it can change over time.
But I almost don't have any idea what the Packers think of Wyatt.
And again, it almost seems somewhat negative.
But now that I think about it, I don't know where Packer fans fall.
So I guess I'm just kind of happy to see...
Obviously...
I mean, again, usually it's like 95% negative, even though there are some negative.
You know, not a standout.
Okay, fine.
Yeah, again, that's not, that's just the agent's phrasing.
Let's go, ba-ba-bang.
Here's overpay, but again, I'm trying to see if these are, uh, I don't know.
I don't know what, I'm trying to see mostly what, I know Bears fans are going to be stupid.
I'm curious what Packer fans are thinking.
$19 million a year for a defensive tackle who vanishes in big games is exactly why Green Bay will never make it back to the Super Bowl.
Let's see, what team are you for? I don't know.
I'll set that to the side.
Green Bay keeps its defensive core together without waiting another year.
He's sacking who? I'm guessing that's making fun of him because it's Fields.
I don't know.
Again, it's funny because it's like the implication here is, oh, you have
to go all the way back to that? No, you literally don't.
You think he had zero sacks last year? It's just a picture they picked.
What are you, stupid? What are you talking about? Everybody is so dumb all the time.
That last negative comment, it's all soccer, so I couldn't tell you.
What NFL team? Holy cow, are they a big soccer fan? Explains a lot, actually.
I did, by the way, enjoy that.
I was rooting for Argentina.
No real reason.
I just, you know, they got the big superstar on them and they seem like the underdogs and I don't know.
I wasn't paying super close attention, but I went that route.
And like most things, when I pick somebody, they end up losing.
Picked America.
I didn't pick them, but I was like, all right, let's watch America.
They lost.
Like, all right, let's go Norway.
Then they lose.
Pick Argentina.
Then they lose.
So I apologize to everybody.
But obviously, next up, we got Tucker Kraft.
And that's one that I don't really think is super debatable.
In fact, every time one of these gets done, it kind of accelerates the other one because it's always hard.
to work on, you have less flexibility when you might have other contracts you need to get done.
I'm pretty sure everything else, again, I would, as I've said, I would pay David McKinney right now if I were them, but I'm guessing they won't do that.
Outside of that, I mean, Tucker is pretty much the last one left.
I mean, I'm sure there's plenty of people you could sign.
I'm sure there's plenty of people asking for money.
But for the most part, I think you pretty much know everything that there is to know on that front.
First of all, 2026, I don't know if this is a part of their premium.
I don't think it is.
You should be able to see this if you want.
You can go over to SpotTrack.
Look at their player rankings.
Go to rankings by year and then do percentage of the cap.
They do a great job because they look at percentage of the cap based on the year.
So it's not just what is the total amount, it's the percentage.
But it's not just the percentage, it's the percentage of the year in which you signed it.
So, for example, the highest amount of money that somebody got as a percentage of the cap was or is Chris Jones for the Kansas City Chiefs.
He signed a five-year, $158.75 million contract, and he signed it in 2024.
The cap hit on that, if I didn't say already, is 12.43%.
After that, the top five would be Jeffrey Simmons, Quinnen Williams, Duran Payne, and Vida Veya.
They go all the way down to 9.73%.
To get to the top 10 would be Nnamdi Maduike, Alim McNeil, Derek Brown, Milton Williams, and Dexter Lawrence.
But before we even continue, let me be clear on this because we don't even need to necessarily do this to see that this is not a big contract.
If you just look at the contract average per year, Jeffrey Simmons is making $35 million per year on average.
Chris Jones is 31.
We're talking $19 million.
So there was a time where a defensive tackle making about $20 million was kind of a big deal.
That is so far gone, it's absurd.
He's not top 10 in really any list right now.
In average contract, it's Simmons, Jones, Lawrence, Jordan Davis, Milton Williams, Zach Allen, Matt Buike, Lynn McNeil, Derek Brown, Quinn and Williams.
And they go all the way down to 24.
To get down to Wyatt, he's 19th.
19th.
And again, this is just based on average.
We'll look at all the other things like when he signed and all that kind of stuff.
So he's not the 19th highest paid in regard to respect as a percentage of the cap and whatnot.
But he has the 19th highest percentage paid.
or excuse me, the 19th highest average per year.
And again, it's an extension.
So anyone that's below him that isn't an extension, or in some cases are an extension, but of a bigger number.
In other words, if we just had the total contract, as opposed to looking at extensions, which I wish we did, he would be even lower.
Because again, it's not $19 million per year.
In fact, let's look at what it is.
because he did have a pretty sizable fifth-year option, but even still it was 12.9.
So if we look at that, so it comes out to 17.5 million, just under 17.5 million.
Again, guys are making 35, right? I mean, at the top, this is not in any way a big contract, not even close to a big contract.
Before we continue, why don't we just take a break here? We'll be right back.
So just to go through a couple more, if we look at his cap hit, which we don't actually know, so maybe we shouldn't do this one, but let's call it a projected cap hit, I guess.
He's ranked 24th, and I don't even think he's going to make that much as far as a cap hit this year.
Total cash, I don't know if we know that either, but they have him listed 29th in cash.
Base salary, 15th.
Again, we don't really know what his base salary is going to be.
They just put a big number down.
I think it's actually what his fifth year option was, is what they have down.
Total contract value, he ranks 19th.
His signing bonus is 10th, $20 million.
Again, not as a percentage, but still, that's, you know, got him up to 10th.
Packers do usually do very large signing bonuses.
However, in terms of total guarantees, they're usually quite low.
In fact, it's basically just your signing bonus and that's it.
That seems to be the case here as well.
I'm not sure we know that 100%, but that I believe is going to be the case.
He ranks 31st in guarantees in this contract.
So I don't have the number, but if we did, and I could go back and do it, but I'm not going to right now.
If people really wanted to hammer this point this would maybe be the best way to do it um if you took guarantees as a percentage of the contract he would be probably outside of the top 40 now he's probably going to make more than just the guarantees in fact we know that he's going to because he's making um 20 million and then he's going to have a a base salary this year even even if it's a very small number he's going to earn more than likely his base salary this year but still that's that's a big deal But let's go back to the number that I think is the best number, and that is the average per year as a percentage of the cap.
Again, he's not top 10.
He is not top 20.
Those would be Zach Allen, DeForest Buckner, Jordan Davis, Leonard Williams, Kenny Clark in Dallas.
Christian Barmore, Zach Seeler, Ed Oliver, Osa Odigizua, and John Franklin Myers.
He comes in at 21st, just 6.31% of the salary cap, which is about 50% of what Chris Jones is getting at the top.
So again, the comments so far seem to be relatively positive.
Packer fans seem excited about it.
I don't really see a whole lot of that's way too much money type of stuff, which is usually the norm pretty much no matter what the number is.
Maybe if it actually had, if the number actually started with a two, it would have made people panic more.
But because it started with a one, one nine, people are kind of calm down about it a little bit again it's probably it's it's more realistically um stated as like a 17 and a half million dollar per year contract and um as we know by you know year three of this four-year contract in other words once he's finished his second year of the contract we pretty much can walk away from him at that point he'll be hitting 30 and so it's it's really going to be uh Probably, again, haven't seen it, and we'll go over the details, assuming I get to see it here pretty soon.
Again, as a reminder, I'm going to be going on vacation, so we've got like one more day here that I can, maybe two, I don't know.
What is today? What are we leaving? I think we're leaving Wednesday, so we can maybe do two more.
We'll see.
But assuming we get a little bit more details, which we should probably by today, but not on this podcast.
We can see any wrinkles, but I'm assuming that is the case.
This is a pretty standard Packers contract.
It's a pretty low contract.
It's not a big, heavy deal.
That's the reason it's such a low contract.
That's the reason there's so few guarantees.
That's the reason we're going to be able to get out of this very easily and very quickly if the injuries persist, if the play falls off, any of that kind of stuff.
One of the negatives of, you know, sort of like the Nick Perry contract is the guy absolutely explodes and then wants to get paid as such.
Then he does get the massive contract and then he falls off and then you're stuck.
This isn't going to be that.
So it's good and it's bad.
I mean, it's bad that we've had so many injuries.
It's been a massive benefit that the Packers have gotten so many discounts.
And I'm sure some of them are going to turn out poorly.
But there's also some that I think are going to overcome the injury stuff.
I'm hopeful that, you know, Watson will be able to overcome that stuff.
And we just got him on a massively cheap deal.
So, I mean, that's, I think, a fair assumption.
Some of these are going to end up turning out not the way you want.
Some of them are going to end up being positive.
As I've said before, you can't just not pay everybody that doesn't live up to everything.
You know what I mean? Well, he's hurt all the time.
Well, he didn't really live up to his first round billing.
Well, you know, he's this, he's that.
Okay, fine, fine.
So you pay him what he's worth, but you don't just cut everybody.
So again, there really hasn't been anything negative here, but I know that's usually the mantra is we shouldn't have paid him and he's overpaid or whatever the case may be.
And again, I don't think that this is that kind of a deal.
I don't think we're going to get stuck in some kind of a horrible way.
You know, like the Kenny Clark deal was pretty bad, but, you know, he got paid at the peak when he was really, really, really good and then just immediately started going downhill.
And it's not that the Packers did anything wrong.
You pay...
Listen, I mean, all this stuff is actually relatively straightforward.
The Packers just do a very easy thing.
Obviously, Russ Ball's a talented guy and whatnot, but the formula here is simple.
You pay guys what they're worth.
That's the game, and that's what they always do, and that's what you should do.
You pay guys what they're worth.
You don't let uber-talented guys walk just because what if they fall off.
That's not how that works because then you just wouldn't pay anybody.
You don't let guys go that struggle.
You just pay them less because of the struggles.
If they're so bad you don't want them anymore, then fine, you don't pay them.
But that's a different discussion and that's not Devontae Wyatt.
You wouldn't look at Wyatt and say he's so bad I don't even want him on the team.
He's very obviously better than almost everybody.
We'll see what happens with Hargrave, but he's our number one or number two hands down.
It's not even close.
So you pay him what he's worth.
I don't know why anybody would say he's not worth this.
Again, if you want to say the injuries and whatnot, that's fine.
But you got to understand the injuries and maybe the age a little bit are the reason we got him so cheap.
Because if Wyatt had come in and been a dominant pass rusher since day one, we'd be looking at maybe closer to like a 10%.
And if you look at Jeffrey Simmons' contract, his contract was a three-year $106 million contract.
And he got 11%.
We paid a guy 57 instead of like 100.
So that's the difference.
Yes, it would have been cool if Wyatt was healthy and just consistently dominant in day one.
But again, then you're looking at 100 to 110 million.
contract.
And then we're sitting here saying, oh, no.
The oh, no becomes a different kind of oh, no, especially at his age.
You start going, oh, what are the odds he's going to live up to this contract? What if he falls off? What if he gets hurt? We're going to be hamstrung with this contract.
Every contract carries risk.
That's the way it goes.
It's either risk on the side of this is a massive contract that's going to be hard to live up to, or it's a lesser contract, but he hasn't You know, he's been iffy.
Well, okay, that's why.
But every contract carries risk.
But the bottom line is, when guys come due, you pay them what they're worth.
And I think the Packers do as good a job of anybody as paying guys what they're worth.
You know, of the few critiques, I think the Rodgers thing.
But as I've said, you know, what are you going to do? When a guy like that has you over the barrel...
What do you do? Back-to-back MVP.
What, are you going to not pay him? And it ended up being nowhere near as catastrophic as we thought.
It was one of those, we're never going to get out of it.
And then Gutekunst comes along and he's like, actually, we are.
We're going to get out of it.
We're going to trade them.
And it's like, well, you can't because the salary cap will be devastated forever.
We'll be ruined financially.
And that just wasn't the case.
We suffered for like a year, but we didn't even notice the suffering.
And then we were fine.
So these things are never as catastrophic as they appear to be.
We got a good team.
We had a good team before the contract.
We continue to have a good team after the contract.
We have one less thing to worry about going into next year as far as what are we going to do with Wyatt.
So it gives us a little bit of peace of mind, gives us a little bit of leeway and freedom to kind of figure out what to do with next year's crop.
Which, for the most part, is going to be just pay them.
And you know what we're going to do? We're going to pay them.
We're going to pay them what they're worth.
Bullard's going to get paid, and Williams is going to get paid, and guys are going to get paid, and that's what's going to happen.
All right, I think I'll just leave it at that.
Y'all have a good rest of your day.
I will talk to you tomorrow.
Have a good one.
Bye-bye.
Marketing is hard.
But I'll tell you a little secret.
It doesn't have to be.
Let me point something out.
You're listening to a podcast right now, and it's great.
You love the host.
You seek it out and download it.
You listen to it while driving, working out, cooking, even going to the bathroom.
Podcasts are a pretty close companion.
And this is a podcast ad.
Did I get your attention? You can reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising from Libsyn Ads.
Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements or run a pre-produced ad like this one across thousands of shows to reach your target audience in their favorite podcasts with Libsyn Ads.
Go to LibsynAds.com, that's L-I-B-S-Y-N, ads.com today.
