Philip Got Paid (Again)

A.J. Smith and Norv Turner may have collectively wasted his prime, but the Chargers apparently just found out the cost for The Great Philip Rivers to play in L.A?

ESPN:

The new deal, worth $83.25 million with $65 million guaranteed, gives Rivers the highest guaranteed money of any player under a current contract.

That creates some financial security for Rivers and wife Tiffany, who are expecting their eighth child.

But the move also shows Rivers is committed and believes the Chargers are built to compete for a Super Bowl now. It is a good sign for a young San Diego roster with emerging talent.

Wanna feel old? Think about this: this incoming freshman class would’ve been too young to remember much about Philip’s career at State. Point them here to educate them on why those of us who saw him, speak of him with such reverence.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

Alums

Home Forums Philip Got Paid (Again)

This topic contains 35 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by  rthomas44 3 years, 11 months ago.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 36 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #87988

    StateFans
    Keymaster

    A.J. Smith and Norv Turner may have collectively wasted his prime, but the Chargers apparently just found out the cost for The Great Philip River to p
    [See the full post at: Philip Got Paid (Again)]

    #87990

    44rules
    Participant

    Good for him. But IMHO, it’s sad because that organization never will win a Super Bowl. Hopefully I’m wrong, as I often am.

    Communism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy. Mao Zedong

    #87991

    PackerInRussia
    Participant

    I love the line about financial security. I’m glad Philip and his family won’t have to feel the strains of poverty.
    Good for him, though. I’d really like to see him win it all. He was the QB of my college tenure (except for freshman year), so he holds a special place in my esteem of Wolfpack players. That and he was a darn good QB and a great, great competitor. I’m not one of those people that remembers every detail of every game I’ve ever seen through the course of my life. I’ve already forgotten most of the games from last season (except that drubbing in CH). But, I fondly remember many of the games from his time; some great performances.

    #87992

    Mike
    Participant

    Congrats to 17 – there is no classier individual in the game and I am thrilled for him. I believe he does have a few good years left but I also believe his best years were wasted.

    I know the fans in SD love him as well, just as much for his off the field as on the field and it is nice to see him rewarded.

    #87993

    rthomas44
    Participant

    Phillip and the bolts are and always will be good but not great. I know that he is what made Chuck last as long as he did. Pro ball is crazy and drunk with money.

    #87996

    PapaJohn
    Participant

    Good things happening to good people.

    While so many of these high profile athletes get media attention by being knuckleheads, Phillip fairly quietly goes about being one of the best in the league at his position. Remember all of the talk about “can he be successful with such a non-standard release?” And Phillip ignored it all.

    Congratulations Mr. Rivers. I believe you deserve being paid as one of the most valuable players in the NFL, glad to see it actually happen.

    #87998

    rthomas44
    Participant

    Rivers is 4 and 5 in the playoffs. Never smelled a super bowl and that is worth 83 mil?

    #87999

    pakfanistan
    Participant

    Rivers is 4 and 5 in the playoffs. Never smelled a super bowl and that is worth 83 mil?

    It’s reparations for leaving him with Norv Freakin’ Turner and/or the ghost of Antonio Gates for five of his prime years.

    #88000

    pakfanistan
    Participant

    Sorry, six. Six of his prime years.

    #88002

    ryebread
    Participant

    As much as I like PR, I wouldn’t have paid him that. I’d have probably traded with Tennessee for future draft picks, and built towards the future.

    And as for PR, by taking this, he can almost guarantee that he won’t make the Super Bowl. Of course that might be the case with any of the teams that traded for him.

    I am afraid that PR is following the path of my favorite football player of all time — Dan Marino. The parallels are eerily similar. I suspect that PR will end up renegotiating that contract down later in his career the exact same way.

    With each passing year, the power play by the Mannings looks smarter and smarter. I hate to see Eli getting rewarded for that move, but it was a brilliant one.

    #88005

    Tau837
    Participant

    ^Completely disagree.

    1. There aren’t enough quality NFL QBs for each team to have one. Teams that have one have little choice but to pay market value to keep them, except in very rare situations where two get paired on one team, enabling the team to let the veteran go (e.g., Brees and Rivers, Favre and Rodgers, Montana and Young). The alternative is typically to go through an extended period of years with poor to mediocre QB play, which significantly raises the odds of a losing record over that lengthy period.

    2. Rivers is one such quality NFL QB. He is a consensus top 10 NFL QB and has been for a long time. He is among the top Chargers players of all time, with Seau, Fouts, Tomlinson, Alworth, Winslow, and Gates; he has a shot to end up as the best player in franchise history. Furthermore, he is well liked by teammates and fans, is a strong leader, has no character issues, etc. Pretty much a model franchise QB.

    3. GMs and coaches do not have lasting job security in the NFL. It’s easy for you to say that the team should have built for the future, but McCoy and Telesco could be on the street in two years if the team isn’t performing.

    Add it all up and it was a nobrainer for the Chargers to extend him.

    #88006

    ryebread
    Participant

    Tau:

    One thing we both have failed to mention is that it is the owners that ultimately pay these salaries. As you say, McCoy and Telesco could be on the street in a couple of years. I would argue that performance could be defined differently by different people. It’s not always about the W/L, but often about the bottom line of the business. When I think of SD as a franchise, I think of one that has historically been run on the cheap. I suspect one of McCoy and Telesco’s metrics that they’re measured on is probably the bottom line.

    The one thing that I think might be in play here is that Rivers on the Bolts makes them better in the short term. That makes them more attractive for a move to LA. I suspect that could be the thinking of the owners. They can pitch “an emerging contender with a franchise QB” as opposed to a “young team that is building towards the future.”

    I see this deal as a sign that the Bolts are moving, and that Philip is moving with them.

    #88007

    rthomas44
    Participant

    If Rivers makes the playoffs, the point is mute. However, if he wants to show everyone that he is worth it, I am going to be watching.

    #88010

    Tau837
    Participant

    Tau:

    One thing we both have failed to mention is that it is the owners that ultimately pay these salaries. As you say, McCoy and Telesco could be on the street in a couple of years. I would argue that performance could be defined differently by different people. It’s not always about the W/L, but often about the bottom line of the business. When I think of SD as a franchise, I think of one that has historically been run on the cheap. I suspect one of McCoy and Telesco’s metrics that they’re measured on is probably the bottom line.

    The one thing that I think might be in play here is that Rivers on the Bolts makes them better in the short term. That makes them more attractive for a move to LA. I suspect that could be the thinking of the owners. They can pitch “an emerging contender with a franchise QB” as opposed to a “young team that is building towards the future.”

    I see this deal as a sign that the Bolts are moving, and that Philip is moving with them.

    I have to disagree.

    1. Let me note that I live in San Diego, I follow the Chargers closely, listen to Chargers talk radio, read Chargers blogs, etc.

    2. When moving a team into a new market, the enthusiasm for the team will likely rarely be stronger. Hence, said team does not need to be a winning team. You can look at the history of expansion teams and moved teams in the major sports to judge whether or not this is true. This undermines most of your post.

    3. If you want to say the Chargers have been cheap, show me some data/metrics. For example, I’m not aware they have typically/consistently had a salary cap figure that is near the bottom of the league. So what do you base this comment on, other than common rhetoric?

    ETA: Your first post said you wouldn’t have paid Rivers, and I disagreed. Then you responded to talk about a possible strategy without commenting on the original subject of discussion. So, upon further reflection, would you have paid him or not?

    #88015

    ryebread
    Participant

    Tau:

    Could it be possible that the local talk media for the Bolts spins things in a way that is appealing to the local fan? Might that analysis be possibly slanted to what people want to hear?

    LA has a mixed history with NFL football. I’d argue the support isn’t necessarily automatically there given how many teams have moved out. You have to look no further than UCLA or the Lakers to see that the stadiums there get full for a winner, but people don’t show up for a loser. If you’re moving to LA, it’s better to bring something you can sell a ticket to. If that’s SD management’s thinking, then good for them.

    Prior to this Rivers move, SD was 12th in the league in open cap space. After this move, they’ve still got open cap room. Maybe that’s good cap management, or maybe it’s a sign that they’re cheap? If you look at future projected cap spending in guaranteed contracts and take out the Rivers spend, they’re near the top in open cap space. Outside if this deal, it kind of supports the theory that the franchise is being run on the lower end of the scale. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but is consistent with the opinion of the Chargers from people who live in other markets.

    Then you’ve got the general view of SD franchise management as a whole. The Mannings made the power play to avoid SD and they did it for a reason. Elway made a similar move years ago to get away from the Colts and it turned out to be a great thing for him. It looks like the same for Eli, with Rivers on the unfortunate end of that. Let’s be honest. Is there any doubt that Rivers would have been better off with the Giants?

    I say all of this as someone who lives in a city with a horrible NFL team. It has terrible ownership and has a mess at the QB spot. I’d personally much rather have Rivers than the QBs this team has, but I see the teams as somewhat similar — with a lot of holes to fill. I’d also absolutely understand a player making a power play like Eli made to avoid playing on this particular team.

    I personally wouldn’t have paid Rivers that. He’s a great player, and I love the guy, but he’s 33 years old, which by most studies of NFL positional age is on the back side of his career. The peak for QBs is typically 32 with performance reduction each season afterwards. This contract runs through when he’s 37. Very few QBs have played at a high level at that age and the ones that do are typically surrounded by very good teams. I already think he’s been playing injured for at least one full season.

    Is that a combination that would result in making him one of the highest paid players in the NFL? Not personally for me. Given the backdrop of SD management, and the “bigger fish” (it’s in quotes because I’m not sure that I necessarily believe that) of LA, I think the reason they did was to make the move.

    Of course, I could be completely wrong. I’m sure all Bolts fans in SD hope that’s the case.

    #88018

    44rules
    Participant

    Not going to get involved with the tussle, but I found this interesting.

    http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/19/nfl-philip-rivers-san-diego-chargers

    Really enjoyed reading about how a QB can win with his feet, even if his feet only move inches at a time.

    Communism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy. Mao Zedong

    #88022

    PapaJohn
    Participant

    ^ Was going to link to the same article

    Very complimentary of Phillip, and very positive about the Bolts this year.

    #88031

    Tau837
    Participant

    Could it be possible that the local talk media for the Bolts spins things in a way that is appealing to the local fan? Might that analysis be possibly slanted to what people want to hear?

    Yes, it’s possible. It’s also *possible* that I am smart enough to filter that stuff. :rolleyes:

    The local coverage here is balanced. There is plenty of criticism of Chargers ownership, management, coaching, and players.

    LA has a mixed history with NFL football. I’d argue the support isn’t necessarily automatically there given how many teams have moved out. You have to look no further than UCLA or the Lakers to see that the stadiums there get full for a winner, but people don’t show up for a loser. If you’re moving to LA, it’s better to bring something you can sell a ticket to. If that’s SD management’s thinking, then good for them.

    Disagree with this take. Bottom line, if the Chargers move from San Diego to LA, it is estimated that the value of the franchise will increase by close to $1B. Yes, that is one billion with a ‘b’. News flash: that isn’t because of wins and losses in the first few seasons or because of who is starting at QB.

    Prior to this Rivers move, SD was 12th in the league in open cap space. After this move, they’ve still got open cap room. Maybe that’s good cap management, or maybe it’s a sign that they’re cheap? If you look at future projected cap spending in guaranteed contracts and take out the Rivers spend, they’re near the top in open cap space. Outside if this deal, it kind of supports the theory that the franchise is being run on the lower end of the scale. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but is consistent with the opinion of the Chargers from people who live in other markets.

    As expected, you don’t seem to have valid metrics on this point. The Chargers are currently #25 in open cap space, with ~$6.1M available. The amount of cap space that was available before the Rivers deal is completely irrelevant, since obviously the team knew they were planning to extend Rivers, and this pretty much invalidates the rest of your paragraph here. The amount of cap space available now is close to normal operating level for the season.

    Furthermore, although unlikely, they could still choose to extend Weddle, which would require more cap space. Also note that Telesco signed Brandon Flowers late in the offseason/preseason last year, and he is now a key player for the team. Maintaining some cap space is a philosophical approach that has been successful so far.

    Then you’ve got the general view of SD franchise management as a whole. The Mannings made the power play to avoid SD and they did it for a reason. Elway made a similar move years ago to get away from the Colts and it turned out to be a great thing for him. It looks like the same for Eli, with Rivers on the unfortunate end of that. Let’s be honest. Is there any doubt that Rivers would have been better off with the Giants?

    None of this has anything to do with your original post to which I responded. You said you wouldn’t have paid Rivers if you were the Chargers. If anything, you citing that NFL players have reason to avoid the Chargers shows that they should indeed have paid Rivers, since it would apparently be harder for them to get another quality QB to join the team.

    Whether or not Rivers would have been better off with the Giants is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. (Though I think the answer is yes.)

    I personally wouldn’t have paid Rivers that. He’s a great player, and I love the guy, but he’s 33 years old, which by most studies of NFL positional age is on the back side of his career. The peak for QBs is typically 32 with performance reduction each season afterwards. This contract runs through when he’s 37. Very few QBs have played at a high level at that age and the ones that do are typically surrounded by very good teams. I already think he’s been playing injured for at least one full season.

    This is antiquated thinking. The history of the NFL is not relevant here. Current rules, medical treatment, and training methods are making it more feasible for QBs to play well to a much older age.

    Favre, Warner, Peyton, Elway, and Moon are examples of QBs who had great seasons at age 38. Brady will likely join them this season. Brees will likely join them next season. Roethlisberger and Eli could join them in a few seasons. Rodgers could join them after that. Etc. And a larger number of QBs had great seasons at age 37. Notice the trend.

    Bottom line, if he doesn’t suffer a serious injury, which is not predictable, Rivers is likely to play at a NFL franchise QB level for the duration of this contract.

    Of course, I could be completely wrong.

    With all due respect, yes, you are wrong.

    #88032

    VaWolf82
    Keymaster

    1. There aren’t enough quality NFL QBs for each team to have one. Teams that have one have little choice but to pay market value to keep them, except in very rare situations where two get paired on one team, enabling the team to let the veteran go (e.g., Brees and Rivers, Favre and Rodgers, Montana and Young). The alternative is typically to go through an extended period of years with poor to mediocre QB play, which significantly raises the odds of a losing record over that lengthy period.

    If there is an NFL GM that doesn’t understand this, he won’t have a job for long.

    The other thing that usually doesn’t get discussed is that the team often goes back to the QB in subsequent years to redo his contract to help out with cap room.

    #88033

    ryebread
    Participant

    Tau: I figured that was your opinion. It doesn’t make my opinion wrong.

    On the metrics, I’m using the same source as you. I just interpret them differently than you. That can always be done with statistics/metrics.

    The original point is what I would have done, which would not have been to extend unless I were moving the franchise and felt that having Rivers made franchise movement more attractive to LA. That’s the angle from which it makes sense to me, so that is what I suspect will happen. We shall see.

    VAWolf82: I agree with you and mentioned that in the Marino parallel. I fully suspect that this contract will be revisited.

    #88034

    mak4dpak
    Participant

    Sad to hear another one of our quarterback greats, Eric Kramer, who lost his son to overdose years ago, is suffering from depression, and attempted suicide with a gun, thankfully unsuccessful. Keep him in your prayers. He is one of ours.

    #88038

    Tau837
    Participant

    Tau: I figured that was your opinion. It doesn’t make my opinion wrong.

    Right. I agreed with you (see my last quote and comment). 🙂

    On the metrics, I’m using the same source as you. I just interpret them differently than you. That can always be done with statistics/metrics.

    You are saying that we can interpret $6M cap space remaining differently. This just seems to be more semantics than anything. For example, what do you think Telesco should have done with that $6M that he hasn’t done?\

    Wait, I just remembered you wouldn’t have paid Rivers. So what would you have done instead with the cap space? Why not make it concrete instead of vague? What would you have done to improve the team?

    TThe original point is what I would have done, which would not have been to extend unless I were moving the franchise and felt that having Rivers made franchise movement more attractive to LA. That’s the angle from which it makes sense to me, so that is what I suspect will happen. We shall see.

    There is no way to “see”. Rivers is signed. If the team moves to LA, you cannot know in what way Rivers at QB influences the franchise success (or lack thereof), vs. if he had not been signed. I get that you are saying this angle makes sense to you. I assure you, it does not make economic sense. But I will agree to disagree.

    VAWolf82: I agree with you and mentioned that in the Marino parallel. I fully suspect that this contract will be revisited.

    Barring injury, I very strongly doubt that it will be revisited. Can you name some instances of QB contracts that were revisited as the QB reached older ages?

    Do you think Roethlisberger’s contract will be revisited?
    Do you think Brady’s contract will be revisited?
    Do you think Brees’s contract will be revisited?
    Etc.

    #88043

    rthomas44
    Participant

    All of the above QB have won superbowls. If SD is dumb enough to pay him that much, so be it. They won’t be smart enough to revisit.

    #88046

    Tau837
    Participant

    All of the above QB have won superbowls. If SD is dumb enough to pay him that much, so be it. They won’t be smart enough to revisit.

    All of the other QBs you are referring to had teams around them that were strong enough (players and coaching) that they could lead them to Super Bowl titles. Rivers hasn’t had that. Apples and oranges.

    #88047

    rthomas44
    Participant

    So,how about 2 more apples, E. Manning and Big Ben. Both came out the same year as PR and both have rings. Is SD a orange or an apple?

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 36 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.