Think about this for a second: Tony Romo and Joe Flacco received contracts over the last month that totaled nearly $229 million. That figure, however unimportant it might be, is less than half the total value of the Golden State Warriors' franchise sale of $450 million that occured just a couple years back. This might be comparing apples to oranges, but it's really crazy to think about, considering that the Warriors' sale represented the largerst franchise transaction in the history of the NBA at that time. 

Now that I have gotten a bit off course and let my amazingly efficiant (for a lack of a better word) A.D.D. kick in, let's look at this through the lens of indivudal value as it relates to quarterbacking in the NFL. 

First, imagine what a 29-year-old Tom Brady would earn in this market after coming off a 16-0 regular season that saw him break nearly every major passing and offensive record in the books. Of course, I am talking about his amazing 2007 season. At that point in his career, Brady was just entering his prime and had three Super Bowl rings under his belt. He was just two years removed from signing a six-year, $60 million extension with the New England Patriots, which was the highest contract for a quarterback in the NFL at that time. 

Fast forward, seven years and Brady inks what accounts to a ridiculously team-friendly three-year, $27 million extension to stick with the Patriots until he turns the age of 40. 

Fortunately for Rodgers, he is in a different market and will be earning a whole heck of a lot more dough than Brady. This despite the fact that the Green Bay Packers' quarterback is nowhere near as accomplished, at least in terms of winning, as Brady was at the same age. 

Even more fortunate for Rodgers, he is in extension negotiations immediately after two lesser quarterbacks tallied contracts over $100 million. 

We have to look at the growth of the quarterback market as it relates to value vs. need. 

Under the aforementioned guidelines, Rodgers is by far the most valuable quarterback in the NFL right now. In fact, one could conclude that he is the most valuable quarterback not named Peyton Manning to suit up in a game since Dan Marino was throwing balls around old Dolphin Stadium in South Beach in the mid-80's. 

He has accounted for over 73 percent of Green Bay's offensive output over the last two seasons, which is by far the No. 1 total in the NFL. Accordingly, the Packers have won 26 regular season games. During that same span, Rodgers has accounted for 85 percent of Green Bay's entire touchdown output. Again, this is by far the highest rate in the entire NFL. 

These are Rodgers' combined statistics over the last two seasons. 

Okay, now that you have just glared at the best two-season stretch in the history of the NFL for a quarterback; it is time to take a gander at what Joe Flacco and Tony Romo have done during the same cpan. 

We all know that quarterbacks are measured more on the success of their teams more than anything. Flacco threw 11 touchdowns compared to zero interceptions and won the Super Bowl MVP this past season. That's the reason why he got one of the largest contracts in the history of the NFL. On the other hand, Romo has won just one playoff game in seven seasons as the Cowboys' starting quarterback. To put that into perspective, that is one less than Colin Kaepernick has won in just 10 NFL starts for the San Francisco 49ers. 

Flacco's .675 winning percentage since 2008 (his rookie campaign) is second to only Brady during that span (.766) and ahead of Rodgers (.667) 

It goes without say that prior to 2012, Flacco had a lot more help on the other side of the ball than Rodgers. Heck, one could easily come to the conclusion that Rodgers had absolutely no help this past season in Green Bay. After all, San Francisco did put up 579 yards of total offense against its' defense in the NFC Divisional Playoffs back in January. No quarterback, I don't care how good he is, can overcome that inept play. 

Flacco has also accounted for nearly 10-percent less of Baltimore's yardage output and 23-percent less than its touchdown output than Rodgers in Green Bay. 

Obviously, it doesn't take a genius to figure out comparing Rodgers to Flacco doesn't make a whole lot of sense. That really isn't the point here. Flacco signed what amounts to one of the largest contracts in the history of the National Football League and will up the market for Rodgers in his contract negotiations with the Packers. 

Deciding on a Value 

This is where it gets tricky. At 29-years-old, Rodgers could be in for just one more HUGE contract in his NFL career. If he were to come to an agreement on a seven-year extension, that'd take Rodgers to nearly his 40th birthday. Instead, there are some out there who believe that the Super Bowl winning quarterback might be better off looking at a smaller deal in terms of length and renegotiating moving forward. Some have pointed to a four-year, $100 million deal as a starting off point. If so, it's easy to come to the conclusion that Rodgers would receive a hefty percentage, maybe $80 million, guaranteed. 

Not a bad deal for the talented quarterback. 

But, what if he decided to holdout for a longer-term deal? What would the numbers look like then? 

Pro Football Reference has this system that determines the approximate value of a player to his team. It is similar to WAR (wins above replacement) in baseball, but takes into account numerous factors. 

Rodgers ranks No. 1 in this category over the last two seasons at 40, with Brady right behind him at 39. To put this into persective, Joe Montana (The G.O.A.T), never surpassed 33 in a single two-year stretch in his Hall of Fame career with the San Francisco 49ers and Kansas City Chiefs. Brett Favre's highest two-year total for his career was 35. 

This is the best way of deteriming value as it relates to the quarterback position from generation to generation. 

Rodgers' approximate value of 23 back in 2011 was the second-highest in the history of the NFL for a quarterback, behind Brady (2007) and Steve Young (1993 and 1994). In fact, his two-year total of 40 is second to only Young in this category. 

While a four-year, $100 million contract represents Michael Jordan money when it was only Michael Jordan that earned that type of money, Rodgers would be better served going longer term in his aspirations. 

After all, Rodgers seems to have history and the market on his size. 

If Flacco and Romo are worth over $40 million guaranteed, it is easy to conclude that Rodgers is worth somewhere between $80 and $100 million guaranteed. This is how much more valuable he is to his team than they are to theirs. 

I wouldn't be surprised to see reports come out that Rodgers is seeking a deal in the neighborhood of $140 and $160 million with $100 million guaranteed over six seasons. 

This type of contract also enables Green Bay to possess salary-cap flexibility moving forward. It could easily extend Rodgers' contract after about four seasons and continue to do so until he is ready to retire, a good 11-13 years from now. We have seen this with Brady over the course of the last four or five seasons. A four-year, $100 million deal puts more pressure on general manager Ted Thompson to get Rodgers' deal renegotiated or extended after just a short three years, as restructures cannot occur in the final year year of the contract. 

Final Prediction: Seven-Years, $170 million with with $95 million guaranteed.