Broncos general manager George Paton on Tuesday categorized his midseason conversations with Russell Wilson’s agent as regular, albeit intense and perhaps emotional, contract negotiations.

Paton, in his first public comments since the end of training camp, didn’t directly respond to Wilson’s contention last month that Paton and the Broncos said flatly that Wilson would be benched for the season’s final nine games if he didn’t agree to postpone a March 17 trigger date that made Wilson’s $37 million in 2025 salary fully guaranteed.

Paton did, however, say he thought he and the club handled the negotiations in “good faith” and asserted that head coach Sean Payton’s decision to bench Wilson for the season’s final two games was “completely independent of the conversations I had with the agent.”

“We couldn’t get a deal done,” Paton said of his late-October conversations with Wilson’s agent, Mark Rodgers. “We moved on with our season. It didn’t come up again. Fast forward to Week 17, Sean makes a change at the quarterback position. This was a football decision made by Sean based on what he thought was the best interest of the team.”

It was that late-season decision, though, that unleashed a back-and-forth for weeks between the sides during which the only two people to actually speak on the record were Wilson and Payton. The latter said he “wasn’t privy” to the October discussions.

Broncos CEO and controlling owner Greg Penner reiterated his support for his general manager and coach Tuesday, but also acknowledged the club came away from the contentious period with lessons to learn.

“Any time you have a situation like this and you try to have these conversations, it’s not always going to be easy,” Penner said. “You always look back and there’s different ways you can handle things, so I’m sure in this case there are some things we could have handled in a different way.

“But again, our goal was to try and see if there was a nice, constructive path forward that was amenable to both parties.”

Paton didn’t divulge much about the exact nature of the discussions during his postseason news conference except to say that he led them and Payton wasn’t directly involved.

“Sean was not part of the negotiations,” Paton said. “Sean was getting ready for Buffalo. We handle the business, (vice president of football administration) Rich (Hurtado) and I. In season, Sean is in prep mode and he was preparing for Buffalo. … I handled the negotiations.”

Those clearly at some point turned contentious. Wilson, for his part, told reporters Dec. 29 there was no way he’d be willing to give up that much money in potential future guarantees, saying, “This game is such a physical game. I’ve played 12 years. That matters to me.”

When Paton was asked Tuesday how Wilson might have come to the conclusion that he was threatened with a benching, Paton said, “That’s a good question. Again, we tried to make an adjustment to the contract. We did so in what we feel was a professional (way) and in the best interest of the Broncos.”

He added, “You have difficult conversations, tough conversations, and you can characterize a negotiation really any way you want. We always try to handle ourselves professionally and in the best interest of the Broncos, and this was no different.”

Wilson last month said the talks between Rodgers and the Broncos lasted throughout the week and that he wasn’t sure if he’d start against Buffalo coming out of the bye in Week 10. He did, of course, and started seven games before Payton eventually replaced him with Jarrett Stidham for the final two.

Wilson said then that playing with the looming thought of being benched, “definitely hurt, it was a low blow for a bit,” and that he didn’t know what 2024 had in store for him.

“I hope that it’s here, and I genuinely mean that,” he said.

The Broncos’ leadership trio on Tuesday said no decision about Wilson’s future had been made.

“The door remains open with Russ,” Paton said. “I’ve had good conversations with Russ. Sean’s had conversations with Russ. The door is open. We’ll just kind of get through the process.”

Payton met with Wilson for about 30 minutes on Monday and told the quarterback he didn’t know what would happen next, but that, “I don’t think it will be a long, drawn-out process.”

The Broncos’ leadership also made it clear Tuesday they had planned for the potential of life after Wilson. And life with the contractual fallout of cutting Wilson.

If they make that move before March 17, they will have to account for $85 million in salary cap charges, likely split between 2024 ($35.4 million) and 2025 ($49.6 million).

“With the dead money, obviously, this would be extreme,” Paton said. “We’ve prepared for any scenario with Rich Hurtado, who runs our cap. We’ll have flexibility either way to do what we need to do.”

Payton pointed out that three of the four teams with the most “dead cap” in the NFL — the Los Angeles Rams, Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Green Bay Packers — made the postseason.

“I’m not suggesting we’re going to have either/or or one or the other,” he said. “But that’s part of the puzzle.”

Ultimately, moving on from Wilson would end with the Broncos not only trading five draft picks and three players for him, but also then paying him nearly $125 million (including $39 million in guaranteed 2024 salary on his way out the door) for two seasons and carrying $85 million in residual damage on their books through 2025.

That is quite a pill, but Penner suggested the Broncos can swallow it.

“Obviously the financial part of it is a significant component in terms of how this works out in the future, but that’s not what will drive the decision,” Penner said. “The decision will be driven on what’s in the best interest of this football team winning games.”