Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Will Aaron Rodgers ever play for Green Bay again: The Poll


Well, will he?  

230 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, -OZ- said:

Or favre, or Peyton, or Joe Montana... 

I could be wrong, but I don't think there's been a GREAT QB who played for one team his entire career since Aikman retired.

Andrew Luck did.....Eli maybe deserves a mention. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joe Bryant said:

If given the opportunity, what percent chance would you say Jordan Love is the answer in GB?

0.0

Obviously he can always improve but word out of Green Bay were his accuracy issues followed him from college to the NFL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Soulfly3 said:

aj hawk stated, as a fact,  that  there's 0% chance he retires. 

but said it isnt totally about the money. very little of it is. 

aj sounds like he knows he's bouncing

He also stated it was his feeling from being around him.  Did he not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Snorkelson said:

Andrew Luck did.....Eli maybe deserves a mention. 

I'm not going to include Eli in the GREAT category. Luck is different and applies.

16 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Big Ben

 

Closer to GREAT. I meant out of those retired, but he'll probably fit when everything is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joe Bryant said:

If given the opportunity, what percent chance would you say Jordan Love is the answer in GB?

The problem is he has a legacy to fill in Rodgers / Favre history.  Anything below their caliber is a failure, but at the same time is unrealistic expectations on Love.  

I don't see how Love could be the answer with all that weight on him.  It's the same as being in NY and following Eli.  Anything less than stellar is a failure.  

I viewed Love as a reasonable mid-tier QB target comparable to Jalen Hurts in Philly - mobile threat and quality arm, but needs time to develop.  Has he had the time and actual coaching to develop?  Did ARodgers mentor him at all?  NOPE!  He has been short-sheeted in GB.  I just don't see him as the QB answer in GB.  He was not given the necessary tools/training/coaching to develop properly.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leaning towards no. I don't think this is about money; it's about Rodgers, right or wrong, feeling like the organization has done him wrong and wanting to move on.  Given his personality, I could see him retiring if they stand pat and refuse to trade him.  Or they could fire the nimrod GM to placate him and keep him in GB. Should be interesting to see how it plays out. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

If given the opportunity, what percent chance would you say Jordan Love is the answer in GB?

75% that he ends up being a solid QB for the Pack. .001% he’s as good as Rodgers.  I think that percentage is lower for this upcoming season so Lock would be more of a short term plan.  

Edited by Pipes
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

He also stated it was his feeling from being around him.  Did he not?

Ya they hung out at the horsey races. He definitely made sure to say it was just HIS thoughts, but they're tight apparently. Who knows

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Birdie048 said:

The problem is he has a legacy to fill in Rodgers / Favre history.  Anything below their caliber is a failure, but at the same time is unrealistic expectations on Love.  

I don't see how Love could be the answer with all that weight on him.  It's the same as being in NY and following Eli.  Anything less than stellar is a failure.  

I viewed Love as a reasonable mid-tier QB target comparable to Jalen Hurts in Philly - mobile threat and quality arm, but needs time to develop.  Has he had the time and actual coaching to develop?  Did ARodgers mentor him at all?  NOPE!  He has been short-sheeted in GB.  I just don't see him as the QB answer in GB.  He was not given the necessary tools/training/coaching to develop properly.   

If he starts this year we should expect Love to struggle at times. But I think he can develop into a good QB. 

The whole mentorship thing is overstated. What QB would have mentored Love in this situation? Let's see, the star QB, one of the truly elite players in the game wants offensive help but they draft his replacement, whose style isn't the same, and the team continues to not support him. And anyone expects Aaron to take him under his wing? That's a lot to ask without giving him support.

Favre didn't mentor Rodgers although he was in better position to do so. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think another issue with Love is his supporting cast. It’s been mentioned in other threads but aside from Davante and Aaron Jones there is a dearth of talent at the skill positions. Rodgers made everyone around him exponentially better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, IHEARTFF said:

Don’t think he will play again for GB. The fault lies with the team here. You have an MVP QB and this is how you treat him? Fail. 

I think you need to research the situation a little more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, -OZ- said:

If he starts this year we should expect Love to struggle at times. But I think he can develop into a good QB. 

The whole mentorship thing is overstated. What QB would have mentored Love in this situation? Let's see, the star QB, one of the truly elite players in the game wants offensive help but they draft his replacement, whose style isn't the same, and the team continues to not support him. And anyone expects Aaron to take him under his wing? That's a lot to ask without giving him support.

Favre didn't mentor Rodgers although he was in better position to do so. 

I don’t think mentorship is an issue, for whatever that’s worth. Rodgers and Love seem to get along fine.  They’re not going to the Kentucky Derby together, but there has been no indication Love is getting the Favre treatment in Green Bay. Somewhat awkward, but they actually have the same agent, David Dunn. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Soulfly3 said:

Ya they hung out at the horsey races. He definitely made sure to say it was just HIS thoughts, but they're tight apparently. Who knows

Sure...and I dont think Hawk speaks without Rodgers permission as that would end the Hawk/McAfee relationship with him Id guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Balco said:

I think another issue with Love is his supporting cast. It’s been mentioned in other threads but aside from Davante and Aaron Jones there is a dearth of talent at the skill positions. Rodgers made everyone around him exponentially better. 

Tonyan is a solid player.  When a healthy Bahktiari the line is solid.  Lazard a solid possession guy.

Bute you have to take out a top 5 WR and top 10 RB to claim the supporting cast isn’t good...it sort of makes the point that perhaps they aren’t all that lacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Balco said:

0.0

Obviously he can always improve but word out of Green Bay were his accuracy issues followed him from college to the NFL. 

who could have ever guessed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nittanylion said:

I know it's a little out there, but, why not? It's not like Gutekunst (sp?), the Packers GM, has accomplished any mercurial GM feats to launch himself into the pantheon of GM greatness. Looking at his body of work, he's done a relatively average job with his role with the franchise, and relatively average is relatively replaceable. Based on some of the comments above, one could argue that he already gambled and lost regarding Rodgers, in that his judgement call on where Rodgers was in his career trajectory,  was a complete whiff. Which resulted in his unilateral (and arguably inappropriate, in regarding his communication with both Murphy and Rodgers), decision to use 1st Round Draft capital to select a player that's been relegated to holding a clipboard on the sidelines, while a team with otherwise some glaring holes underachieved, and squandered opportunity with the most precious commodity in the NFL, a season helmed by a  Franchise HOF-caliber QB, as well as damaged the Franchise's relationship with said QB, is already grounds for dismissal, no matter how Rodgers has handled it on his end. Hell, Rodgers, despite his annoying cattiness, responded the the controversy with elite performance, by delivering a career season, and it wasn't his fault the Team didn't beat the Bucs, and get to the SB... but they might have had a better shot with a 1st Round-caliber player on either side of the ball, rather than a backup qb, who it was GM's choice to select.

In the big scheme of things, Rodgers is much more valuable to the franchise than the current GM. From a strictly cold business standpoint, based on performance and track record, it's a pretty easy decision, actually. Bye, GM. Rodgers isn't just any player, trying to tail-wag the dog. He's Michael Jordan-caliber elite upper tier, and like it or not, the way life works in the cold, hard real world of athletics, and business, for that matter, is that people of that caliber get to operate under a different set of parameters than the average joe, and I'm OK with that. IMHO, he's earned it. YMMV, of course.

I get that Rodgers is infinitely more valuable than the GM but you just can’t fire a guy because the QB didn’t like one of his draft picks. That’s just a preposterous amount of weight to give one individual, especially since it seems like the GM has done a decent enough job. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Capella said:

I get that Rodgers is infinitely more valuable than the GM but you just can’t fire a guy because the QB didn’t like one of his draft picks. That’s just a preposterous amount of weight to give one individual, especially since it seems like the GM has done a decent enough job. 

True and that is the downside.  However.   Can you fire a GM for awful communication leading to an MVP QB and face of the franchise becoming so pissed he wants out?   Which likely leads to also losing your next best offensive player (Adams)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing Rodgers does better than football is hold grudges.  The guy won't even talk to his own family.  Who does that?   

He's not playing for GB again.  If the Packers press the issue and force him back, he will be a toxic presence. Part of what makes him great is his self motivation through perceived slights is on a Jordan level. See: The Last Dance.  He can't just turn that off now.  It's what drives him.  Pretty sure he thinks he should be the guy with 7 rings by now and it's only because the stupid organization mismanaged things that he doesn't  Maybe he's right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Tonyan is a solid player.  When a healthy Bahktiari the line is solid.  Lazard a solid possession guy.

Bute you have to take out a top 5 WR and top 10 RB to claim the supporting cast isn’t good...it sort of makes the point that perhaps they aren’t all that lacking.

In the modern NFL it's just an average supporting cast.  Looking at it from a weapons standpoint (RB, WR, TE) here is how they shake out vs the rest of the NFL

 

Easily better than the Pack - Cowboys, Vikings, Falcons, Buccanears, Saints, Rams, Seahawks, Bengals, Browns, Steelers, Broncos, Chiefs  - 12 teams

Similar to the Pack (a case can be made either way) - Giants, WFT, Eagles, 49ers, Cardinals, Bills. Titans, Colts, Raiders - 9 teams

Worse than the Pack - Lions, Bears, Panthers, Jets, Dolphins, Patriots, Texans, Jags, Chargers, Ravens - 10 Teams

 

 Alot of that middle group has young unproven weapons like the Eagles, Colts and 49ers.  They may not be better polished weapons but I'd say that middle group's weapons have more raw talent than GB's.  How that will translate to the NFL remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pipes said:

In the modern NFL it's just an average supporting cast.  Looking at it from a weapons standpoint (RB, WR, TE) here is how they shake out vs the rest of the NFL

 

Easily better than the Pack - Cowboys, Vikings, Falcons, Buccanears, Saints, Rams, Seahawks, Bengals, Browns, Steelers, Broncos, Chiefs  - 12 teams

Similar to the Pack (a case can be made either way) - Giants, WFT, Eagles, 49ers, Cardinals, Bills. Titans, Colts, Raiders - 9 teams

Worse than the Pack - Lions, Bears, Panthers, Jets, Dolphins, Patriots, Texans, Jags, Chargers, Ravens - 10 Teams

 

 Alot of that middle group has young unproven weapons like the Eagles, Colts and 49ers.  They may not be better polished weapons but I'd say that middle group's weapons have more raw talent than GB's.  How that will translate to the NFL remains to be seen.

Id disagree on the Seahawks being better...Rams, Saints, Bengals...even the Chiefs.   Because Adams is that damn good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

True and that is the downside.  However.   Can you fire a GM for awful communication leading to an MVP QB and face of the franchise becoming so pissed he wants out?   Which likely leads to also losing your next best offensive player (Adams)?

I guess that would have to be the story they take up if they do. He definitely botched that. Would still be a crazy turn of events if they ran that guy out of there because AR wants them too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Joe Bryant said:

If given the opportunity, what percent chance would you say Jordan Love is the answer in GB?

Its hard because he's never taken a snap for the Packers, not even in preseason.  I've never seen him play football.  Last season, the Packers coaches felt free agent QB Tim Boyle (now with Detroit) was a better option to back up Rodgers than their #1 draft choice.  We'll presumably get our first look at him this summer.  During the 3 years Rodgers was backing up Favre, there were numerous reports from camp that Rodgers did not have what it takes.  He was reportedly dismal his first two years in training camp, and ended up using the 3 years as a back-up to completely change his delivery/mechanics/footwork.  I think Love was drafted as a project similar to Rodgers. He has the athleticism and a great arm, but there are big question marks on whether he has NFL QB quality skills.  There is only one resource I read regarding the NFL draft - long time Packer beat writer Bob McGinn.  I went back this morning to read his comments about Love when he was drafted.  He had alot to say, but the summary is that some scouts love him but more think he'll be a bust.  We still don't know alot about Brian Gutekunst draft skills, but the good news for Packer fans is Gutekunst is a life-long scout.  He may not be a good people person, but his passion is in scouting, learned from the Ted Thompson school, and he obviously has the stones to trust his draft board and make the pick he thinks is best for the team regardless of external factors.  That's the one thing giving me hope about Love, understanding I've never seen him play. I know this is a boring answer, not what you are looking for, but the best I can say is 50/50 he ends up being a starting-level NFL quarterback.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Capella said:

I guess that would have to be the story they take up if they do. He definitely botched that. Would still be a crazy turn of events if they ran that guy out of there because AR wants them too. 

The problem i see...is this will all lijely go bad and the GM and Murphy will be gone in a few years too.

Easier to limit it just to replacing the GM if you can salvage Rodgers and the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Birdie048 said:

The problem is he has a legacy to fill in Rodgers / Favre history.  Anything below their caliber is a failure, but at the same time is unrealistic expectations on Love.  

 

This is a crazy take.  He doesn't have to be a HoF player in order to be a good draft pick.  If he ends up starting for 10 years and the team has success, its a successful pick.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Id disagree on the Seahawks being better...Rams, Saints, Bengals...even the Chiefs.   Because Adams is that damn good. 

I'm trying not to be a homer in my groupings.  Yes Davante's a stud but all these teams have studs too and with teams like the Rams they don't have anyone has good as Davante but their options 2, 3 and 4 are much better than GB's.  I think a young QB needs more options not 1 great one that can be gameplanned away.  Yes teams couldn't take Davante away last season but that's with #12 at QB.  With Love I think it's a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Love pick, IMHO, was a cute attempt to play the 'have your cake, and eat it too' game. Based on how I was raised, and my personal and business experiences in life, t's my firm belief that anyone who has both feet firmly planted in the real world knows that that's not how life works. At some point in the life of a resource, you make a hard choice - fish or cut bait. In the case of Rodgers, you either ride him until the wheels fall off, maximize the effectiveness of said ride, and deal with the suck that's going to come after he falls off the cliff...or move on prior to the decline, and it's just plain luck whether you move on too soon, or not. That's one of a GM's primary responsibilities, and what their judging their job performance revolves around. In this case, Gute guessed wrong when it came to Rodgers, and it's largely his subsequent actions that have caused the franchise to underperform, and alienate it's greatest asset. Rodgers behavior aside - and it's not even that bad of behavior...it's not like he's a thug, an addict, a miscreant or any of a million negative things - there should be consequences for the GM making a wrong call in the first place, and then piling more bad on top of it.  Would Rodgers be acting out if it wasn't a snowball of bad guesses and decisions that got us to this point? I'm thinking 'no'. GM is at the root of all of this. I'd have fired him already.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Capella said:

I get that Rodgers is infinitely more valuable than the GM but you just can’t fire a guy because the QB didn’t like one of his draft picks. That’s just a preposterous amount of weight to give one individual, especially since it seems like the GM has done a decent enough job. 

It's really no different from when they fired Vince Lombardi because he didn't call Bart Star before drafting Joe Horn #1 in 1971.

  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, nittanylion said:

The Love pick, IMHO, was a cute attempt to play the 'have your cake, and eat it too' game. Based on how I was raised, and my personal and business experiences in life, t's my firm belief that anyone who has both feet firmly planted in the real world knows that that's not how life works. At some point in the life of a resource, you make a hard choice - fish or cut bait. In the case of Rodgers, you either ride him until the wheels fall off, maximize the effectiveness of said ride, and deal with the suck that's going to come after he falls off the cliff...or move on prior to the decline, and it's just plain luck whether you move on too soon, or not. That's one of a GM's primary responsibilities, and what their judging their job performance revolves around. In this case, Gute guessed wrong when it came to Rodgers, and it's largely his subsequent actions that have caused the franchise to underperform, and alienate it's greatest asset. Rodgers behavior aside - and it's not even that bad of behavior...it's not like he's a thug, an addict, a miscreant or any of a million negative things - there should be consequences for the GM making a wrong call in the first place, and then piling more bad on top of it.  Would Rodgers be acting out if it wasn't a snowball of bad guesses and decisions that got us to this point? I'm thinking 'no'. GM is at the root of all of this. I'd have fired him already.

🌮🤷🏻‍♂️ 

I'd buy your logic with any other franchise. But this is what happened when they drafted Rodgers.

Edited by -OZ-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Tonyan is a solid player.  When a healthy Bahktiari the line is solid.  Lazard a solid possession guy.

Bute you have to take out a top 5 WR and top 10 RB to claim the supporting cast isn’t good...it sort of makes the point that perhaps they aren’t all that lacking.

Davante is a stud - doesn’t matter who the qb is, he gets open on every single play. And I am super high on Aaron Jones, I think he is actually underutilized.

But that’s it. Tonyan is an average player without Rodgers and same goes for Lazard, MVS and any other receiver on the roster not named Amari Rodgers (waiting to hear reports on how he looks in camp).

I am hopeful the line can be okay. Obviously a non healthy Bakhtiari will really hurt. Lose number one rated center to free agency. The two replacement tackles were unmitigated disasters last year. I am hopefully Meyers and Runyon provide solid play inside.

Bottom line - No Aaron Rodgers = No playoffs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, nittanylion said:

The Love pick, IMHO, was a cute attempt to play the 'have your cake, and eat it too' game. Based on how I was raised, and my personal and business experiences in life, t's my firm belief that anyone who has both feet firmly planted in the real world knows that that's not how life works. At some point in the life of a resource, you make a hard choice - fish or cut bait. In the case of Rodgers, you either ride him until the wheels fall off, maximize the effectiveness of said ride, and deal with the suck that's going to come after he falls off the cliff...or move on prior to the decline, and it's just plain luck whether you move on too soon, or not. That's one of a GM's primary responsibilities, and what their judging their job performance revolves around. In this case, Gute guessed wrong when it came to Rodgers, and it's largely his subsequent actions that have caused the franchise to underperform, and alienate it's greatest asset. Rodgers behavior aside - and it's not even that bad of behavior...it's not like he's a thug, an addict, a miscreant or any of a million negative things - there should be consequences for the GM making a wrong call in the first place, and then piling more bad on top of it.  Would Rodgers be acting out if it wasn't a snowball of bad guesses and decisions that got us to this point? I'm thinking 'no'. GM is at the root of all of this. I'd have fired him already.

I think there's some truth here, but a few comments.  First, we know that Gutekunst reports to team President Mark Murphy and that Murphy has final say on big personnel moves. He promoted Gutekust a few years ago and the consensus was he wanted a good scout, but otherwise a yes-man in terms of big decisions.  Murphy was president during the Favre fiasco, so he's been down a similar road.  He's a power guy, former NFL player, MBA from Kogod, JD from Georgetown, AD at Northwestern.  Murphy has totally transformed Lambeau and changed the culture in Green Bay. If you're going to fire anyone (which I think is crazy), you have to look at Murphy first.  Secondly, you can't ever give a player that much power, or your franchise is done.  You can never let the inmates run the asylum.  Finally, I don't believe any of this about Rodgers/Gutekunst - Rodgers is a strange, egomaniacal dude, but he's not stupid.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Id disagree on the Seahawks being better...Rams, Saints, Bengals...even the Chiefs.   Because Adams is that damn good. 

Crazy imo. Roughly speaking, Adams = kelce. Nobody else comes close to tyreek. Jones is better than CEH but we'll see by how much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Pipes said:

I'm trying not to be a homer in my groupings.  Yes Davante's a stud but all these teams have studs too and with teams like the Rams they don't have anyone has good as Davante but their options 2, 3 and 4 are much better than GB's.  I think a young QB needs more options not 1 great one that can be gameplanned away.  Yes teams couldn't take Davante away last season but that's with #12 at QB.  With Love I think it's a different story.

I think the Rams options are deep...but that Stud IMO trumps it.  With the Chiefs specifically...Kelce and Tyreek are great. But the rest are IMO as inconsistent as MVS.  So Adams and Jones being on lar with Hill Kelce.  I dint think one is clearly better as a group than the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, -OZ- said:

Crazy imo. Roughly speaking, Adams = kelce. Nobody else comes close to tyreek. Jones is better than CEH but we'll see by how much. 

See below...and at this point in their career...give me Adams over Kelce.

And I think Jones is miles ahead of CEH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They were mutually trying to rework his contract over the past few months.  

Yes. Rodgers is pissed and I’m sure would be fine with a trade, but if the Pack give him what he wants contract wise he’ll be back.

my view is that this is mainly a negotiation tactic by Rodgers to get what he wants.

in the end he’ll be starting week 1 with GB with a fat new contract.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Balco said:

Davante is a stud - doesn’t matter who the qb is, he gets open on every single play. And I am super high on Aaron Jones, I think he is actually underutilized.

But that’s it. Tonyan is an average player without Rodgers and same goes for Lazard, MVS and any other receiver on the roster not named Amari Rodgers (waiting to hear reports on how he looks in camp).

I am hopeful the line can be okay. Obviously a non healthy Bakhtiari will really hurt. Lose number one rated center to free agency. The two replacement tackles were unmitigated disasters last year. I am hopefully Meyers and Runyon provide solid play inside.

Bottom line - No Aaron Rodgers = No playoffs. 

Tackle was not a disaster all year.  It was against TB for sure...but not  all year no.

Just Love starting...I agree no playoffs.   But that isn’t the only option if they move him.

I also think Tonyan is above average.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sho nuff said:

Tackle was not a disaster all year.  It was against TB for sure...but not  all year no.

Just Love starting...I agree no playoffs.   But that isn’t the only option if they move him.

I also think Tonyan is above average.

Ham and Egger +

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Tackle was not a disaster all year.  It was against TB for sure...but not  all year no.

Just Love starting...I agree no playoffs.   But that isn’t the only option if they move him.

I also think Tonyan is above average.

They were a disaster by any objective measure when Bakhtiari was out.

Tonyan is an average player made better by his qb. I love the guy and his intensity but it is what it is.

Without Rodgers this offense goes in the garbage - he is that good. And it’s why his leak at this stage of the game ticks me off so much.

if he demanded a trade before all the signings, the packers could have traded him and also focused on building a roster post Rodgers. Now it’s a mad scramble (still think they cave and give him more guaranteed money)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Balco said:

They were a disaster by any objective measure when Bakhtiari was out.

Tonyan is an average player made better by his qb. I love the guy and his intensity but it is what it is.

Without Rodgers this offense goes in the garbage - he is that good. And it’s why his leak at this stage of the game ticks me off so much.

if he demanded a trade before all the signings, the packers could have traded him and also focused on building a roster post Rodgers. Now it’s a mad scramble (still think they cave and give him more guaranteed money)

I think it depends who the QB is.  Love...I agree the offense will be awful.

A vet replacement (an example...trading to someone like TN and gettin Tannehill in return)...I think its at least a middle of the pack Offense.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ILUVBEER99 said:

They were mutually trying to rework his contract over the past few months.  

Yes. Rodgers is pissed and I’m sure would be fine with a trade, but if the Pack give him what he wants contract wise he’ll be back.

my view is that this is mainly a negotiation tactic by Rodgers to get what he wants.

in the end he’ll be starting week 1 with GB with a fat new contract.

 

This is probably the most reasonable take, but it goes against their approach.  If they sign him to another 5 year record deal (which is surely what he wants), they are completely ####ed unless he becomes Tom Brady and plays at a high level until he's 43.  I think one reason they made the move with Love is because the team decided that's unlikely, given his injury history and decline in performance the prior 3 seasons.  Last season obviously through a huge wrench into that, which is what makes all of this so interesting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Willy said:

The only thing Rodgers does better than football is hold grudges.  The guy won't even talk to his own family.  Who does that?   

He's not playing for GB again.  If the Packers press the issue and force him back, he will be a toxic presence. Part of what makes him great is his self motivation through perceived slights is on a Jordan level. See: The Last Dance.  He can't just turn that off now.  It's what drives him.  Pretty sure he thinks he should be the guy with 7 rings by now and it's only because the stupid organization mismanaged things that he doesn't  Maybe he's right.

Tom Brady typically barely cracks the top 10 in QB compensation.  The Packers have made Rodgers the highest paid QB in the NFL twice

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, CletiusMaximus said:

This is probably the most reasonable take, but it goes against their approach.  If they sign him to another 5 year record deal (which is surely what he wants), they are completely ####ed unless he becomes Tom Brady and plays at a high level until he's 43.  I think one reason they made the move with Love is because the team decided that's unlikely, given his injury history and decline in performance the prior 3 seasons.  Last season obviously through a huge wrench into that, which is what makes all of this so interesting.

 

If they do this, whoever made the call to trade up to draft Love should be fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Willy said:

Pretty sure he thinks he should be the guy with 7 rings by now and it's only because the stupid organization mismanaged things that he doesn't  Maybe he's right.

Funny thing, a huge reason the Patriots and even bucs won is their defense. Not every year but many. The Packers have tried to address their defense but haven't been successful. 

Brady only had a couple receiving options close to Adams in ability, but Brady helped make lesser players better. Rodgers hasn't done that (as well)

Edited by -OZ-
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this is a contract thing. I think it's a respect thing. 

The Green Bay front office humiliated one of the best players in the league last year not just reaching for a QB. But trading up to reach for a QB. This is miles apart from Green Bay drafting Rodgers when he fell 20 spots lower than he was projected. 

Rodgers smiled, poured his tequila , didn't complain and put up a MVP season. 

But that move was a gamble and the front office lost. 

  • Like 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I don't think this is a contract thing. I think it's a respect thing. 

The Green Bay front office humiliated one of the best players in the league last year not just reaching for a QB. But trading up to reach for a QB. This is miles apart from Green Bay drafting Rodgers when he fell 20 spots lower than he was projected. 

Rodgers smiled, poured his tequila , didn't complain and put up a MVP season. 

But that move was a gamble and the front office lost. 

So what’s your vote? I’m curious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Joe Bryant said:

I don't think this is a contract thing. I think it's a respect thing. 

The Green Bay front office humiliated one of the best players in the league last year not just reaching for a QB. But trading up to reach for a QB. This is miles apart from Green Bay drafting Rodgers when he fell 20 spots lower than he was projected. 

Rodgers smiled, poured his tequila , didn't complain and put up a MVP season. 

But that move was a gamble and the front office lost. 

But I think the issue here is...why is that humiliating?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...