Packers Next Quarterback

[APB]

https://overthecap.com/looking-ahead-to ... on-rodgers

To summarize, the Packers are essentially at the mercy of Rodgers opting to retire because no team is taking on that contract, not with the way Rodgers is performing this year. Cutting him would induce a salary cap roster purge of unprecedented measure.

But that leaves the team between a rock and a hard place.

If MLF decides to bench Rodgers in order to get a good look at Love to inform future decisions, Rodgers the Diva likely surfaces and he'll likely be far less inclined to work with the Packers on a retirement option that helps the team. Instead, and knowing Rodgers from his past behaviors, it'd likely get ugly and the team would be forced to implode itself from a roster standpoint (by cutting him) rather than retain the now soured and salty QB.

So the team has to maintain a good relationship with Rodgers. He undoubtedly knows this. The fact the organization allowed themselves to be placed into this predicament is unconscionable.

[paco]

https://overthecap.com/looking-ahead-to ... on-rodgers

To summarize, the Packers are essentially at the mercy of Rodgers opting to retire because no team is taking on that contract, not with the way Rodgers is performing this year. Cutting him would induce a salary cap induced roster purge of unprecedented measure.

But that leaves the team between a rock and a hard place.

If MLF decides to bench Rodgers in order to get a good look at Love to inform future decisions, Rodgers the Diva likely surfaces and he'll likely be far less inclined to work with the Packers on a retirement option that helps the team. Instead, and knowing Rodgers from his past behaviors, it'd likely get ugly and the team would be forced to implode itself from a roster standpoint (by cutting him) rather than retain the now soured and salty QB.

So the team has to maintain a good relationship with Rodgers. He undoubtedly knows this. The fact the organization allowed themselves to be placed into this predicament is unconscionable.

If I'm reading this right, him retiring and us trading him post June are basically the same thing from a cap perspective, right? If we go the route of benching him, or even not and say Love is the guy next year. It doesn't much matter what Rodgers wants. If he wants to play, trade him. If he wants to retire, do that.

I'm probably wrong, but I have a feeling that both side will figure out a way to play nice and make whichever happen to both of their benefits. Yes, this is naive Paco here.

[Yoop]

https://overthecap.com/looking-ahead-to ... on-rodgers

To summarize, the Packers are essentially at the mercy of Rodgers opting to retire because no team is taking on that contract, not with the way Rodgers is performing this year. Cutting him would induce a salary cap induced roster purge of unprecedented measure.

But that leaves the team between a rock and a hard place.

If MLF decides to bench Rodgers in order to get a good look at Love to inform future decisions, Rodgers the Diva likely surfaces and he'll likely be far less inclined to work with the Packers on a retirement option that helps the team. Instead, and knowing Rodgers from his past behaviors, it'd likely get ugly and the team would be forced to implode itself from a roster standpoint (by cutting him) rather than retain the now soured and salty QB.

So the team has to maintain a good relationship with Rodgers. He undoubtedly knows this. The fact the organization allowed themselves to be placed into this predicament is unconscionable.

there are at least a half doz teams with QB's taking 20% of cap hits, we ranked fifth in the league now with Rodgers.

besides WR, and these OL issues this team has the talent to be a lot better, why everyone uses Rodgers contract to say we can't afford better receivers is just looking for excuses, Rodgers had 8 dropped passes yesterday, 4 that would have extended drives, one of which would have went for a TD. if some of those drops where catches we would have won yesterday.

[APB]

https://overthecap.com/looking-ahead-to ... on-rodgers

To summarize, the Packers are essentially at the mercy of Rodgers opting to retire because no team is taking on that contract, not with the way Rodgers is performing this year. Cutting him would induce a salary cap induced roster purge of unprecedented measure.

But that leaves the team between a rock and a hard place.

If MLF decides to bench Rodgers in order to get a good look at Love to inform future decisions, Rodgers the Diva likely surfaces and he'll likely be far less inclined to work with the Packers on a retirement option that helps the team. Instead, and knowing Rodgers from his past behaviors, it'd likely get ugly and the team would be forced to implode itself from a roster standpoint (by cutting him) rather than retain the now soured and salty QB.

So the team has to maintain a good relationship with Rodgers. He undoubtedly knows this. The fact the organization allowed themselves to be placed into this predicament is unconscionable.

If I'm reading this right, him retiring and us trading him post June are basically the same thing from a cap perspective, right? If we go the route of benching him, or even not and say Love is the guy next year. It doesn't much matter what Rodgers wants. If he wants to play, trade him. If he wants to retire, do that.

I'm probably wrong, but I have a feeling that both side will figure out a way to play nice and make whichever happen to both of their benefits. Yes, this is naive Paco here.

Trade him...to whom? Would you expect a robust trade market for a top salaried but declining and verge-of-retirement QB?

[paco]

To summarize, the Packers are essentially at the mercy of Rodgers opting to retire because no team is taking on that contract, not with the way Rodgers is performing this year. Cutting him would induce a salary cap induced roster purge of unprecedented measure.

But that leaves the team between a rock and a hard place.

If MLF decides to bench Rodgers in order to get a good look at Love to inform future decisions, Rodgers the Diva likely surfaces and he'll likely be far less inclined to work with the Packers on a retirement option that helps the team. Instead, and knowing Rodgers from his past behaviors, it'd likely get ugly and the team would be forced to implode itself from a roster standpoint (by cutting him) rather than retain the now soured and salty QB.

So the team has to maintain a good relationship with Rodgers. He undoubtedly knows this. The fact the organization allowed themselves to be placed into this predicament is unconscionable.

If I'm reading this right, him retiring and us trading him post June are basically the same thing from a cap perspective, right? If we go the route of benching him, or even not and say Love is the guy next year. It doesn't much matter what Rodgers wants. If he wants to play, trade him. If he wants to retire, do that.

I'm probably wrong, but I have a feeling that both side will figure out a way to play nice and make whichever happen to both of their benefits. Yes, this is naive Paco here.

Trade him...to whom? Would you expect a robust trade market for a top salaried but declining and verge-of-retirement QB?

If the NFL has proven anything, its that it isn't very smart. I think the market is smaller than it was. But Carolina, Tampa Bay, Denver, Indy, New Orleans, Miami, and Washington could all be potential targets.

[APB]

If I'm reading this right, him retiring and us trading him post June are basically the same thing from a cap perspective, right? If we go the route of benching him, or even not and say Love is the guy next year. It doesn't much matter what Rodgers wants. If he wants to play, trade him. If he wants to retire, do that.

I'm probably wrong, but I have a feeling that both side will figure out a way to play nice and make whichever happen to both of their benefits. Yes, this is naive Paco here.

Trade him...to whom? Would you expect a robust trade market for a top salaried but declining and verge-of-retirement QB?

If the NFL has proven anything, its that it isn't very smart. I think the market is smaller than it was. But Carolina, Tampa Bay, Denver, Indy, New Orleans, Miami, and Washington could all be potential targets.

I don't believe his market would be anywhere near your list but there's no way we'll ever know until it actually happens so no use arguing it.

[AmishMafia]

Thirdly, in no world is a Washington receiving corps with Terry McLaurin on it on par with the Packers WRs.

Well, we had Jaire covering him during most of his receptions and Jaire had great coverage. Heinekie read the coverage and made some impressive passes.

Both Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon are better RB receivers than they had. Our TEs are better. And I don't think there is much difference after McLaurin and our WRs. Bottom line, AR doesn't appear to put as much effort into it than other QBs. I did see him on the phone on the sidelines. Presumably he was talking with coaches in the booth. But maybe he was making some dinner reservation for later.

[APB]

Heinekie read the coverage and made some impressive passes.

That 's the difference between the Packers and other teams.

Other teams throw to where the receiver actually is/is going whereas Rodgers throws to where he thinks they should be and then glares at them when the pass falls incomplete.

Rookie Kenny Pickett, 2nd start of his career, had more success running the Steeler offense last night vs Miami than Rodgers has had this season. Dumb INTs doomed him, though. The 3rd string 5th rd rookie Zappe up in NE did, as well, over his 3 week starting span. Taylor Heinekie yesterday, too.

Oh, but that's right...meh, receivers.

[Labrev]

Blaming Rodgers is good, correct, wholesome, lawful, intelligent, charismatic, rational, civilized, and beautiful.

[paco]

Trade him...to whom? Would you expect a robust trade market for a top salaried but declining and verge-of-retirement QB?

If the NFL has proven anything, its that it isn't very smart. I think the market is smaller than it was. But Carolina, Tampa Bay, Denver, Indy, New Orleans, Miami, and Washington could all be potential targets.

I don't believe his market would be anywhere near your list but there's no way we'll ever know until it actually happens so no use arguing it.

Its bound to be less than that. Just tossing out could-be's at this point. But I would be willing to bet there are 2 or 3 teams that would be more than willing to trade for him. Value is a completely different question. Not getting 3-1sts for him anymore.

[Realist]

My guess is the next legit qb that can get us to another superbowl is playing high-school football. And that is an optimistic opinion.

[lupedafiasco]

Heinekie read the coverage and made some impressive passes.

That 's the difference between the Packers and other teams.

Other teams throw to where the receiver actually is/is going whereas Rodgers throws to where he thinks they should be and then glares at them when the pass falls incomplete.

Rookie Kenny Pickett, 2nd start of his career, had more success running the Steeler offense last night vs Miami than Rodgers has had this season. Dumb INTs doomed him, though. The 3rd string 5th rd rookie Zappe up in NE did, as well, over his 3 week starting span. Taylor Heinekie yesterday, too.

Oh, but that's right...meh, receivers.

Other teams invest in their offense.

[LombardiTime]

Thirdly, in no world is a Washington receiving corps with Terry McLaurin on it on par with the Packers WRs.

Well, we had Jaire covering him during most of his receptions and Jaire had great coverage. Heinekie read the coverage and made some impressive passes.

The original comment, that Rodgers "just got outplayed by Heinike who was working with WRs on par with the Packers" is demonstrably false.

In his 3 full seasons in the NFL, McLaurin has had 58 catches for 919 yards and 7 TDs, 87 for 1,118 and 4 TDs, and 77 for 1,053 and 5 TDs.

In 2022, McLaurin is on pace for 1,068 yards. He played 70 snaps yesterday.

McLaurin's QBs have been Case Keenum/Dwayne Haskins (2019), Haskins/Kyle Allen/Alex Smith (post leg injury) (2020), Heinicke (2021), and Heinicke/Carston Wentz (2022). Washington will have another, different QB in 2023.

The fact that McLaurin repeatedly bested Jaire yesterday attests to his talent.

As for the Packer receivers yesterday, the most yardage Lazard has ever gained in a season is 513 and he is not on pace to get close to 1,000 this year either. Lazard also got injured and only played 32 snaps yesterday. Watkins, who had 28 snaps, had a 1,000 season once -- back in 2015 in Buffalo. Since then, Sammy's best season resulted in 673 yards in 2019.

The Pack's other 3 WRs were 4th round rookie Doubs (48 snaps, no catches and 2 drops), 7th round rookie Samari Toure making his NFL debut (19 snaps), and Amari Rodgers (16 snaps). (BTW, the Commanders' #2 WR yesterday Curtis Samuel, who had 5 catches for 53 yards, would lead the Pack in receiving yards through 7 games).

The bottom line from yesterday is that Heinicke is a weak-armed nobody QB who threw an awful pick six, benefitted from a running attack that outgained GB by more than 4 to 1 (166-38 yards), and was fortunate enough to have a top WR in Terry McLaurin to bail him out when the going got tough. Sort of like how Davante Adams used to help bail out Aaron Rodgers.

Rodgers was not all that good against Washington and has not been very good for much of the season, but that does not negate the fact that the WRs he was supposed to throw to yesterday were, as a group, a bottom 2-5 NFL group and certainly not on par with Washington's WRs.

[Ghost_Lombardi]

AR's 2023 dead cap would be 99,000,000 and change. Really.

And I doubt that GB trades him.

Jordan Love may start in 2024 (move AR after 2023 and apply the tag to Love or sign him long term).

No, that isnt correct from my understanding.

All for discussing the future, but we gotta be accurate and informed.

If he's cut, the dead money is, I think, 99,000,000. 23's article he links to states as much. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

The upshot is that cutting him really isn't an option if the team decides to rebuild.

[bud fox]

Cutting Rodgers is not an option from a salary perspective.

You all are unfortunately stuck with 4 time mvp, 1 time superbowl mvp and highest rated passer of all time.

Unlucky

[Ghost_Lombardi]

Cutting Rodgers is not an option from a salary perspective.

You all are unfortunately stuck with 3 time mvp, 1 time superbowl mvp and highest rated passer of all time.

Unlucky

He turns 39 in December. 39. Unlike Brady, he's never been a statue in the pocket, but is approaching that now. He probably can't change. This team isn't winning anything this year. Bak's salary cap hit for 2023 is huge, and we have holes all over the roster. I don't see the organization able to build around our aging former MVP (also, I have a son in the 7th grade, and he wasn't born when GB last won the SB).

So yeah, we are stuck with our diva QB and his mediocre numbers, his drug use, and his anti-vax &%$@ which put his own purely personal hang ups ahead of the team last year.

[Labrev]

Yeah Rodgers's game is aging like milk. So much of it was dependent on escaping the pocket and rolling out, plus the ability to disregard mechanics by virtue of sheer arm strength/talent.

Now his legs and arm are starting to go and he's totally ill-prepared for it. Coach is, too, because he gave Rodgers way too much leeway to run the offense as he likes it.


To say nothing about how stupid it is to try to build a high-flying pass offense for a team whose road to a title will run through Green Bay in winter. That "awesome" 2011 team fell apart like a house of cards as soon as they had to play playoff football in sub-optimal conditions.

[lupedafiasco]

Yeah Rodgers's game is aging like milk. So much of it was dependent on escaping the pocket and rolling out, plus the ability to disregard mechanics by virtue of sheer arm strength/talent.

Now his legs and arm are starting to go and he's totally ill-prepared for it. Coach is, too, because he gave Rodgers way too much leeway to run the offense as he likes it.


To say nothing about how stupid it is to try to build a high-flying pass offense for a team whose road to a title will run through Green Bay in winter. That "awesome" 2011 team fell apart like a house of cards as soon as they had to play playoff football in sub-optimal conditions.

Dude... He won back to back MVPs in the last two years. The only difference between then and now is everything about the talent on offense is significantly worse. What do you think is more likely? The 2 time reigning MVP regressed in a matter of months or that when we dropped our 2 best WRs and replaced them with garbage our offense cant move the ball because its &%$@.

[Labrev]

Yeah Rodgers's game is aging like milk. So much of it was dependent on escaping the pocket and rolling out, plus the ability to disregard mechanics by virtue of sheer arm strength/talent.

Now his legs and arm are starting to go and he's totally ill-prepared for it. Coach is, too, because he gave Rodgers way too much leeway to run the offense as he likes it.


To say nothing about how stupid it is to try to build a high-flying pass offense for a team whose road to a title will run through Green Bay in winter. That "awesome" 2011 team fell apart like a house of cards as soon as they had to play playoff football in sub-optimal conditions.

Dude... He won back to back MVPs in the last two years. The only difference between then and now is everything about the talent on offense is significantly worse. What do you think is more likely? The 2 time reigning MVP regressed in a matter of months or that when we dropped our 2 best WRs and replaced them with garbage our offense cant move the ball because its &%$@.

Your point does not contradict my point at all.

[Labrev]

As for his recent back-to-back MVPs, it's now time to face the reality: 17 was the real MVP all along.

Adams was producing with Hundo, he was producing in 2018 when Rodgers was mid and McCarthy was failing, he was producing in 2019 when Rodgers was still mid and MLF was new on the scene, and ofc he produced his best couple years when Rodgers got out of his slump (note that Rodgers' WR situation did not change between the year before when he was not playing great and the following MVP season, at least there were no significant additions to the mix). He is even producing now with Oakland, McDaniels, and Carr, not as highly but still getting it done.

Some have said LaFleur is just a product of Rodgers, but that can't be true because Rodgers wasn't good in the first year MLF was here. But you know who was always good, before and after MLF? Davante Adams.

It was Adams. It was always Adams.

I underestimated how big of a loss Adams was, not mind you because Rodgers not having him is a valid excuse for the poor play on O, but because Adams was hungry and had a real champion mindset, neither of which is true of our diva QB. Our mistake was not that we failed to adequately replace him, it's that we let him get away and made our bed with Erin.