What to do with Aaron (with season now in dumpster)?

[Yoop]

All this concern/talk over Love's 5th year option.

The Packers likely know what they have in Love. I think the fan base has a pretty good idea, too.

Assuming Packers' brass feels relatively confident Love is the future, I'd just as soon see a multi-year contract extension next spring, with it the added flexibility of managing cap hits and basically getting him locked up long term at a relative discount, before simply riding the 5th year option for $20ish mil (cash and cap hit) and then paying full cost for an ascending young QB after he's "proved" it.

That is, if they're confident.

Now, granted, that comes with risk. If Love has already plateaued (or @lupedafiasco is right and he's trash can juice) then he becomes our very own Zach Wilson and the team will need to be...redefined. That's all beyond the horizon stuff, though.

For the immediate future, either sign him long term next spring or decline the 5th year option altogether and start over in the QB search. My $.02 cents.

spot on, the best situation by far is to pick up the 5th year option, Rodgers plays all of 2023 and we can resign Love to a cheaper contract simply because he hasn't played enough to establish higher value

[BF004]

If you are Love, what kind of extension would you take?

If he doesn’t play again next year, 2024 he’s on 5th year option and starting, what would you take? Or wanna bet on yourself having a big year and being an FA and getting big bank or play the franchise game?

I think I’d want a lot.

Franchise tag for 2025 likely to be 35-40, then 20% increases.

So just even a two year extension before 2024, I’d probably be asking for 20+40+45= or like 33-35 per. For 2024-26.

Would/Should we give that much?

[salmar80]

Honestly our offensive line was amazing. Rodgers never had a hint of pressure. AJ Dillon ran great and Christian Watson was the playmaker. This offense is turning into the Offensive Line and Christian Watson show.

A huge Pass Interference was called because Watson destroyed his man. It was an easy TD if the ball was accurate, but instead it was incredibly underthrown. The underthrow though was rewarded because the DB didn't turn his head and ran into Watson as he tried to go back to the ball.

Personally I hate those DPI's as it rewards the offense for a short ball. But that was more of a win on the WR than it was on anything.

Watson is a special, special player. This offense with Watson and Doubs in the future is something to get really excited about.

Amazing how people can't see how Rodgers pocket movement helps this line.

Yeah.

no. Credit goes to the offensive line for the Bears game. They were incredible. Anything else is a joke and clear bias towards idol worship.

I mean, AR's movement skills in pocket does help out, but it sure helps AR to have a pocket to move around in.

Bud's is an asinine comment: As if OL would only count as good if a QB was protected despite of what the QB does. Fact is good QBs either have to be able to move around (AR), be quick to get rid of the ball (Brady), or brave and unflappable enough to be ready to throw while getting hit (Roethlisberger). Not even the best OL can protect an statue that holds onto the ball.

[go pak go]

All this concern/talk over Love's 5th year option.

The Packers likely know what they have in Love. I think the fan base has a pretty good idea, too.

Assuming Packers' brass feels relatively confident Love is the future, I'd just as soon see a multi-year contract extension next spring, with it the added flexibility of managing cap hits and basically getting him locked up long term at a relative discount, before simply riding the 5th year option for $20ish mil (cash and cap hit) and then paying full cost for an ascending young QB after he's "proved" it.

That is, if they're confident.

Now, granted, that comes with risk. If Love has already plateaued (or @lupedafiasco is right and he's trash can juice) then he becomes our very own Zach Wilson and the team will need to be...redefined. That's all beyond the horizon stuff, though.

For the immediate future, either sign him long term next spring or decline the 5th year option altogether and start over in the QB search. My $.02 cents.

An extension could be challenging unless Love is assured 2023 or 2024 (at the latest) it will be his team. That is the one nice thing about having the 5th year. We can force Love's hand if needed.

But I think everyone likely knows Rodgers will be done in GB after 2023 at the latest if the Packers want to move on with Love.

[Labrev]

one of our OL man is being pushed right back towards him that happened quite a bit in the Bears game as well as every other game

No.

[Yoop]

one of our OL man is being pushed right back towards him that happened quite a bit in the Bears game as well as every other game

No.

yes, you and several others refuse to give credit where credit is do.

[Yoop]

Amazing how people can't see how Rodgers pocket movement helps this line.

Yeah.

no. Credit goes to the offensive line for the Bears game. They were incredible. Anything else is a joke and clear bias towards idol worship.

I mean, AR's movement skills in pocket does help out, but it sure helps AR to have a pocket to move around in.

Bud's is an asinine comment: As if OL would only count as good if a QB was protected despite of what the QB does. Fact is good QBs either have to be able to move around (AR), be quick to get rid of the ball (Brady), or brave and unflappable enough to be ready to throw while getting hit (Roethlisberger). Not even the best OL can protect an statue that holds onto the ball.

with the last 3 or so games our OL is now ranked 11th in the league, so Rodgers has had to move and avoid pressure, so obvious when ya actually pay attention to it

[salmar80]

If you are Love, what kind of extension would you take?

If he doesn’t play again next year, 2024 he’s on 5th year option and starting, what would you take? Or wanna bet on yourself having a big year and being an FA and getting big bank or play the franchise game?

I think I’d want a lot.

Franchise tag for 2025 likely to be 35-40, then 20% increases.

So just even a two year extension before 2024, I’d probably be asking for 20+40+45= or like 33-35 per. For 2024-26.

Would/Should we give that much?

I bet Aaron has told him about how much he lost inking a long term deal a bit too early.

If the franchise doesn't believe in Love enough to offer quality starting QB money, that would signal he would not be safe as a starter anyways. In that case, if I were Love, I'd bank on having a good season on the option year and then negotiating.

[Labrev]

one of our OL man is being pushed right back towards him that happened quite a bit in the Bears game as well as every other game

No.

yes, you and several others refuse to give credit where credit is do.

No, as in: no, the OL was not getting pushed back into him quite a bit in the Bears game; there were like 4 pressures all game.

You/RDF whine all the time about 12 not getting credit because you imagine him playing way better than he actually did. In this case (as is often the case), you are not simply giving him undue credit, you are doing so by SMEARING other players that objectively played a great game. Sickening.

[Pckfn23]

No.

yes, you and several others refuse to give credit where credit is do.

No, as in: no, the OL was not getting pushed back into him quite a bit in the Bears game; there were like 4 pressures all game.

You/RDF whine all the time about 12 not getting credit because you imagine him playing way better than he actually did. In this case (as is often the case), you are not simply giving him undue credit, you are doing so by SMEARING other players that objectively played a great game. Sickening.

Ya, found the "refusing to give credit where credit is due," comment ironic as that is exactly what is happening when not acknowledging that the OL had a superb pass blocking day.

[go pak go]

No.

yes, you and several others refuse to give credit where credit is do.

No, as in: no, the OL was not getting pushed back into him quite a bit in the Bears game; there were like 4 pressures all game.

You/RDF whine all the time about 12 not getting credit because you imagine him playing way better than he actually did. In this case (as is often the case), you are not simply giving him undue credit, you are doing so by SMEARING other players that objectively played a great game. Sickening.

Yeah. Andy Herman did his grades and again Rodgers graded low. It was not a good game for Rodgers at all. Why it wasn't a horrible grade is lack of INTs but when you get a low 80's QB rating with no turnovers (and 2 TDs)...it means it was a bad day at the office. And it's more than just inaccurate throws that can try and be blamed on the thumb. Rodgers is doing wrong checks. He is doing wrong audibles and he is looking at the wrong side of the field. It could be "playcall" to have Rodgers look right when he should look left, but as Herman even says...it's happening a lot.

The hero balls on 3rd and shorts are getting old. But again. This is a trend. The bar is lowering and the wow plays that made up for these in the past are disappearing.

The supporting cast is coming as was predicted in the early season. The star receiver is there. The RBs are there. The Oline is there. I don't think it is coincidence that the only defense or "spin" on Rodgers from this game is him avoiding pressures in the pocket when the Oline did so well there was in reality no pressure to avoid.

Early in the season I thought the defense and run game could carry this team in the first half and the pass game and Oline would come on in the 2nd half. Part of that has happened. But I am starting to be of the belief that our defense and current QB cannot take us where we need to go.

Needless to say, I really want to see #10 this season in more action because I want to see if my suspicion of this offense is legitimate.

[LombardiTime]

All this concern/talk over Love's 5th year option.

The Packers likely know what they have in Love. I think the fan base has a pretty good idea, too.

Assuming Packers' brass feels relatively confident Love is the future, I'd just as soon see a multi-year contract extension next spring, with it the added flexibility of managing cap hits and basically getting him locked up long term at a relative discount, before simply riding the 5th year option for $20ish mil (cash and cap hit) and then paying full cost for an ascending young QB after he's "proved" it.

That is, if they're confident.

Now, granted, that comes with risk. If Love has already plateaued (or @lupedafiasco is right and he's trash can juice) then he becomes our very own Zach Wilson and the team will need to be...redefined. That's all beyond the horizon stuff, though.

For the immediate future, either sign him long term next spring or decline the 5th year option altogether and start over in the QB search. My $.02 cents.

An extension could be challenging unless Love is assured 2023 or 2024 (at the latest) it will be his team. That is the one nice thing about having the 5th year. We can force Love's hand if needed.

But I think everyone likely knows Rodgers will be done in GB after 2023 at the latest if the Packers want to move on with Love.

As someone who wanted to move on from Rodgers after last season, can you provide more detail as to why EVERYONE likely knows Rodgers will be done after 2023?

Not disputing the point, but not seeing the indisputable evidence for either.

[go pak go]

All this concern/talk over Love's 5th year option.

The Packers likely know what they have in Love. I think the fan base has a pretty good idea, too.

Assuming Packers' brass feels relatively confident Love is the future, I'd just as soon see a multi-year contract extension next spring, with it the added flexibility of managing cap hits and basically getting him locked up long term at a relative discount, before simply riding the 5th year option for $20ish mil (cash and cap hit) and then paying full cost for an ascending young QB after he's "proved" it.

That is, if they're confident.

Now, granted, that comes with risk. If Love has already plateaued (or @lupedafiasco is right and he's trash can juice) then he becomes our very own Zach Wilson and the team will need to be...redefined. That's all beyond the horizon stuff, though.

For the immediate future, either sign him long term next spring or decline the 5th year option altogether and start over in the QB search. My $.02 cents.

An extension could be challenging unless Love is assured 2023 or 2024 (at the latest) it will be his team. That is the one nice thing about having the 5th year. We can force Love's hand if needed.

But I think everyone likely knows Rodgers will be done in GB after 2023 at the latest if the Packers want to move on with Love.

As someone who wanted to move on from Rodgers after last season, can you provide more detail as to why EVERYONE likely knows Rodgers will be done after 2023?

Not disputing the point, but not seeing the indisputable evidence for either.

Yeah no that's a good point.

But I think you need to bold the rest of the sentence. I qualified my statement pretty heavily "if the Packers want to move on with Love".

If the Packers believe in Love, Rodgers last year in GB has to be next year. Absolutely has to. We know Love won't sit on a Packers bench after 2023. He will be looking for an opportunity elsewhere.

[APB]

If you are Love, what kind of extension would you take?

If he doesn’t play again next year, 2024 he’s on 5th year option and starting, what would you take? Or wanna bet on yourself having a big year and being an FA and getting big bank or play the franchise game?

I think I’d want a lot.

Franchise tag for 2025 likely to be 35-40, then 20% increases.

So just even a two year extension before 2024, I’d probably be asking for 20+40+45= or like 33-35 per. For 2024-26.

Would/Should we give that much?

Let's assume the Packers FO cannot find a trade partner for AR and AR indicates he's not ready to retire just yet. That makes Rodgers the starter, again, in 2023 whether he, we, or they like it.

The Packers FO then approaches Love about a new contract. He prefers the 5th year option and the potential rewards that follow but the Packers let him know they are not decided on exercising the option and are even considering drafting his replacement moving forward. They're indeed comfortable sticking with Love, however, if it can be on a reasonable non-bank breaking new contract. We're talking tearing up the 4th year of his rookie deal ($2.3m) and offering somewhere in the 5 yr - $30m/yr range with associated market driven guarantees.

That pays him considerably more than his previous contract's 4th year and, again, considerably more than any 5th yr option would. His sacrifice? Potentially playing out the remaining 3 years of the deal at a minor discount. And that's only if he's really good. That sacrifice also allows the Packer's to build a team around him post-Rodgers thus increasing his chances for that aforementioned future success.

Now put yourself in Love's position. He has achieved assurances of lifelong financial stability, all while still retaining the potential for big, big money should his play dictate. None of that goes away. He has also relieved himself of any risk should he fail miserably once handed the reigns.

The alternative is to play hardball with the team that drafted and developed him and take your chances with free agency potentially following year four of a rookie deal that saw him play less than a full game throughout the length of it.

And consider the contract he'd get then?

What outside team is going to offer top dollar to a player who was just declined for their 5th year and who hasn't put more than a games worth of meaningful film out there? And should he fail that first year with his new team, what's to say a regime change doesn't take place and he finds himself back in the FA pool only this time competing with the Josh Johnson's and Blaine Gabbert's of the NFL?

Love has got to know his best chance at both career success and financial success is, at this point, with the Packers. Yes, he may not achieve both on this next contract but the likelihood he ever achieves either diminishes exponentially should he choose to force the Packers hand and he lands with the likes of a Lovie Smith or Ron Rivera type as his HC.

[Yoop]

No.

yes, you and several others refuse to give credit where credit is do.

No, as in: no, the OL was not getting pushed back into him quite a bit in the Bears game; there were like 4 pressures all game.

You/RDF whine all the time about 12 not getting credit because you imagine him playing way better than he actually did. In this case (as is often the case), you are not simply giving him undue credit, you are doing so by SMEARING other players that objectively played a great game. Sickening.

when a OL man is pushed back in the pocket and Rodgers alludes that push it is not counted as a pressure because the DL had not freed himself of the blocker, but that hardly means Rodgers didn't have to move, this OL has ranked middle of the league or even worse run blocking most of this season, and now just recently has moved up to slot level 11 in league rankings.

and GPG I could give a &%$@ less what Herman has to say, reality concerning the Bears game, like most games this year, receivers are not open, true Rodgers hasn't been as accurate as normal, even some of that can be blamed elsewhere besides just him, as to the read progressions, you and Herman have no idea about that. ffs this pilling on Rodgers BS is so over the top.

very likely Rodgers is our QB next season, whether you or Herman like it or not.

[Pckfn23]

when a OL man is pushed back in the pocket and Rodgers alludes that push it is not counted as a pressure because the DL had not freed himself of the blocker,

This is false. If a defender forces the QB to move it is counted as a pressure.

It's in the definition for PFF and PFR

[bud fox]

when a OL man is pushed back in the pocket and Rodgers alludes that push it is not counted as a pressure because the DL had not freed himself of the blocker,

This is false. If a defender forces the QB to move it is counted as a pressure.

It's in the definition for PFF and PFR

Pfr definition of a pressure is a combination of scks, hurries and knock-down.

Hurry is defined as "any play where the QB is induced to throw the ball earlier than intended or chased out of the pocket".

So a qb bouncing around the pocket isn't a pressure it is only when they flee the pocket.

[Pckfn23]

Yep, a simple small movement in the pocket is not a pressure, never said it was...

[bud fox]

Yep, a simple small movement in the pocket is not a pressure, never said it was...

Qb can allude a ol push and remain in pocket. You said that if a defender forces a qb to move its a pressure. That is false as per pfr definition.

Rodgers is probably the best in the league in bouncing around and staying in the pocket.

[Pckfn23]

And this is PFF:

Under pressure passing is any time the quarterback is disturbed from his normal throwing motion from set up to release, or anytime a pressure is registered on a given passing play.

2 from OL against the Bears. A fabrication to say the OL was responsible for an appreciable amount of pressures in the form of getting pushed back into the QB.