New York Jets and Trade Compensation

[Acrobat]

why would a GM give up two first for Rodgers when he is incapable of winning a SB, or is it that our GM's over the years have made it to hard a task for the QB to over come there poor decisions, and the GM's that are interested know this.

everyone in a hurry to dump Rodgers for Love simply refuses to believe that, they also refuse to accept that the odds of Love ever QBing a Packers team to a SB win are almost zero to none, just as it is for almost every QB in the league

Ticket sales, brand value, and the perception that Rodgers could win a Super Bowl with more weapons, just to name a few reasons.

[Captain_Ben]

I really think that for Rodgers fanboys, having him as our starting QB and playing above-average is about equal in enjoyableness as an actual SuperBowl season. Like, I think they would honestly rather have a decade of great Rodgers play without a SuperBowl win like 2011-2022 than to win it all with Trent Dilfer at QB (they will never admit it, but you can just hear them saying "eew!!" to the thought of the latter).

I don't consider myself a fanboy, but I have decided that I want him back on the Packers because I think at this point he gives us a better chance to win a Super Bowl than Jordan Love does. Even with his massive contract, I think the Packers will field a talented team next season. The rookie WR's will have a year in the system under their belts. AR (hopefully) won't be playing with a broken thumb on his throwing hand. I think it's premature to be insisting that AR is done when you look at the circumstances of last season. Broken thumb, throwing to rookie WR's from small schools, dumb dumb defensive coordinator (like he's had for most of his career). If Love is indeed that valuable, I think we should consider trying to trade him and not AR.

[Yoop]

why would a GM give up two first for Rodgers when he is incapable of winning a SB, or is it that our GM's over the years have made it to hard a task for the QB to over come there poor decisions, and the GM's that are interested know this.

everyone in a hurry to dump Rodgers for Love simply refuses to believe that, they also refuse to accept that the odds of Love ever QBing a Packers team to a SB win are almost zero to none, just as it is for almost every QB in the league

Explain why ARs inability to throw deep, refusal to hit WRs open in the middle, and a reluctance to be a leader are a result of poor decisions by the GM? The poorest decision Gute has made is not to trade him sooner.

Almost every QB has no chance to win a SB? Somebody has to win of the 32 starters. Bet you said Hurts and Stafford had no chance either at points of their career.

And as far as assessing ARs value based on what a GM will trade for him - Do you think Russell Wilson is a great QB based on Denver's trade?

only a fool would think the thumb didn't hinder his accuracy, pass rush forces QB's to become inconsistent, If ya can't lead by example it becomes nothing but words when your not doing well yourself.

speaking in hindsight it was foolish of Murphy to give Rodgers a 100 mil. contract in 2018, when he still had two years left on his old deal, and instead of drafting 3 very raw receivers should have brought in a more ready to play guy, either in that draft, or in UFA, you and others focus your blame on Rodgers and give the FO a pass.

AR's value to us this coming season is another run at a ring, or whatever we can get in a trade, while you seem to think he's washed up, I doubt that very much.

I've known Stafford can be a very good QB a long time, no surprise improving his supporting cast would led to a trophy, and it's been the same thing here with Rodgers, ya need to give a QB talent, or good DC's can scheme up to cover 1 or 2 guys specially when one is a RB, the other a WR, NO impact #2 , no impact TE, lousy ST, average defense

and that is a fair assessment of the Packers for the last half dozen years, yep lets blame Rodgers, MVP's get MVP trophys because in part there able to do more with less.

[Yoop]

why would a GM give up two first for Rodgers when he is incapable of winning a SB, or is it that our GM's over the years have made it to hard a task for the QB to over come there poor decisions, and the GM's that are interested know this.

everyone in a hurry to dump Rodgers for Love simply refuses to believe that, they also refuse to accept that the odds of Love ever QBing a Packers team to a SB win are almost zero to none, just as it is for almost every QB in the league

Ticket sales, brand value, and the perception that Rodgers could win a Super Bowl with more weapons, just to name a few reasons.

all true, specially the last part, Stafford went to the Rams and was able to do there what he couldn't do in a talentless detroit offense, same with Rodgers and the Packers

[Yoop]

How about the folks that didn't play him, so we might get a feel for whether he's the one, especially this year?

this article BSA brought in another thread shows the progression of Love in the eyes of his personal coach.

who knows why Lafleur didn't rest Rodgers thumb and insert Love, probably because he felt even with the thumb Rodgers was still the best option

https://www.golongtd.com/p/he-can-be-on ... ingIn=true

lol Loves personal coach has to say he has gotten better. If he hadnt gotten better, he should fire himself. Thats propaganda.

some of it, sure, but it does shed light on the step by step progress of Love, and reading it I didn't see a false word, he was very very raw, which translates to a lot of coaching up, and he did look night and day better as a result of two years as a understudy to Rodgers, in the little exposure last year we saw a accurate deep passing ability, the kid does have a strong arm, and on all but several drops he looked to handle pass pressure.

now I admit the part about two eye, one on the defender, the other on receivers was a bit weird, but other then that I found the article enlightening

[Labrev]

I really think that for Rodgers fanboys, having him as our starting QB and playing above-average is about equal in enjoyableness as an actual SuperBowl season. Like, I think they would honestly rather have a decade of great Rodgers play without a SuperBowl win like 2011-2022 than to win it all with Trent Dilfer at QB (they will never admit it, but you can just hear them saying "eew!!" to the thought of the latter).

I don't consider myself a fanboy, but I have decided that I want him back on the Packers because I think at this point he gives us a better chance to win a Super Bowl than Jordan Love does. Even with his massive contract, I think the Packers will field a talented team next season. The rookie WR's will have a year in the system under their belts. AR (hopefully) won't be playing with a broken thumb on his throwing hand. I think it's premature to be insisting that AR is done when you look at the circumstances of last season. Broken thumb, throwing to rookie WR's from small schools, dumb dumb defensive coordinator (like he's had for most of his career). If Love is indeed that valuable, I think we should consider trying to trade him and not AR.

I think my post was directed less at people who have articulable rational reasons for your opinion and more towards people who become basket cases about how much this team HAS to stick by Rodgers, for whom this larger issue is some weird emotional pathology; that clearly is not you. I respect your far more reasoned basis for it. Mike Wahle has the same position. I don't agree, but I can respect it.

[go pak go]

I think the most you could expect for Jordan in a trade is a 3rd round pick or a trade for "change of scenery" players and conditional picks.

I will say this about Jordan Love's 2022 season:

There was no point that Love really disappointed. We had quite a few of those moments in 2021 but 2022 he balled when he had the opportunity. The Saints preseason and Eagles games were great performances by Love.

We have seen progression of Love every year. He was nothing in 2020, slight preseason performance in 2021, noticeable improvement in 2022. So we do see a progression here.

As far as if the organization should know if Love is up to the challenge? I mean this is the same organization who thought Amari Rodgers was the better option over Kesean Nixon as our returner so.....

[Pckfn23]

I just don't see how a 2023 Packers team minus these guys:

image.png (84.9 KiB) Viewed 482 times

that just went 8-9 AND must figure out a way to get under a $25 million cap overage can be seen to have a realistic shot at a Super Bowl even with Aaron Rodgers.

And the 2024 Packers are only $4 Million under a cap of $235 million...

[Drj820]

I just don't see how a 2023 Packers team minus these guys:
image.png

that just went 8-9 AND must figure out a way to get under a $25 million cap overage can be seen to have a realistic shot at a Super Bowl even with Aaron Rodgers.

And the 2024 Packers are only $4 Million under a cap of $235 million...

Point taken, its a lot to replace...but honestly there is only a couple players on that list that played a key role...Amos, Lazard, and Jarron Reed

Most of those guys including Tonyan dont really add much anymore

[Pckfn23]

I don't disagree about those players, but we have to replace them with veteran minimum players and/or rookies. Many of those guys brought more than their replacements will be expected to bring.

[Labrev]

The whole discussion about the pieces around Rodgers is academic. Even if it's more than adequate, Rodgers will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, probably by stupidly throwing into double coverage yet again and missing wide-open receivers (that is his equivalent of Favre's INTs).

The problem is not what we have around Rodgers. The fact his contract makes it hard to provide good enough supporting talent around him is an issue, yes, but that's the lesser issue.

But the bigger issue is that even when he has enough talent around him, he will just choke it away. The problem IS Aaron Rodgers, prohibitive contract or no.

[Pckfn23]

The whole discussion about the pieces around Rodgers is academic. Even if it's more than adequate, Rodgers will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, probably by stupidly throwing into double coverage yet again and missing wide-open receivers (that is his equivalent of Favre's INTs).

The problem is not what we have around Rodgers. The fact his contract makes it hard to provide good enough supporting talent around him is an issue, yes, but that's the lesser issue.

But the bigger issue is that even when he has enough talent around him, he will just choke it away. The problem IS Aaron Rodgers, prohibitive contract or no.

Well, that evokes big emotional responses in some and whether true or not, doesn't lead to good discussions. When we can talk about the pieces around Rodgers and how they won't be enough, yet again, that does tend to get some reasonable discussion. I mean, it is the constant refrain that the reason we don't win it all is because of the lack of quality players around Rodgers.

[Yoop]

I just don't see how a 2023 Packers team minus these guys:
image.png

that just went 8-9 AND must figure out a way to get under a $25 million cap overage can be seen to have a realistic shot at a Super Bowl even with Aaron Rodgers.

And the 2024 Packers are only $4 Million under a cap of $235 million...

Point taken, its a lot to replace...but honestly there is only a couple players on that list that played a key role...Amos, Lazard, and Jarron Reed

Most of those guys including Tonyan dont really add much anymore

both Reed and Tonyan will be cheap, Amos production fell of a cliff, he's a draft replacement, Lazard will get close to what MVS got so we have to let him go, and use another draft pick on one with more potential, there bound to be some roster roll over, Rodgers could actually redo his deal if he wants to stay.

media reports are all over the place on trade scenarios, same with Love has to play or he'll ask for a trade, when he comes out and actually says that then I'll listen, young players all want to play, nothing uncommon about that.

people are using last years performance to make rash unfounded statements about Rodgers, and simply refuse any rationality on the subject, to believe Rodgers who just a year prior was threading the needle to the tune of a MVP selection, to over the hill loser, inaccurate and blind, egocentric maniac, who hates rookie receivers, well I just can't get there.

the 60 mil. is my only issue, I'am convinced without a doubt that the QB we saw last year is not a true indication of Rodgers ability, to many things hindered his capability, and the main driver for his perceived value on the open market for other teams, as it should be with us.
but if he wont rework his contract to realistic money, then grab what we can get for him and go with Love

I'am a fan boy of every packer player, no matter how long they've been with the team, specially the ones that carried this team to the post season as much as he did. and with some mediocre supporting cast.

[Drj820]

I don’t agree Amos play has “fallen off a cliff”

[Yoop]

The whole discussion about the pieces around Rodgers is academic. Even if it's more than adequate, Rodgers will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, probably by stupidly throwing into double coverage yet again and missing wide-open receivers (that is his equivalent of Favre's INTs).

The problem is not what we have around Rodgers. The fact his contract makes it hard to provide good enough supporting talent around him is an issue, yes, but that's the lesser issue.

But the bigger issue is that even when he has enough talent around him, he will just choke it away. The problem IS Aaron Rodgers, prohibitive contract or no.

complete horse manure, do you see any SB winner with the talent on offense this team has had the last 5 years, or average defenses, hell less then average, or seller dweller ST's, when you lack skill position players you can't afford to lose any, and we always do, when your run game is stymied you can't afford to have receivers drop TD passes, which is why we lost in 2020, for every PO loss I can point to Rodgers supporting cast failures, you turn a blind eye to that and just blame Rodgers for not being as great as he normally has been, reality is come PO's defenses tend to rise above there normal play, thats when the offenses supporting cast has to step up as well, ours doesn't, why? because we implode, we get poor pass pro, we get dropped passes, we get fumbles, we get a injury to a RB, all PO teams experience some of this, true, but when you have a skeleton group of skill position players the loss of a Dillon or a Jones is huge, when all you have at receiver is Adams and a steep decline to #2.

people refuse to accept that, and instead concentrate on the couple times Rodgers didn't see a open Lazard or someone else.

[Labrev]

Well, that evokes big emotional responses in some and whether true or not, doesn't lead to good discussions. When we can talk about the pieces around Rodgers and how they won't be enough, yet again, that does tend to get some reasonable discussion. I mean, it is the constant refrain that the reason we don't win it all is because of the lack of quality players around Rodgers.

Don't care. This conventional wisdom needs to be subverted, the same way it needed to be when Brett Favre was choking away seasons while Packers fans mindlessly worshipped him for having saved the franchise years ago.

Rodgers's low production games are the 2010s equivalent of Favre's 2000s INTs. It's high time we came to terms with the reality: Rodgers = Favre. Time is a flat circle.

complete horse manure, do you see any SB winner with the talent on offense this team has had the last 5 years,

Umm yeah. Chiefs have 1 star player in their receiving group (Kelce) and then various guys who are not star players but fulfill a different role, one of whom was ON OUR TEAM in the last 5 years we supposedly didn't have enough talent. That should be more than enough for an elite QB like Mahomes, especially if the team is paying them accordingly.

Instead of Kelce, we had Adams, who was an even more dynamic receiving threat. We had Cobb, who Rodgers insisted on having, which goes against the idea Rodgers didn't throw to other receivers because of a lack of trust (Cobb being second only to Adams as receivers Rodgers trusts most). For one of those two years, we had Tonyan playing pretty well at TE.

We also had/have way better RBs than KC ever has in a given year, Jones and Dillon. Dillon was more productive for us as RB2 than KC's RB1.

OL is about the same.

Brady won it in 2016 when his only good receiver was a slot who's not as good as Adams (Edelman) and again a bunch of no-name guys. He did also have Martellus Bennett, who for some reason is proof of other QBs having way better receivers, but when he's less productive in GB with Rodgers than he was for the Bears and their QB carousel, somehow Rodgers fans can't put 2 and 2 together on that one.

Boy, that was easy.

Sure, there are some teams with more talent you can point to. Generally, those are not teams that were paying Elite QB for years before their SB apearance. The Bucs and Rams added the QB *after* getting the other players. Philly this year has all the O talent because their QB costs a paltry $1m.

[Ghost_Lombardi]

NO team will trade anything worthwhile unless Rodgers agrees to play more than one year. If Rodgers won't agree to this, a trade will not happen. Therefore, your Rodgers must accept a trade or retire is simply not true.

The team acquiring him makes the picks contingent upon Rodgers playing in 2023 or beyond. If he refuses to play for them, then he doesn't get paid.

It really is that simple. Once traded he's no longer a Packer. If he refuses to play and retires to spite GB, then so be it. The acquiring team gives up nothing and GB gets him and his contract off the books. Everyone wins except for Aaron Rodgers.

Have y'all never been in a cutthroat business deal?

[Yoop]

KC receivers SB 54
Hill- 105 yrds
S. Watkins 98 yrds
Kelce 43 yrds

Williams 105 yrds rushing, 40 plus receiving

KC won because they did have skill position players that produced, with the 14th ranked defense, they won by 2 scores over the #2 defense in the league Niners, which also blows this defense wins championships theory out to.

we have limped along with crap defense and Rodgers carrying this offense for most of the last 12 years.

[Pugger]

I really think that for Rodgers fanboys, having him as our starting QB and playing above-average is about equal in enjoyableness as an actual SuperBowl season. Like, I think they would honestly rather have a decade of great Rodgers play without a SuperBowl win like 2011-2022 than to win it all with Trent Dilfer at QB (they will never admit it, but you can just hear them saying "eew!!" to the thought of the latter).

I don't consider myself a fanboy, but I have decided that I want him back on the Packers because I think at this point he gives us a better chance to win a Super Bowl than Jordan Love does. Even with his massive contract, I think the Packers will field a talented team next season. The rookie WR's will have a year in the system under their belts. AR (hopefully) won't be playing with a broken thumb on his throwing hand. I think it's premature to be insisting that AR is done when you look at the circumstances of last season. Broken thumb, throwing to rookie WR's from small schools, dumb dumb defensive coordinator (like he's had for most of his career). If Love is indeed that valuable, I think we should consider trying to trade him and not AR.

My gut says AR will be back in 2023 and then Love will take over in 2024. If Rodgers wants to continue playing (and we all think he does) and Packers' management want him back he'll return. I just hope if this occurs fans don't all bent out of shape and even start booing him at practice and Lambeau. I recall he had to endure that during the summer of 2008 and that was wrong then too. Any displeasure if #12 is back should be aimed at Gute and company and not the player. IMO if Rodgers wants to come back that should tell us a lot about how he feels about this franchise.

[YoHoChecko]

I played the "what compensation will we/could we/should we get for Aaron Rodgers" game way way way too much last season, so I'm sitting this one out... but I do enjoy that it was at least mentioned in this thread that packaging our other behemoth contract and sending BFFs Rodgers and Bakh out as a package deal was at least mentioned by someone here. It's sitting in my brain, too. If you want to start fresh with Love, might as well make it part of a youth movement, and we have two LTs (and admittedly maybe no RTs, though we'll see) on the roster ready to start to fill those shoes

But generally speaking, I would like two top-100 picks this year and a conditional pick next year that will likely fall in the top 100, but possibly very high, unless Rodgers gets badly injured or retires (like play time, roster status, playoff/pro bowl accomplishment conditions)