Rodgers wants out

[Crazylegs Starks]

I wish Aaron would just go on Greta and explain everything. Whoops, Greta is no longer on the air.

Actually <pushes glasses up> Greta is still on regional TV. I occasionally see an ad for her show.

[Bogey]

And the inability to find gratitude for what was is a personal failing of the fans much more so than it is a failure of the front office or players on our favorite team.

Wow! Yes.

[Foosball]

I wish Aaron would just go on Greta and explain everything. Whoops, Greta is no longer on the air.

Actually <pushes glasses up> Greta is still on regional TV. I occasionally see an ad for her show.

In one way shape or form, this will happen. Maybe with Ellen Degeneres since she helped him meet Shailene Woodley.

[lupedafiasco]

Ok.

I still think the best case scenario is that Rodgers returns and we try to run it back.

But I’m ready to release my hard line stance that we can’t trade him this year.

I want to send him to the Raiders.

I want Mariota, who played for MLF in TEN
I want this year’s first, Leatherwood, to lock down the RT position
I want this year’s second, Trevon Moehrig, to upgrade the star position
I want last year’s first, Henry Ruggs, to enhance our speed on offense and eventually take MVS’ job
And I want next year’s first.

I’ll throw in Josh Jackson who belongs in a Gus Bradley type system and Mayock called the most intriguing corner in the draft and kept comparing him to Marcus Peters.

They can have Lazard, too, of Rodgers wants him.

Obviously our best shot at glory is with Rodgers. But this haul would put us in the playoff hunt right away, keep the roster cheap with rookie contracts, and make a run in 22-25

Id rather send him to Denver.

I see something like:
Rodgers for Lock. Gutey like Lock according to reports at the time. Could be &%$@ but hes a young vet with experience.
Anyone but Adams and A. Rodgers for Jeudy. Good route runner with upside stuck on a bad team. He can get open.
Eric Stokes for Patrick Surtain. We get the better, cleaner prospect here.
Next years 1st.
A conditional pick the following year where if Rodgers they make the playoffs both years we get a 1st if not we get a 2nd.

To me if we get Ruggs and Leatherwood we just got 2 players the Raiders significantly reached for and I dont think are really that good. I could be asking for too much though.

[bud fox]

I'm ready to blame everyone because everyone is eligible to be blamed. They are all losers. Adams. Rodgers. King. Z. (I am not including Clark or Jaire. They did their part)

It's stupid when fans feel this higher power to feel the right that blaming a GM or coach at a higher % is acceptable when other players, who have a more direct impact on a micro game level, hurt the Packers chances at getting a SB by not making a play when it was there to be made.

For instance, what do you think is easier for an organization to accomplish? Using a 2nd rounder and 1st rounder to trade up to 21 to draft a WR from LSU and hope he is the answer for an alternative target in a playoff game and that is why we didn't make the SB? OR have your #1 WR be able to catch a 3 yard pass when we need it?

We do the same thing for the 2014 NFCCG too. Like it's so easy and convenient to blame Mike McCarthy. But how about we dish sh*t to Julius Peppers who was the moron who told Morgan Burnett to slide at mid-field with an open path to the End zone? For gods sake at least slide inside field goal range. Or how about we knash our teeth at Eddie Lacy or Aaron Rodgers who couldn't do jack sh*t inside the 2 yardline on multiple occasions to score a TD when your defense gets 5 turnovers?

It's just so stupid how it's okay and fashionable to blame people who have less impact on a game but feel it's unnecessary to blame fan favorites because they built up "prior equity and we like em"

The front office isn't holding Rodgers or Adams, etc. back. They are all losers because they all lost and the playmakers we relied on making us plays didn't make the Packers plays when they were there to be made.

I think you can tell I have heard enough of the Packers front office holding this team back when it is the names on the fan favorite's jerseys that are the losers and are the reason the Packers have 1 SB in the Rodgers era.

funny how the teams that usually have beaten us have better rosters, more impact players, there QB's have 3, 4 or even 5 quality receivers, there defenses have quality lbers, and we have Rodgers Adams and Jones, so ya when ya Lose Jones and Adams is held in check it's harder to win

We had the talent and opportunity to win in 2020 and 2014 tho. We didn’t have the leadership at QB to put us over the finish line like the opposing teams we faced had.

The talent with a QB of Rodgers ability. Let's see how this team does with Love this year.

Rodgers was the best QB last year. He was also better than Brady. His team wasn't better than the Bucs

[German_Panzer]

I am on Rodgers' side on this one. The Love draft shows that GB is not "all in" on Rodgers, they were not only not trusting #12, they were preparing his sacking, just like TT did in 2005 with Favre when he drafted #12 which basically read as: Brett, you suck with your INT's and I don't believe you can bring us to the promised land again, so we rebuild, sucker. But Aaron had every right to be trusted (unlike Favre who's flaws were more in his nature). The more I think about it the more I think Rodgers will leave. He could still win 3-6 titles with a team that fulfills all his wishes like Tampa did to Brady. If such a team arises with a 2+ year competitive future, he'll be gone because let's face it: our team again is not that good, talentwise I see us about at #3-#5 but that means again we will face one or two more talented teams. And of course, he could make life in titletown a living hell, so eventually Murphy, MLF and Gute will bend, I don't think they have the guts to go to war with AR.

[YoHoChecko]

Id rather send him to Denver.

I see something like:
Rodgers for Lock. Gutey like Lock according to reports at the time. Could be &%$@ but hes a young vet with experience.
Anyone but Adams and A. Rodgers for Jeudy. Good route runner with upside stuck on a bad team. He can get open.
Eric Stokes for Patrick Surtain. We get the better, cleaner prospect here.
Next years 1st.
A conditional pick the following year where if Rodgers they make the playoffs both years we get a 1st if not we get a 2nd.

To me if we get Ruggs and Leatherwood we just got 2 players the Raiders significantly reached for and I dont think are really that good. I could be asking for too much though.

No such thing as asking too much. You’re giving too much back off you ask me. Why would I swap out stokes and not just keep him too?

My baseline is three 1s, a 2, and a backup QB. Which is a totally reasonable return at this stage.

I also don’t want to push it into the future too much, so I’m going for recently executed picks rather than unknown future picks. And I’m filing needs.

I’d rather have Bridgewater than Lock because we would need a steady experienced vet not an inaccurate developmental player, to pair with Love. But Surtain and Jeudy are non negotiable pieces. And stokes isn’t leaving.

I agree that Leatherwood and Ruggs are inferior players to Surtain and Jeudy, but Moehrig and Mariota are really quality add-ons. I only gave back Jackson and maybe a WR as a little sweetener to clear out the roster space needed to absorb such a deal.

I also loved Ruggs coming out and think MLF would know exactly what to do with him. And when you have technicians in house like Adams and Amari... the podcast I was listening to yesterday talked about speed as seasoning. How when you have that showed element in the team it makes everyone else “taste” a little better.

Plus imagine the practice races between Ruggs and Stokes

[YoHoChecko]

Oh is also want to send Rodgers somewhere a little dysfunctional. The Raiders count way more than the Broncos

[Yoop]

funny how the teams that usually have beaten us have better rosters, more impact players, there QB's have 3, 4 or even 5 quality receivers, there defenses have quality lbers, and we have Rodgers Adams and Jones, so ya when ya Lose Jones and Adams is held in check it's harder to win

That's just not true.

The 49ers receivers in the NFCCG two years ago stink. They have Deebo and that's it. Their RBs are total journeymen and yes, Mostert ran all over us, but no, he's not even a fulltime starting RB. George Kittle is an elite TE talent and that's who they have in the passing game there. They were a matchup nightmare for us.

Brady did, indeed, have 3 very high quality receiving weapons and terrible RBs and a middle of the road OLine.

Both teams' defenses were much better than ours, which I blame at least as much on coaching as on personnel. We have a lot of talented players and very few holes where there is no player worth the slot (ILB being the lone exception in my book). The teams we have played are no better-stocked than we are. We were better than the Giants in 2011, than the Seahawks in 2014. The talent is fine. The execution in the final games, by coaches, players, and yes sometimes Rodgers, has not been good enough. It's mostly bad breaks and flukey outcomes. But they've become enough of a pattern for people to look for REASONS. But most people who think we NEED to do better for some reason refuse to ever consider that on that list of REASONS Aaron Rodgers sometimes qualifies.

Personally, I don't feel the need to find REASONS. It's a fluky game and a matter of inches and we have failed to win Super Bowls in a variety of ways for a variety of causes, both strengths and weaknesses failing in large moments. I don't believe everything happens for a reason though. Some things just happen. And the inability to find gratitude for what was is a personal failing of the fans much more so than it is a failure of the front office or players on our favorite team.

Agree with much of what you said. Though I think Tampa Bay's O-line was way better than middle of the road.

As for losing games when it matters. Until the Packers start to realize they don't match up with teams with speedy and aggressive LBs they will continue to lose to them.

Those LBs fill the hole before the RB even gets there. They take the middle of the field out of play for the offense.

Maybe someday they'll wake up to the fact it's a plus to have some players who can just out run others on the field.

the way you beat lbers like that is with quick twitch WR, not with long striders like Lazard, MVS, Q Brown etc. only Adams, and he's not really a short area WR has been able to, and defense blanket him.

we moved up 10 slots to take Savage, we danced all over the first round to take alexander, yet Guty would rather move up 5 slots for Love instead of getting a slot receiver that may have helped us beat those lbers

[NCF]

Ok.

I still think the best case scenario is that Rodgers returns and we try to run it back.

But I’m ready to release my hard line stance that we can’t trade him this year.

I want to send him to the Raiders.

I want Mariota, who played for MLF in TEN
I want this year’s first, Leatherwood, to lock down the RT position
I want this year’s second, Trevon Moehrig, to upgrade the star position
I want last year’s first, Henry Ruggs, to enhance our speed on offense and eventually take MVS’ job
And I want next year’s first.

I’ll throw in Josh Jackson who belongs in a Gus Bradley type system and Mayock called the most intriguing corner in the draft and kept comparing him to Marcus Peters.

They can have Lazard, too, of Rodgers wants him.

Obviously our best shot at glory is with Rodgers. But this haul would put us in the playoff hunt right away, keep the roster cheap with rookie contracts, and make a run in 22-25

Id rather send him to Denver.

I see something like:
Rodgers for Lock. Gutey like Lock according to reports at the time. Could be &%$@ but hes a young vet with experience.
Anyone but Adams and A. Rodgers for Jeudy. Good route runner with upside stuck on a bad team. He can get open.
Eric Stokes for Patrick Surtain. We get the better, cleaner prospect here.
Next years 1st.
A conditional pick the following year where if Rodgers they make the playoffs both years we get a 1st if not we get a 2nd.

To me if we get Ruggs and Leatherwood we just got 2 players the Raiders significantly reached for and I dont think are really that good. I could be asking for too much though.

I don't really like the balance of either deal. The QB's are throw-ins, IMO, so fine, take them. I would take the WR prospects from last year (kind of in lieu of a 1st-rounder in 2021). I do not want any of the players drafted this year other than maybe Moehrig would be really nice. I feel like he get hosed in value for players the trading team really likes. Instead, I want all the future draft capital. 1 and 2 next year, and another 1 and maybe 3 or 4 the year after.

[NCF]

I also don’t want to push it into the future too much, so I’m going for recently executed picks rather than unknown future picks.

Why? This is going to be a transitional year and we have a good team. Improving it marginally doesn't make sense to me if we can get that value back in future drafts to build a decent window when we are ready to compete, again... maybe as early as next season.

[YoHoChecko]

I don't really like the balance of either deal. The QB's are throw-ins, IMO, so fine, take them. I would take the WR prospects from last year (kind of in lieu of a 1st-rounder in 2021). I do not want any of the players drafted this year other than maybe Moehrig would be really nice. I feel like he get hosed in value for players the trading team really likes. Instead, I want all the future draft capital. 1 and 2 next year, and another 1 and maybe 3 or 4 the year after.

I want to be a good football team at the very latest, in 2022. All future picks don't accomplish that. Taking players who were picked with premium picks and fill our needs DO accomplish that.

The QBs are far more than throw ins. They're probably year one starters for us while Love continues to improve. The COVID offseasons are so rough on player development for a position like QB where the fine tuning really needs to be supervised to make sure the mechanics look right.

But for mine, Mariota played for MLF. He was injured that year and it was pretty mediocre, but he had his career high completion percentage and already knows all the basics.

What positions on this team am I worried about into the future? Future starting RT, the Star position, and starting WR beyond 21. My deal hits all of that and still gives us a future first. I'm not worried about how much the previous team likes their picks because my price isn't negotiable. That's the beauty of not HAVING to trade Rodgers nor wanting to. You don't have to take what you can get. You get the offer you want or you keep him.

Three 1s is the bare minimum. Three ones is what it cost to draft Trey Lance. Two ones is what it cost to get Matt Stafford. Three ones for the MVP is a steal. So I'm adding in a second and a QB. If I were doing a Broncos deal, I'd bring in Meinerz, even though he doesn't solve the RT problem, it at least gives us another tough, physical, but freakishly athletic player to develop on the iOL, as he can play C and Guard.

I promise you that Mariota in 21 and Love in 22 can win with the resulting roster. Maybe not a Super Bowl, we'll see. But I am NOT giving up Rodgers to enter a rebuilding phase. I am only giving up Rodgers if the return is so overwhelming that the team actually feels kind of exciting. A 2023 first round draft pick doesn't excite me.

[YoHoChecko]

Instead, I want all the future draft capital. 1 and 2 next year, and another 1 and maybe 3 or 4 the year after.

What you're basically saying here is that you'd rather have a 2023 first round pick to improve the team than... a first round player on a rookie contract? You want a 2022 second round pick more than you want Moehrig or Meinerz? A 2023 first round pick more than you want Leatherwood or Surtain?

How on earth would the team improve in 2022, let alone in 2021, if we're trading for first round picks that won't be on the team until 2023 and won't make much of an impact until 2024?

[NCF]

I don't really like the balance of either deal. The QB's are throw-ins, IMO, so fine, take them. I would take the WR prospects from last year (kind of in lieu of a 1st-rounder in 2021). I do not want any of the players drafted this year other than maybe Moehrig would be really nice. I feel like he get hosed in value for players the trading team really likes. Instead, I want all the future draft capital. 1 and 2 next year, and another 1 and maybe 3 or 4 the year after.

I want to be a good football team at the very latest, in 2022. All future picks don't accomplish that. Taking players who were picked with premium picks and fill our needs DO accomplish that.

The QBs are far more than throw ins. They're probably year one starters for us while Love continues to improve. The COVID offseasons are so rough on player development for a position like QB where the fine tuning really needs to be supervised to make sure the mechanics look right.

But for mine, Mariota played for MLF. He was injured that year and it was pretty mediocre, but he had his career high completion percentage and already knows all the basics.

What positions on this team am I worried about into the future? Future starting RT, the Star position, and starting WR beyond 21. My deal hits all of that and still gives us a future first. I'm not worried about how much the previous team likes their picks because my price isn't negotiable. That's the beauty of not HAVING to trade Rodgers nor wanting to. You don't have to take what you can get. You get the offer you want or you keep him.

Three 1s is the bare minimum. Three ones is what it cost to draft Trey Lance. Two ones is what it cost to get Matt Stafford. Three ones for the MVP is a steal. So I'm adding in a second and a QB. If I were doing a Broncos deal, I'd bring in Meinerz, even though he doesn't solve the RT problem, it at least gives us another tough, physical, but freakishly athletic player to develop on the iOL, as he can play C and Guard.

I promise you that Mariota in 21 and Love in 22 can win with the resulting roster. Maybe not a Super Bowl, we'll see. But I am NOT giving up Rodgers to enter a rebuilding phase. I am only giving up Rodgers if the return is so overwhelming that the team actually feels kind of exciting. A 2023 first round draft pick doesn't excite me.

I guess we will have to disagree on this, then. To me, even given our roster holes, this team is good enough to win in 2021 and with a flux of premium picks in the next 2 years, there is no reason the talent doesn't improve further. You may value Mariota more than I, but I would rather add a vet off the street or trade for someone else at a cheaper cost. If LV values Mariota more than a throw-in, then I don't want him included in the trade.

[NCF]

Instead, I want all the future draft capital. 1 and 2 next year, and another 1 and maybe 3 or 4 the year after.

What you're basically saying here is that you'd rather have a 2023 first round pick to improve the team than... a first round player on a rookie contract? You want a 2022 second round pick more than you want Moehrig or Meinerz? A 2023 first round pick more than you want Leatherwood or Surtain?

How on earth would the team improve in 2022, let alone in 2021, if we're trading for first round picks that won't be on the team until 2023 and won't make much of an impact until 2024?

Because I think the team is already good enough to win. It's about opening the window and improving upon whatever marginal success we are able to realize in 2021 and 2022 when we know we have major cap issues and a team built around Aaron Rodgers. Also, because I don't want their lottery tickets, I want my own. You're telling me Alex Leatherwood is a guy we would really covet as our future RT? Wasn't even a guy I had on my radar in this draft.

[YoHoChecko]

I guess we will have to disagree on this, then. To me, even given our roster holes, this team is good enough to win in 2021 and with a flux of premium picks in the next 2 years, there is no reason the talent doesn't improve further. You may value Mariota more than I, but I would rather add a vet off the street or trade for someone else at a cheaper cost. If LV values Mariota more than a throw-in, then I don't want him included in the trade.

Why do you keep talking about how the other team values these players? I don't care. I'm not negotiating. I'm naming a price. Meet it or we keep Rodgers, go about your life Mike and Jon.

[NCF]

I guess we will have to disagree on this, then. To me, even given our roster holes, this team is good enough to win in 2021 and with a flux of premium picks in the next 2 years, there is no reason the talent doesn't improve further. You may value Mariota more than I, but I would rather add a vet off the street or trade for someone else at a cheaper cost. If LV values Mariota more than a throw-in, then I don't want him included in the trade.

Why do you keep talking about how the other team values these players? I don't care. I'm not negotiating. I'm naming a price. Meet it or we keep Rodgers, go about your life Mike and Jon.

Because it matters. You may not care... but they do.

[YoHoChecko]

Because it matters. You may not care... but they do.

Here's the conversation:

Mayock: I want Rodgers

Gutey: This is the price for Rodgers

Mayock: I really like Mariota

Gutey: Ok, we'll call Denver or keep Rodgers

Mayock: ok

done. we have a hall of fame QB on our roster. Or we trade him to Mayock's division rival. I don't care how much they like any of these players. They either like Rodgers more, or they don't. We are not in a rush, we are not in a position where we need to act. The Green Bay Packers control every aspect of this situation except for the media narrative and Rodgers' own behavior.

[go pak go]

Definitely don't think Lupe's trade with Denver is enough compensation for us.

I would be more on board if we get Surtain but didn't give up Stokes. I think that is primarily where I am at. (that way we have 3 CBs for the long term and Alexander can play everywhere)

I think two prior 1's (Juedy/Surtain), a QB (Bridgwater/Lock) and next year's 1st is a good starting point. We can give them Jackson if they want another CB body and I think it isn't outrageous for asking for like a 2023 2nd rounder or something.

I do think Denver would say no to it though because their roster would be depleted but that is the point people don't get. National media heads are like, "the Broncos are contenders if they have Rodgers"

yes they are...but they won't be the current Broncos if they get Rodgers.

Our challenge for the Packers is you want some immediate help so you know what you are getting, but you also don't want to necessarily only get immediate help and once you are actually ready to win (say 2023)....your cheap rookies want expensive deals and you can't keep them anyways.

I mean if you are going into 2023 and finally just getting good and then Love, Alexander, Juedy, Surtain, Gary, Juedy, Savage, etc. etc. coming up for contract....we are going to lose half the team and none of it was really worth it.

[Gunzaan]

40 pages in a matter of days? Wow. Thanks for ruining the entire draft process for those drafted and for the fans. I can’t even imagine how annoying reporters are going to be with the same questions over and over for players that will start practicing eventually.

It’s a good 40 page read though - lots of good insights and perspectives - and also a heck of a lot of revisionist history to fit their narrow perspectives by the usual people. The ego involved is incredible to watch in full motion.