Whose Side Are You On?

[YoHoChecko]

It's a hard line to walk between being direct and honest and being blatantly insulting. How do you tell a Jordy Nelson, "OK, here's the deal, we will have you back, but on a minimum, non-guaranteed salary so we can cut you if your preseason performance is lesser than these rookies." Silence almost seems better, but it's not and these conversations have to be had.

Sure, I think the easier ones are the pending free agents. It's pretty easy to say something along the lines of "we value you and your contribution so much, but you have earned more money than we can afford to pay you. We'd like to keep you, but honestly our budget only allows for an offer that you would more likely deem insulting than appealing. But it's a cap management and budget issue, not a reflection of what we think of you as a player" to a guy approaching free agency in February when you start your free agency prep (just from my above search, seems like most of those "I haven't heard anything" quotes and columns come out in late February)

The guys who get released early, it's pretty tough to give them a heads up. Though I'm slipping at my job, and I feel like my bosses have pretty well prepared me for any outcome by the time my annual evaluation comes up in July, haha.

I also think the whole "it's not who is brought in but who is pushed out" thing is sooorrrt of a cop out for the same phenomenon.

Like, Jordy could have stayed on a pay cut if the team had drafted 1 or 2, rather than 3 WRs that year. Tim Boyle would be Rodgers' backup if the team hadn't drafted Jordan Love. JC Tretter might have stuck around if they hadn't drafted Corey Linsley.

As others said, it's a game of replacement; and SOMEONE needs to be on rookie contracts. It's tough to reeaallly distinguish between the decisions of bringing people in and of letting people go.

[Drj820]

The James Jones interview... especially when asked what the major beef actually is and he responded "that's a conversation I have to keep private" indicates to me that there is A THING that Rodgers is bothered by, more specific than the general way James Jones explained it after that, about people being allowed to leave the building.

But it is becoming maybe clearer, right?

Like, let's start with 2016 when Josh Sitton is a surprise cut. Sitton was considered a leader on the team, both of the OLine and the offense in general. My sense at the time was that Sitton had turned sour on the team and the team recognized the danger of a leader who is "leading" the troops against team management and let him go.

In 2017 was TJ Lang, who introduced us to this general management practice (even though there was slightly different management at the time)

Lang, who likely would be the Packers’ most expensive free agent to re-sign, said Monday in an interview on SiriusXM NFL Radio that he “hasn’t heard a word” from the Packers about a new contract.

“I said it after the season about obviously wanting to stay in Green Bay, and I still feel that way, but at this point I don’t really have any other options,” Lang said. “I have to prepare as if I’m going to hit the open market and see what the options are.”

Now, before March came, he did report that there had been "some contact," so it didn't stay silent, but that quote still resonated with us as fans.

Then in 2018 Jordy gets cut with one year left on his deal. This, to me, is a big one; maybe THE big one. James Jones mentioned him in some detail, that having a guy who can finish the QB's sentences might be more productive and important than having a guy who's a step faster. Jordy's play in Oakland justified the move, but from the QB's point of view, this seems big. Jordy at the time said he was "hurt" by the "unceremonius cut." This quote hits different now than it did 3 years ago.

Nelson was slated to enter the final year of a four-year, $39 million deal with the Packers this season that came with a cap hit of more than $12 million. He anticipated being asked to take a pay cut, and even considered it, up until he spoke with new Green Bay general manager Brian Gutekunst.

"I think the [pay cut] number was part of it, but also the conversation I had in the meeting," Nelson said. "I met with Brian and had a discussion because I had to get a feel for not just the pay cut but what their plans were going forward. After that meeting, there wasn't, I don't think, much desire there. I think with the combination of both, we decided what was best for myself and my family [just] as they decided what was best for them and the Packers."

Rodgers signed his big extension, though, like 4 months later. So he was probably bothered by it, but hadn't identified it as a pattern.

There is a small parade of players who have reported/stated that leading up to free agency they heard absolute radio silence, and I wish I could remember more of them. So Jordy talks about wanting to know their plans moving forward regarding him, and was unsatisfied with the meeting. Lang talks about wanting to remain a Packer and hearing nothing. This happened again this offseason with Linsley.

Packers center Corey Linsley said Thursday that while he doesn't necessarily want to leave Green Bay, he feels as if his departure is coming in March.

"We're not closing the door for anything," Linsley told SiriusXM NFL Radio. "Obviously we'd never do that for any team, especially the Packers, but yeah it definitely feels weird. Looks like all signs are pointing towards snapping the ball somewhere else next year."

We also of course have Aaron Rodgers calling Jake Kumerow a "lock" for the roster the day before he got cut in final roster cutdowns. This came up in reporting in a way that was almost comical, given the absolute nonfactor that Kumerow had been, but as was mentioned at the time, Rodgers made comments about this during the season, stating in a press conference "the last time I praised a guy he ended up in Buffalo so I'll keep those comments to myself."

And then we have his "people" rant.

It’s never been about the draft pick, picking Jordan. I love Jordan. He’s a great kid. Lot of fun to work together. I love the coaching staff, love my teammates. Love the fan base in Green Bay. Incredible 16 years. It’s just kind of about a philosophy, you know? And maybe forgetting that it is about the people that make the thing go.

It’s about character. It’s about culture. It’s about doing things the right way. A lot of this was put in motion last year. The wrench was just kind of thrown into it when I won the MVP and played the way I played last year. So this is just kind of I think the spill out of all that. But look, man, it is about the people, and that’s the most important thing. Green Bay has always been about the people, from Curly Lambeau being owner and founder to the ’60s with Lombardi and Bart Starr and all those incredible names to the ’90s teams with Coach Holmgren and Favrey and the Minister of Defense to the run that we’ve been on. It’s about the people.

So now, we're getting an idea that Rodgers wants the team to be more sentimental about who it releases, to give Rodgers' opinions of which OLinemen and WRs he likes having around him some weight, and probably most of all, to let the players know, more candidly and more empathetically, what the team plans for them are when the time is coming. Jordy wanted to know the plan for him. Lang wanted to know the plan. Linsley wanted to know the plan. And Rodgers feels like he intuited his own replacement plan primarily because they didn't communicate with him clearly what their plan was.

Those, I think, are reasonable things to be upset about and want to see changed. They are also backward-looking gripes which means there isn't a great resolution for it.

I STILL think the best way out of this is for Gutey to address the team, tell them he has heard their concerns, Aaron's concerns. Open his door for players to come in and have a conversation with him about those types of grievances. I think they should hire someone in the front office to be some sort of a player liason to keep the FO accountable to the goals they are setting out, and that person should be present for the meetings and should be someone the team knows and trusts--likely a former player. Then, after addressing the team, making the hire, holding the meetings, and implementing some sort of communication reforms, (some of which will leak to the media) the team should formally announce it in a press release the day before Gutey has media access for a press conference. And then he can make his case that concerns have been heard, that the situation is ongoing, and that they still want Aaron Rodgers back. Rodgers comes back, he needs very little (if any) personal accommodations made, and to his teammates he's the hero who fought for their humanity and dignity in a dog-eat-dog business.

If he doesn't come back, despite all of that, to the outside world he's the villain who pretends to make it about the team and the people but it's really about him and his selfish demands.

That's my take. That's my plan.

Good stuff Yoho. James Jones sure did say a lot in that interview. His words, plus Hawks and the Kenny mayne interview really do start to paint a picture. Rodgers loved Linsley and Linsley loved GB. There is ZERO excuse for the Packers FO or Gute to give Linsley and his agent radio silence after the year of faithful service he has provided for the team. It’s not only bad business, it’s disrespectful.

I agree with you that Rodgers snuffed out their plan and is making sure he doesn’t have the same fate as his friends. He is trying to prevent the Packers from getting the satisfaction of carrying out their plan on him. Which most likely was to dump him after 2021...until he won MVP then he flipped the script, and he knows that.

I guess I’m just commenting on your post to say that after all the times this has happened, maybe the Linsley thing has way more to do with this than we may have thought. He probably thinks they did his boy wrong, and he is fighting for a change for his boys..as well as keeping it from happening to him.

[YoHoChecko]

I guess I’m just commenting on your post to say that after all the times this has happened, maybe the Linsley thing has way more to do with this than we may have thought. He probably thinks they did his boy wrong, and he is fighting for a change for his boys..as well as keeping it from happening to him.

Yeah, it does feel like a picture is emerging.

BUT if it is, I don't understand how it's still ongoing. This feels like a very easy thing to communicate, and if the team is anywhere near as desperate for his return as it seems, it also should be an easy thing to ameliorate.

That's why I ALSO suspect that there are more individually beneficial things Rodgers is seeking. But who knows. He won't say.

Maybe the plan is all along to return, but only after giving them enough of a real scare to make lasting changes. I dunno. I just have no idea how to interpret these events. The things about the communication with departing players has ALWAYS bothered me. It's the thing I hate most about how my favorite team does business. So I'm there. But I still can't figure out how Rodgers has to pull this extreme of a measure to address it, if that's the crux of the issue, hence my siding with the team over Rodgers in this.

[NCF]

I guess I’m just commenting on your post to say that after all the times this has happened, maybe the Linsley thing has way more to do with this than we may have thought. He probably thinks they did his boy wrong, and he is fighting for a change for his boys..as well as keeping it from happening to him.

Yeah, it does feel like a picture is emerging.

BUT if it is, I don't understand how it's still ongoing. This feels like a very easy thing to communicate, and if the team is anywhere near as desperate for his return as it seems, it also should be an easy thing to ameliorate.

That's why I ALSO suspect that there are more individually beneficial things Rodgers is seeking. But who knows. He won't say.

Maybe the plan is all along to return, but only after giving them enough of a real scare to make lasting changes. I dunno. I just have no idea how to interpret these events. The things about the communication with departing players has ALWAYS bothered me. It's the thing I hate most about how my favorite team does business. So I'm there. But I still can't figure out how Rodgers has to pull this extreme of a measure to address it, if that's the crux of the issue, hence my siding with the team over Rodgers in this.

With Rodgers on the home stretch of his career in Green Bay, it could be an early warning, "OK, you did this over and over, but DON'T YOU DARE let this happen with Davante Adams." I'm looking for connections and bits and pieces. Just piecing together early offseason reports that an extension for Adams seemed imminent and then crickets, maybe there is a connection there. Who knows? I do agree, though, there is something and something relatively big that no one has been able to get ahold of.

[Yoop]

Maybe the plan is all along to return, but only after giving them enough of a real scare to make lasting changes. I dunno. I just have no idea how to interpret these events. The things about the communication with departing players has ALWAYS bothered me. It's the thing I hate most about how my favorite team does business. So I'm there. But I still can't figure out how Rodgers has to pull this extreme of a measure to address it, if that's the crux of the issue, hence my siding with the team over Rodgers in this. Yoho

well maybe it's because it has been brought up by every player that departed, Sitton mentioned it, Lang, Jordy, Linsley, and those are just the most obvious ones, seems standard practice for the GB FO to treat players this way, it took the best player the team has had the last 40 years to get there attention and force them to take a look in the mirror so to speak.

hopefully your right, they have learned a lesson, maybe Rodgers trust that they did and will come back for TC.

[lupedafiasco]

I guess I’m just commenting on your post to say that after all the times this has happened, maybe the Linsley thing has way more to do with this than we may have thought. He probably thinks they did his boy wrong, and he is fighting for a change for his boys..as well as keeping it from happening to him.

Yeah, it does feel like a picture is emerging.

BUT if it is, I don't understand how it's still ongoing. This feels like a very easy thing to communicate, and if the team is anywhere near as desperate for his return as it seems, it also should be an easy thing to ameliorate.

That's why I ALSO suspect that there are more individually beneficial things Rodgers is seeking. But who knows. He won't say.

Maybe the plan is all along to return, but only after giving them enough of a real scare to make lasting changes. I dunno. I just have no idea how to interpret these events. The things about the communication with departing players has ALWAYS bothered me. It's the thing I hate most about how my favorite team does business. So I'm there. But I still can't figure out how Rodgers has to pull this extreme of a measure to address it, if that's the crux of the issue, hence my siding with the team over Rodgers in this.

With Rodgers on the home stretch of his career in Green Bay, it could be an early warning, "OK, you did this over and over, but DON'T YOU DARE let this happen with Davante Adams." I'm looking for connections and bits and pieces. Just piecing together early offseason reports that an extension for Adams seemed imminent and then crickets, maybe there is a connection there. Who knows? I do agree, though, there is something and something relatively big that no one has been able to get ahold of.

I don’t see it as don’t you dare let this happen to Davante Adams. I see it as don’t you dare let this happen to me.

[Drj820]

I guess I’m just commenting on your post to say that after all the times this has happened, maybe the Linsley thing has way more to do with this than we may have thought. He probably thinks they did his boy wrong, and he is fighting for a change for his boys..as well as keeping it from happening to him.

Yeah, it does feel like a picture is emerging.

BUT if it is, I don't understand how it's still ongoing. This feels like a very easy thing to communicate, and if the team is anywhere near as desperate for his return as it seems, it also should be an easy thing to ameliorate.

That's why I ALSO suspect that there are more individually beneficial things Rodgers is seeking. But who knows. He won't say.

Maybe the plan is all along to return, but only after giving them enough of a real scare to make lasting changes. I dunno. I just have no idea how to interpret these events. The things about the communication with departing players has ALWAYS bothered me. It's the thing I hate most about how my favorite team does business. So I'm there. But I still can't figure out how Rodgers has to pull this extreme of a measure to address it, if that's the crux of the issue, hence my siding with the team over Rodgers in this.

Alright, digging a bit deeper...

Maybe Gute and Murphy are into winning the PR battle but not really into doing much tangible to win back Rodgers. Maybe they desperately hope he’s back for 2021, but still want him gone by 2022 and they aren’t willing to do anything tangible to corrupt that original plan? Maybe it’s just Lafleur that feels screwed and is willing to beg him back. Maybe to the FO, the players are just nameless beings known as “the player” and the old school FO feels like they don’t owe them anything in this business. Maybe the way handle things is the way they think it should be handled and they aren’t willing to drop to a knee and ask for forgiveness from the team and change their ways??

^^ all seems like very easy things to fix, if you actually want to fix it. Gutey and Murph may just be arrogant enough to think they can operate this ship just fine without having to deal with the prickliness that is Rodgers personality. I think everybody wants him back for 2021, but I think it’s possible the team may be willing to punt on ‘21 if it means he’s gone by ‘22. They might not be willing to make the obvious compromises that we think they would be willing to make.

That said, I do kind of get the impression that most people in the know expect him to be back. Davante, Bahk, James Jones...the players seem to think he’s in the middle of some sort of protest, and they seem to support his protest...but they seem a little too relaxed about everything to be thinking that he really may not be there come sept. I think Davante and Bahk know what’s up.

[YoHoChecko]

Maybe Gute and Murphy are into winning the PR battle but not really into doing much tangible to win back Rodgers. Maybe they desperately hope he’s back for 2021, but still want him gone by 2022 and they aren’t willing to do anything tangible to corrupt that original plan?

Actually, while on their side; this is what I think. Maybe not gone before 22 but at least gone before 23. I think that's a sticking point. They're maybe willing to do alll the other things but ensure his tenure here beyond the nest 2 years. 23 really is a key year in the decision process with that being the final year of Love's rookie deal before the 5th year option, which is the perfect time to negotiate a long term deal if you plan for him to be a starter. And that's probably something they aren't DEFINITELY doing, but also don't want to close the door on.

But I will say that I don't think it's JUST PR that the Packers want Rodgers back. And I do believe the reports that they have made him offers that include raises and potentially extensions, but not of the variety that ensures he's with the team long-term. But I also believe the reports that Rodgers is turning down those offers and I'm not sure he's turning them down because of the offers themselves or out of some sort of principled protest.

All speculation, but I do think we have clearer speculation now than we did a month ago.

[APB]

Here I thought my "practice set-up for Love" theory was far-fetched...

[NCF]

Here I thought my "practice set-up for Love" theory was far-fetched...

I think it's as plausible as about 8M other possibilities. Just could be literally anything.

[Drj820]

Maybe Gute and Murphy are into winning the PR battle but not really into doing much tangible to win back Rodgers. Maybe they desperately hope he’s back for 2021, but still want him gone by 2022 and they aren’t willing to do anything tangible to corrupt that original plan?

Actually, while on their side; this is what I think. Maybe not gone before 22 but at least gone before 23. I think that's a sticking point. They're maybe willing to do alll the other things but ensure his tenure here beyond the nest 2 years. 23 really is a key year in the decision process with that being the final year of Love's rookie deal before the 5th year option, which is the perfect time to negotiate a long term deal if you plan for him to be a starter. And that's probably something they aren't DEFINITELY doing, but also don't want to close the door on.

But I will say that I don't think it's JUST PR that the Packers want Rodgers back. And I do believe the reports that they have made him offers that include raises and potentially extensions, but not of the variety that ensures he's with the team long-term. But I also believe the reports that Rodgers is turning down those offers and I'm not sure he's turning them down because of the offers themselves or out of some sort of principled protest.

All speculation, but I do think we have clearer speculation now than we did a month ago.

It does take some arrogance tho to desperately want to move on from a HOF QB that Just won an MVP. It’s like he is a thorn in their side that they would rather see gone. I say this bc I think Rodgers could play well for a minimum of 4 more years in Lafleurs system. It’s a very QB friendly system and he learned that he doesn’t have to put himself in danger by being Houdini last year. I just don’t get the rush to move on. I don’t think he’s a year or two away from serious decline. The artificial deadline the FO has put on Rodgers time in GB has caused lots of problems and seems unnecessary to me.

[Drj820]

In every public statement Gute and Murph has made they still say “rodgers is a our QB For 2021 “and beyond””. They still refuse to just say “Rodgers is our QB At minimum through the remainder of his contract”

Rodgers hears that and knows what’s being said

[NCF]

I just don’t get the rush to move on.

I think our salary cap hurt may be part of it. I don't know that, but I do think if you have to blow up the team... or if blowing up the team makes it really easy to kind of re-set from a cap perspective, that does seem like the right time to transition at QB, if that transition is coming, anyway, in the short-term.

[YoHoChecko]

It does take some arrogance tho to desperately want to move on from a HOF QB that Just won an MVP. It’s like he is a thorn in their side that they would rather see gone. I say this bc I think Rodgers could play well for a minimum of 4 more years in Lafleurs system. It’s a very QB friendly system and he learned that he doesn’t have to put himself in danger by being Houdini last year. I just don’t get the rush to move on. I don’t think he’s a year or two away from serious decline. The artificial deadline the FO has put on Rodgers time in GB has caused lots of problems and seems unnecessary to me.

I just don't see it as "desperately wanting to move on" so much as "desperately wanting to keep their options open in a sport where players often hit a wall rather quickly and the salary cap unexpectedly declined and made this window of opportunity much more difficult to sustain"

It's only an artificial deadline if you ignore the possibility that if Rodgers kept playing well for 3 years, they might have extended him and traded Love, but only after they had a chance to showcase Love's development in a preseason or two to enhance his value.

[YoHoChecko]

In every public statement Gute and Murph has made they still say “rodgers is a our QB For 2021 “and beyond””. They still refuse to just say “Rodgers is our QB At minimum through the remainder of his contract”

Rodgers hears that and knows what’s being said

Yeah, I do, 100%, believe the plan was to make a decision on Rodgers' and Love's futures with the team after the 2022 season; I believe that's the perfect time to make that decision. And I agree with you that they probably are still trying to allow themselves that decision point.

But it's a decision point, where you either trade Love (and likely draft a new QB in the top 90) or you trade Rodgers. Not a deadline, where Rodgers is gone.

[Drj820]

In every public statement Gute and Murph has made they still say “rodgers is a our QB For 2021 “and beyond””. They still refuse to just say “Rodgers is our QB At minimum through the remainder of his contract”

Rodgers hears that and knows what’s being said

Yeah, I do, 100%, believe the plan was to make a decision on Rodgers' and Love's futures with the team after the 2022 season; I believe that's the perfect time to make that decision. And I agree with you that they probably are still trying to allow themselves that decision point.

But it's a decision point, where you either trade Love (and likely draft a new QB in the top 90) or you trade Rodgers. Not a deadline, where Rodgers is gone.

Cant blame him for not wanting to be competing for his job through a decision point or for feeling like it feels like a deadline tho. I still say he should have demanded a contract that would make this sort of thing much more difficult tho.

[Drj820]

I just don’t get the rush to move on.

I think our salary cap hurt may be part of it. I don't know that, but I do think if you have to blow up the team... or if blowing up the team makes it really easy to kind of re-set from a cap perspective, that does seem like the right time to transition at QB, if that transition is coming, anyway, in the short-term.

We just need to draft well, and having money to resign our guys would be great and is needed...but I’m not sure we could get FAs to come to GB even if we had more Space. We would have to outbid everyone by millions like we did with Turner, the smiths, and Amos. The cap is in trouble bc we overpaid those guys while still paying Rodgers so much, and then paid a RB while we drafted another one in the second round. We have holes due to several poor drafts and you just can’t fill them all when a first rounder is sitting behind the QB, and the second rounder is behind another well paid rb.

I’m just saying while I agree paying Rodgers so much does hurt the rest of the team, it’s possible to fill it out with better drafts and drafting players that can be used (like 2021 draft seems to have accomplished). Also the cap situation isn’t just Rodgers fault, it’s Kenny Clark’s, Bahks, soon to be Jaires, and the FAs we overpaid for too.

You have to pay the best players the highest rates, and Rodgers is the league MVP

[Scott4Pack]

Jordan Love looked terrible!
Jordan Love looked great!

Gotta get those views...

I'll wait until I see some actual plays from scrimmage.

No QB with only 4 letters in his name has ever won a Super Bowl.

Fran?

;-)

[YoHoChecko]

We would have to outbid everyone by millions like we did with Turner, the smiths, and Amos. The cap is in trouble bc we overpaid those guys while still paying Rodgers so much

Except they aren't overpaid. They are playing up to those contracts with the exception of Preston last year. Turner seemed way overpaid and is now a discount starting OT in the league. Amos is outplaying his contract honestly. Za'Darius is right in line with his paycheck. The narrative that our cap trouble is due to "overpayments" is weak. It's due to having too many really good players.

[salmar80]

We would have to outbid everyone by millions like we did with Turner, the smiths, and Amos. The cap is in trouble bc we overpaid those guys while still paying Rodgers so much

Except they aren't overpaid. They are playing up to those contracts with the exception of Preston last year. Turner seemed way overpaid and is now a discount starting OT in the league. Amos is outplaying his contract honestly. Za'Darius is right in line with his paycheck. The narrative that our cap trouble is due to "overpayments" is weak. It's due to having too many really good players.

I was gonna write the same. I mean, yes, UFAs aren't cheap, not even beyond the 1st silly money tier (and none of our 2019 signings got top tier money that year).

I bet if one were to compare our 2019 FA haul to any team, we'd look REAL good overall. Probably a good topic for a thread on a slow day.