Rodgers wants out

[paco]

I just find it too bad that Rodgers can't be in Milwaukee to watch the team he owns win a title.

He should know how hard and rare it is to be at these spots. And yet him being at th Forum would be a distraction.

Personally I just don't see how the benefits outweigh the costs when I put myself in his shoes.

I was thinking that too. I wonder how much regret he'll be feeling today that he can't be courtside.

Wouldn't doubt he sneaks in and is sitting in the owner's box or something, without people knowing. Rodgers might be a $%@#, but I don't think he wants to ruin the Bucks' moment either. But I think he has to be there in some form, despite his situation or the reception he'll get. If not, then he really is a $%@#.

[NCF]

absolutely, thats why I want the FO to stick with Rodgers, and like Rodgers I don't believe thats the plan, everyone acts as though Rodgers is acting this way with no good reason, obviously he doesn't trust Guty and Murphy to allow him to finish his contract here, I don't either.

Won't allow him to finish... hmmm...

until I hear this from the FO, or Rodgers himself says he turned it down I wont believe it, Schefter spreads a lot of half truths and un varified comments, it's click bait, why would Rodgers turn it down, it's what he wqanted all along, and as with other nfl contracts unless there are no trade clauses, or guarantee's the contract isn't worth the paper it's written on to the player.

[lupedafiasco]

Again why would Rodgers be willing to sign another contract with a team that was clearly ready to end his previous deal? No trust, no deal.

I have no doubt a deal was offered. I also have no doubt Rodgers told them he would wipe his ass with it.

[Yoop]

Won't allow him to finish... hmmm...

until I hear this from the FO, or Rodgers himself says he turned it down I wont believe it, Schefter spreads a lot of half truths and un varified comments, it's click bait, why would Rodgers turn it down, it's what he wqanted all along, and as with other nfl contracts unless there are no trade clauses, or guarantee's the contract isn't worth the paper it's written on to the player.

Not really, if it where true Murphy or Gute would have said it in a presser to put the heat on Rodgers to respond, both sides are talking through outsiders that way neither can be held to these comments, sooooooorry, no sale

[paco]

Not really, if it where true Murphy or Gute would have said it in a presser to put the heat on Rodgers to respond, both sides are talking through outsiders that way neither can be held to these comments, sooooooorry, no sale

I'm pretty sure both have said it. Did they come out and say we offered this much for this many years? No. But it's been eluded to or flat out mentioned a few times.

People need to get over the fact that this is about money. It isn't. It never was. And for some people money doesn't fix everything. When has Rodgers ever come off like the type of person who would be that way? Never.

[Pckfn23]

What evidence is there that the team was clearly ready to move on from Rodgers? Drafting Jordan Love, is that it?

[NCF]

What evidence is there that the team was clearly ready to move on from Rodgers? Drafting Jordan Love, is that it?

Yep. That's it.

[lupedafiasco]

Yep. That's it.

Not sure how it can be anything else. You dont bring in a player in the 1st round not to play.

[YoHoChecko]

Yep. That's it.

Not sure how it can be anything else. You dont bring in a player in the 1st round not to play.

We did for Rodgers.

[dsr]

he's playing as well or better since 2014, there was no reason to draft his replacement, rather to keep him healthy one of those slot receivers would have helped him stay healthy, get the ball out quicker, as I said, the Tampa coverage and pass rush was a big reason for that loss, and one of those receivers could have helped, Love sitten on the side with street cloths didn't, we all new the time to win a SB with Rodgers was closing, why not draft players to win now versus picks for the future, and the pandemic drives my point home, besides Rodgers we'll probably lose 3 or 4 star players next year, imo this season is our best hope for years to come to win it all.

The only reason not to draft his replacement is if he is immortal and ageless. If he is ever going to retire, then he will need to be replaced.

[lupedafiasco]

Yep. That's it.

Not sure how it can be anything else. You dont bring in a player in the 1st round not to play.

We did for Rodgers.

Exactly my point. Just completely different circumstances and you know it. Favre was talking about the end all the time. Rodgers has been talking about doing everything he can to extend his career. Didnt sound or look like a guy near the end of his career at all especially compared to Favre. Rodgers could have been the #1 overall pick. Not a soul thought Love was even in that conversation. Rodgers went 2nd at his position in his class. Love went 4th.

These are not the same situations.

[Yoop]

Not really, if it where true Murphy or Gute would have said it in a presser to put the heat on Rodgers to respond, both sides are talking through outsiders that way neither can be held to these comments, sooooooorry, no sale

I'm pretty sure both have said it. Did they come out and say we offered this much for this many years? No. But it's been eluded to or flat out mentioned a few times.

People need to get over the fact that this is about money. It isn't. It never was. And for some people money doesn't fix everything. When has Rodgers ever come off like the type of person who would be that way? Never.

All I ever hear from the two is that Rodgers is our QB for this season and beyond, Beyond, could mean 2022, but it's very vague.

I agree, I don't think it's about money either, imo Rodgers wants to be the starting QB till the time comes that he can't win the starting gig any longer, 2024, 2025, at minimum 2023, and his play over the years and certainly last year is evidence that he deserves it.

I've got nothing against Love, we didn't need a Rodgers replacement though, simply a back up that could be counted on to not lose a game, Guty had to realize picking Love would not go well with Rodgers, now look at the mess where in, I don't see any way that this is not Rodgers last year, and Love is a huge question mark, anyone that thinks ya can just coach a QB for 3 or 4 years and they will become a all pro or even quality starter hasn't been paying attention to the waiver wires, these guys come and go every year.

that last season with Favre some of us where still willing to go with him over Rodgers, and we'd have been right to do so, but Favre was a jerk so the team moved on, Rodgers hasn't acted anything like Favre did, and sure didn't deserve to have the preverbial rug drug out beneath him, which basically this amounts to

[Pckfn23]

If that's it, then that is some weak evidence that the Packers were/are clearly trying to force Rodgers out. We drafted Love to succeed Rodgers because Rodgers had 2 average years. If QB is so very important to winning championships then it was a proper move. Not a fan of it, but there is valid reasoning behind the move, other than forcing Rodgers out.

[Yoop]

If that's it, then that is some weak evidence that the Packers were/are clearly trying to force Rodgers out. We drafted Love to succeed Rodgers because Rodgers had 2 average years. If QB is so very important to winning championships then it was a proper move. Not a fan of it, but there is valid reasoning behind the move, other than forcing Rodgers out.

average??? by who's standards, a bunch of stat geeks at PFF, the lack of supporting talent and schemes is the biggest reasons for Rodgers decline

[YoHoChecko]

Exactly my point. Just completely different circumstances and you know it. Favre was talking about the end all the time. Rodgers has been talking about doing everything he can to extend his career. Didnt sound or look like a guy near the end of his career at all especially compared to Favre. Rodgers could have been the #1 overall pick. Not a soul thought Love was even in that conversation. Rodgers went 2nd at his position in his class. Love went 4th.

These are not the same situations.

Ok, but the differences you're talking about don't matter at all.

What matters is that we drafted a guy 25th overall and gladly sat him on the bench for 3 years as long as we had a HoF QB willing to play and play well. It was only when Favre retired and then tried to return AFTER the reigns had been handed over that Rodgers was chosen over Favre and in that case, like this, it was due to the veteran QB's own actions.

We gladly would have done it again, I'm sure.

You draft a highly-talented QB in the late first round to give you a chance to develop the next great starter for your team before you need him. You draft one as insurance against the potential that your aging QB isn't going to recover his glory days. And when the aging QB plays well, you keep that kid on the bench and develop him until you need him or trade him.

Your stupid little platitudes like "you don't drafta guy in the first not to play him" is one-note two-dimensional thinking. Good management is about nuance, options, resilience, plans a, b, and c for as many scenarios as possible. Good management is about adapting to changing circumstances. That a player was drafted in the first round provides absolutely zero evidence to what will happen with that player in 1 year, 2 years, 3 years. He could bust. He could be traded. He could play out his whole rookie contract as a backup and net us nothing more than a comp pick.

The only person who forced anything here is Rodgers, this offseason. Everything else is just possibilities. We're back to square one on this. You have ZERO basis to claim that drafting Love put a clock on Rodgers that would end before his contract was up, except for the fact that if YOU were a GM, that's how YOU would treat first round picks. Because you think everything is black and white and all your ideas are better than everyone else's. If that's how Gutey thinks, you're right, he's a crap GM. But my sense is that the reason he's not a crap GM is that he doesn't think that way, and he's said as much countless times, whether you choose to believe him or not.

[Acrobat]

The one fact that continues to almost go ignored is that other than Brady, ever single other great QB hasn't made it past the age of 41 without looking too old and most of them didn't make it to 40 at all.

[YoHoChecko]

The one fact that continues to almost go ignored is that other than Brady, ever single other great QB hasn't made it past the age of 41 without looking too old and most of them didn't make it to 40 at all.

Trust me, I have not overlooked that fact.

[go pak go]

The one fact that continues to almost go ignored is that other than Brady, ever single other great QB hasn't made it past the age of 41 without looking too old and most of them didn't make it to 40 at all.

And unlike Brady, Rodgers has been pounded in his career.

I mean if we are being honest, the game of NO's vs TB Divisional Round was one of the more sadder battles I have seen in a while. Both of those QB's looked OLD.

It's still embarrassing how King and Savage got carved up so much a week later. Because the balls were not all that different. High lofty balls on 3rd down.

[YoHoChecko]

I'll say, again; I thought it was 1-2 years early to draft a high-pick replacement for Rodgers. I had toyed with it that offseason; thought early in the process that maybe a Jacob Eason would be a late first or early second round option, but the draft process shook out differently. I didn't look much at Love because of his lousy final season stats, but I was generally, examining the possibility. When I did the math and looked at the contracts, I thought, I'll explore this more fully next offseason. That's when the "look for Rodgers' replacement" window really opened for me.

But as I showed earlier, the idea that a first round talent lasts past pick 15 at QB every year is a fallacy. So they took the shot when a guy was there; they probably thought it might be a little early, too. But I'm much happier developing Love slowly than I would be crossing my fingers for Kyle Trask.

[go pak go]

I've got nothing against Love, we didn't need a Rodgers replacement though, simply a back up that could be counted on to not lose a game, Guty had to realize picking Love would not go well with Rodgers, now look at the mess where in, I don't see any way that this is not Rodgers last year, and Love is a huge question mark, anyone that thinks ya can just coach a QB for 3 or 4 years and they will become a all pro or even quality starter hasn't been paying attention to the waiver wires, these guys come and go every year.

that last season with Favre some of us where still willing to go with him over Rodgers, and we'd have been right to do so, but Favre was a jerk so the team moved on, Rodgers hasn't acted anything like Favre did, and sure didn't deserve to have the preverbial rug drug out beneath him, which basically this amounts to

It's so funny because you are trying to use the "you can't develop a guy after 3 years and expect him to be an All Pro or competent starter" as an argument to not draft Love. Whereas I think the complete opposite. That statement you made is exactly why a team should draft a QB if they fall. Like YoHo has said many times, QB's at Love's level don't fall ball 25 often. It's a very rare thing. So when a top prospect is there, you take him. Because you don't know when that opportunity will come again.

And I would add that I don't see much difference in Favre's actions in spring 2008 compared to Rodgers's actions. At least Favre cried and told me he hopes he earned every penny we paid him.