Rodgers future

[Yoop]

what other possible outcomes make sense to you though, those two seem the only logical ones to me

i think he just wanted to argue and say i was pounding a narrative or something

Either that or trolling (saying things simply to get a reaction), which is equally abhorrent.

haaaaa, your the one that mentioned something Rodgers has never hinted he'd do, take a team friendly deal so we could afford to keep other players?

to me Rodgers doesn't act at all as though he'd be interested in something like that, most pundents expect he'll be the highest paid player in the league wherever he plays next year.

[Pckfn23]

It's not just putting words in his mouth, though. Rodgers has said enough to surmise that he is not taking a discount without specifically saying those words.

I agree with Yoho's take, but Rodgers specifically said he would not take a discount? I've heard Adams say that...

That is why I chose my words very carefully. I don't think Rodgers has clearly stated it, but reading between the lines, I think he has. You know how calculated he is.

Gotchya, I agree that what he says would lead people to believe he would not take a discount. I would just add that it is not out of the realm of possibility. Like, I agree with Yoho's take, but I can also acknowledge the possibility that Rodgers MAY want to take that discount to offer the team a better situation to craft a better team around him.

I think some are trying really hard to put all this in black and white, when it definitely isn't.

[Pckfn23]

i think he just wanted to argue and say i was pounding a narrative or something

Either that or trolling (saying things simply to get a reaction), which is equally abhorrent.

haaaaa, your the one that mentioned something Rodgers has never hinted he'd do, take a team friendly deal so we could afford to keep other players?

to me Rodgers doesn't act at all as though he'd be interested in something like that, most pundents expect he'll be the highest paid player in the league wherever he plays next year.

Yes, I did mention it because it is still a possibility...

[NCF]

It's not black and white. That is for sure.

This is a pretty decent read that talks about possible extensions.

I cannot construct a decent-looking contract for Rodgers if he is extended unless he is willing to play for less than his fair market value.

https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/the-cap-s ... odgers-413

[Labrev]

I think if you arent scared of the future without Rodgers, you have to take the opportunity to get a kings ransom for an older QB. Almost any other outcome is admitting that you dont feel confident in going it alone without him. It just makes too much sense to take the draft picks, the people you can resign without him, and all the flexibility it gives you.

Unless of course you think your success as an org is solely in his hands.

The guy is 38, though. A future without Rodgers is an inevitability not long from now. I don't think fear really affects the thinking. What's the worst that will happen, they move on and Love flops? Whatever, you try again and keep trying until you get a QB you can win with; that's exactly what will happen after you give him an extension that allows him to retire a Packer, anyway.

[Acrobat]

I think if you arent scared of the future without Rodgers, you have to take the opportunity to get a kings ransom for an older QB. Almost any other outcome is admitting that you dont feel confident in going it alone without him. It just makes too much sense to take the draft picks, the people you can resign without him, and all the flexibility it gives you.

Unless of course you think your success as an org is solely in his hands.

The guy is 38, though. A future without Rodgers is an inevitability not long from now. I don't think fear really affects the thinking. What's the worst that will happen, they move on and Love flops? Whatever, you try again and keep trying until you get a QB you can win with; that's exactly what will happen after you give him an extension that allows him to retire a Packer, anyway.

Yep, and the Packers have the structure to rebuild quickly unlike other franchises where the front offices are complete train wrecks. That's what mostly makes me confident long term even if Love flops and we have a couple losing seasons post-Rodgers.

[Drj820]

I think if you arent scared of the future without Rodgers, you have to take the opportunity to get a kings ransom for an older QB. Almost any other outcome is admitting that you dont feel confident in going it alone without him. It just makes too much sense to take the draft picks, the people you can resign without him, and all the flexibility it gives you.

Unless of course you think your success as an org is solely in his hands.

The guy is 38, though. A future without Rodgers is an inevitability not long from now. I don't think fear really affects the thinking. What's the worst that will happen, they move on and Love flops? Whatever, you try again and keep trying until you get a QB you can win with; that's exactly what will happen after you give him an extension that allows him to retire a Packer, anyway.

Yep, and the Packers have the structure to rebuild quickly unlike other franchises where the front offices are complete train wrecks. That's what mostly makes me confident long term even if Love flops and we have a couple losing seasons post-Rodgers.

You guys are correctly saying reasons why we should let him go though. I am saying if they keep him...and he doesnt take a major discount...that they are bringing him back because they are scared of life without him.

[BF004]

It's not black and white. That is for sure.

This is a pretty decent read that talks about possible extensions.

I cannot construct a decent-looking contract for Rodgers if he is extended unless he is willing to play for less than his fair market value.

https://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/the-cap-s ... odgers-413

I think my sample "2 year contract" I whipped up in my mock draft thread is preferable to either of his options.

But for '22, you can give out a $1 million salary, his $19.2 million prorated bonus, and then basically 1/4th of his guaranteed signing bonus.

For a sample 2 year commitment contract, Give him a $50 million check for signing, can probably bring '22 cap hit down to ~$33 million. Rodgers gets paid about $80 million over the next two years in real money. Throw on a couple dummy years to say whatever you want, make his 'new money' average look like 45 million or 50 million, wouldn't matter.

Leaves us with $25 million in dead money between '24 and '25 to figure out.

image.png (16.77 KiB) Viewed 582 times

Giving him $50 million dollars guaranteed for this year and still a quite fair ~31 million next year. Have a hard time imagine Aaron saying no to essentially a 2 year $81 million dollar contract.

Those cap hits can be manageable. Like I noted, we have the 6th (~100,000,000) most cap space in the league in 2023 as of now, and will likely be bigger without Cobb, Mercedes, and Crosby's dead cap lumps going to 2022.

Our only major URFA's will be Jaire and Elgton, granted both will be gigantic contracts, and Rashan and Savage on 5th year options which is not on the books yet.


We can 100% make it work with Aaron and field a very good team and not lose our young rookies, if we want to do so.

[German_Panzer]

Rodgers needs to take a paycut, alone because otherwise we would reinforce a loser attitude. AR did not lead us to the promised land. That has to carry over somehow to his extension. And of course a QB who is not able to lead us into the SB with the talent of the last two years will be virtually useless with less talent which will be undisputably the case if AR wants max money. This and his cocky refuse to pay the Packers due respect and lip service (usually a no-brainer) makes it more probable he leaves. I think with MM/TT he was gone, but MLF/Gute are sissies, maybe they bend over due to angst.

[bud fox]

Rodgers should not take a pay cut unless every packer, coach and management takes the same pay cut. Show how much winning means to them.

Rodgers contract average is about the same as a combined Jimmy G and Kevin King. I would rather us spend that money on Rodgers than Jimmy G and Kevin King.

We got the number 1 seed without zdarius, Jenkins, Bahk and Jaire - shows the value of those players.

We have seen what happens when we don't have Rodgers.

[Half Empty]

Rodgers should not take a pay cut unless every packer, coach and management takes the same pay cut. Show how much winning means to them.

Rodgers contract average is about the same as a combined Jimmy G and Kevin King. I would rather us spend that money on Rodgers than Jimmy G and Kevin King.

We got the number 1 seed without zdarius, Jenkins, Bahk and Jaire - shows the value of those players.

We have seen what happens when we don't have Rodgers.

Don't quite follow. You note that they got the #1 seed without a bunch of stars, but you want the obviously effective replacements, the FO that got them, and the guys who coached them to take pay cuts? As for the stars, perhaps we saw the value of those players (or lack thereof) in the playoffs.

The team hasn't been successful without Rodgers. It also hasn't, for those who think the goal is a Lombardi, been successful in over a decade with him.

I'll take your word on the contracts. So, because SF and the Pack made some bad choices on other players, they should do it with AR to even things up?

Strictly along the lines of 'is it fair?'. so probably not relevant, but it seems that a guy with a nine-figure salary history with the team could, for the sake of bringing home the brass ring, give up some cap room a lot more easily than the rest.

[bud fox]

Rodgers should not take a pay cut unless every packer, coach and management takes the same pay cut. Show how much winning means to them.

Rodgers contract average is about the same as a combined Jimmy G and Kevin King. I would rather us spend that money on Rodgers than Jimmy G and Kevin King.

We got the number 1 seed without zdarius, Jenkins, Bahk and Jaire - shows the value of those players.

We have seen what happens when we don't have Rodgers.

Don't quite follow. You note that they got the #1 seed without a bunch of stars, but you want the obviously effective replacements, the FO that got them, and the guys who coached them to take pay cuts? As for the stars, perhaps we saw the value of those players (or lack thereof) in the playoffs.

The team hasn't been successful without Rodgers. It also hasn't, for those who think the goal is a Lombardi, been successful in over a decade with him.

I'll take your word on the contracts. So, because SF and the Pack made some bad choices on other players, they should do it with AR to even things up?

Strictly along the lines of 'is it fair?'. so probably not relevant, but it seems that a guy with a nine-figure salary history with the team could, for the sake of bringing home the brass ring, give up some cap room a lot more easily than the rest.

If the right thing to do is take pay cuts everybody should take a pay cut - why only Rodgers?

It isn't that the team has been unsuccessful without Rodgers it is that they have been woeful without Rodgers.

My point is an average QB is only 6 mil less than Rodgers on average. Rodgers value is currently fine.

Also those players would not have helped in the playoffs if it is based on one of the two:

Rodgers is the reason we lost - some posters say
Special Teams is the reason we lost - some posters say

[salmar80]

The guy is 38, though. A future without Rodgers is an inevitability not long from now. I don't think fear really affects the thinking. What's the worst that will happen, they move on and Love flops? Whatever, you try again and keep trying until you get a QB you can win with; that's exactly what will happen after you give him an extension that allows him to retire a Packer, anyway.

Yep, and the Packers have the structure to rebuild quickly unlike other franchises where the front offices are complete train wrecks. That's what mostly makes me confident long term even if Love flops and we have a couple losing seasons post-Rodgers.

You guys are correctly saying reasons why we should let him go though. I am saying if they keep him...and he doesnt take a major discount...that they are bringing him back because they are scared of life without him.

I reaaaallly don't understand this "are they scared of life without AR or are they brave" -line of thinking.

We still have the same GM who had the nuts to make the extremely unpopular Love pick. Who went Rasul over the popular whatshisname CB, the Smiths over trading for Mack, etc.

I certainly don't see a GM who operates outta fear for public backlash or makes moves to avoid getting fired.

Besides, if the internal scouting report says "Love will be a superstar soon", moving on from AR would not be based on fear, anyways. If that report says "Love may have hit his ceiling already", then extending AR would be done out of logic, not fear.

[bud fox]

Yep, and the Packers have the structure to rebuild quickly unlike other franchises where the front offices are complete train wrecks. That's what mostly makes me confident long term even if Love flops and we have a couple losing seasons post-Rodgers.

You guys are correctly saying reasons why we should let him go though. I am saying if they keep him...and he doesnt take a major discount...that they are bringing him back because they are scared of life without him.

I reaaaallly don't understand this "are they scared of life without AR or are they brave" -line of thinking.

We still have the same GM who had the nuts to make the extremely unpopular Love pick. Who went Rasul over the popular whatshisname CB, the Smiths over trading for Mack, etc.

I certainly don't see a GM who operates outta fear for public backlash or makes moves to avoid getting fired.

Besides, if the internal scouting report says "Love will be a superstar soon", moving on from AR would not be based on fear, anyways. If that report says "Love may have hit his ceiling already", then extending AR would be done out of logic, not fear.

None of those decisions have mattered because he has Rodgers at QB. What does he have to fear? No matter what he does Rodgers will make this a winning team.

Take that away and all those decisions become very important and microscoped.

[salmar80]

You guys are correctly saying reasons why we should let him go though. I am saying if they keep him...and he doesnt take a major discount...that they are bringing him back because they are scared of life without him.

I reaaaallly don't understand this "are they scared of life without AR or are they brave" -line of thinking.

We still have the same GM who had the nuts to make the extremely unpopular Love pick. Who went Rasul over the popular whatshisname CB, the Smiths over trading for Mack, etc.

I certainly don't see a GM who operates outta fear for public backlash or makes moves to avoid getting fired.

Besides, if the internal scouting report says "Love will be a superstar soon", moving on from AR would not be based on fear, anyways. If that report says "Love may have hit his ceiling already", then extending AR would be done out of logic, not fear.

None of those decisions have mattered because he has Rodgers at QB. What does he have to fear? No matter what he does Rodgers will make this a winning team.

Take that away and all those decisions become very important and microscoped.

What did he have to fear? With Love pick, how about pissing off AR enough that he'd forced a trade earlier, and then getting the tar and feather treatment? With Smiths, that they'd be expensive FA busts that would set D back for years. Getting fired for that. Rasul, looking cheap instead of going "all-in" at a need position on D. Not fireable, just embarrassing.

AR could've made Gutey extremely safe, had Gutey had chosen to do the popular things. 1st round receiver. Get most popular FAs. Be the public's bitch. Gutey chose to be brave and do what he felt was best for the franchise, regardless of whether those moves were popular or not.

[Drj820]

If there is a way to bring Rodgers back and it not cost us many other assets on the team, that’s one thing. Also, its a new idea to me...I have heard a lot about how it makes no sense financially to brings him back unless it’s a very long term deal etc.

Alright so if the options (that are believed to be the most probably options) are...keep Rodgers and lose other valuable assets on the team, or trade Rodgers, get lots of loot, keep assets, and go with another QB...

There is nothing fearful about moving into life without Rodgers. That’s bold!!!

The “scared to live life without him” comes if they beg him back, abandon Love or just make Love backup, and lose assets and bring a lesser team back for 2022 because they are scared to go it alone without Rodgers. That’s where the fear comes in...has nothing to do with if they move on from Rodgers.

[Drj820]

I reaaaallly don't understand this "are they scared of life without AR or are they brave" -line of thinking.

We still have the same GM who had the nuts to make the extremely unpopular Love pick. Who went Rasul over the popular whatshisname CB, the Smiths over trading for Mack, etc.

I certainly don't see a GM who operates outta fear for public backlash or makes moves to avoid getting fired.

Besides, if the internal scouting report says "Love will be a superstar soon", moving on from AR would not be based on fear, anyways. If that report says "Love may have hit his ceiling already", then extending AR would be done out of logic, not fear.

None of those decisions have mattered because he has Rodgers at QB. What does he have to fear? No matter what he does Rodgers will make this a winning team.

Take that away and all those decisions become very important and microscoped.

What did he have to fear? With Love pick, how about pissing off AR enough that he'd forced a trade earlier, and then getting the tar and feather treatment? With Smiths, that they'd be expensive FA busts that would set D back for years. Getting fired for that. Rasul, looking cheap instead of going "all-in" at a need position on D. Not fireable, just embarrassing.

AR could've made Gutey extremely safe, had Gutey had chosen to do the popular things. 1st round receiver. Get most popular FAs. Be the public's bitch. Gutey chose to be brave and do what he felt was best for the franchise, regardless of whether those moves were popular or not.

Every move you describe is the packers preparing to move on from Rodgers. They are now on the edge of the high dive diving board. Time to take the jump into the pool.

Unless they decide to walk back down the ladder.

[salmar80]

None of those decisions have mattered because he has Rodgers at QB. What does he have to fear? No matter what he does Rodgers will make this a winning team.

Take that away and all those decisions become very important and microscoped.

What did he have to fear? With Love pick, how about pissing off AR enough that he'd forced a trade earlier, and then getting the tar and feather treatment? With Smiths, that they'd be expensive FA busts that would set D back for years. Getting fired for that. Rasul, looking cheap instead of going "all-in" at a need position on D. Not fireable, just embarrassing.

AR could've made Gutey extremely safe, had Gutey had chosen to do the popular things. 1st round receiver. Get most popular FAs. Be the public's bitch. Gutey chose to be brave and do what he felt was best for the franchise, regardless of whether those moves were popular or not.

Every move you describe is the packers preparing to move on from Rodgers. They are now on the edge of the high dive diving board. Time to take the jump into the pool.

Unless they decide to walk back down the ladder.

Literally the only move outta those that has anything to do with AR's future is picking Love.

I really dunno what your obsession of making this about a idiotic children's game "Gutey, you're chicken if you don't cut AR. Guuuuteeee's scaaaareeed, he dooon't daaaaare! Chicken, chicken!" is all about.

But I'm 100% sure Gutey won't operate based on that. He's gonna do the boring adult thing, and keep options open, evaluate, and make fearless decisions based on that.

Only a fool climbs to a high dive board and jumps without checking whether there's water in the pool.

[Drj820]

What did he have to fear? With Love pick, how about pissing off AR enough that he'd forced a trade earlier, and then getting the tar and feather treatment? With Smiths, that they'd be expensive FA busts that would set D back for years. Getting fired for that. Rasul, looking cheap instead of going "all-in" at a need position on D. Not fireable, just embarrassing.

AR could've made Gutey extremely safe, had Gutey had chosen to do the popular things. 1st round receiver. Get most popular FAs. Be the public's bitch. Gutey chose to be brave and do what he felt was best for the franchise, regardless of whether those moves were popular or not.

Every move you describe is the packers preparing to move on from Rodgers. They are now on the edge of the high dive diving board. Time to take the jump into the pool.

Unless they decide to walk back down the ladder.

Literally the only move outta those that has anything to do with AR's future is picking Love.

I really dunno what your obsession of making this about a idiotic children's game "Gutey, you're chicken if you don't cut AR. Guuuuteeee's scaaaareeed, he dooon't daaaaare! Chicken, chicken!" is all about.

But I'm 100% sure Gutey won't operate based on that. He's gonna do the boring adult thing, and keep options open, evaluate, and make fearless decisions based on that.

Only a fool climbs to a high dive board and jumps without checking whether there's water in the pool.

I think, at this point, if they bring back Rodgers and Rodgers doesn’t play on a major discount that they are admitting they don’t want to go forward with their plan to move on from him.

I also think that may be the smart thing to do, for their own futures.

You disagree. Cool.

[bud fox]

Fear is a normal emotion. If Gute is worried about moving on from Rodgers than he is scared of moving on from Rodgers.

Everything that has been shown is that he and the packers are scared right now from moving on from Rodgers.

This was not the case when he drafted Love. That was being young and dumb in the role.