Rodgers future

[Pugger]

You think Denver might have a better chance of the playoffs with the MVP at QB and spending their 80m cap space compared to having a beat up Teddy Bridgewater?

Honestly, if anything, Jalen Raegor would be a reason for Rodgers *not* to want to go there. Plus, a run game led by Javonte Williams is a million times more exciting than Miles Sanders who has been largely garbage this year.

Also, Philly fans are dicks. Broncos are way more chilled out.

As for the Packers choosing to keep him for 2022 on a 45m cap hit only to lose him for nothing next year - that would be some major cutting off our nose to spite our face. Not only would we have to dismantle our current team to fit him under the cap, we'd also not even get a year to assess Love before deciding on his 5th year option. We'd be left with no Rodgers, possibly no Love and not even a high pick to choose a top QB in '23.

Or the Packers could accept Denver's 'low ball' offer of a 1st and a 3rd and get to start the new era around Love, see if he can do it, and if not, it probably puts them in a good position to select a top QB in '23.

I said Denver was number one. I always said that. Good grief.

All I said is Philly could be an underdog here.

Yes I think Denver makes the playoffs with Rodgers. I also know Philly makes the playoffs with Rodgers. Both teams have a lot of cap and both can bring on Adams.

So what Reagor isn't as good as Juedy. He would be a 3rd WR. And if you have read me on this forum long enough, you know my feelings on getting so hell bent over shape on a 3rd and 4th WR talk...

If Philly comes in and offers us 2 1st rounders in 2022 (they have 3 1st rounders), a 2023 1st and a 2024 1st for Rodgers and Adams...I'm taking it.

Rodgers then goes to Philly. He has 3 great WRs. He has a RB. He has a defense. AND the Eagles still have plenty of draft picks to continue to build for the short run.

That is why I am saying Philly is an underdog here. I think people are sleeping on them. They got a lot of draft capital that can outbid other teams if they want. The biggest thing is if they want.

The problem is they don't offer that if Rodgers has told them he won't play for them. And Rodgers probably doesn't want his new team to be down multiple first round draft picks if he can help it.

That's why a simple one team list, a quiet agreement of modest compensation of maybe a 1st and a 2nd, ensures it's in the interest of the Packers to accept and sets up Rodgers nicely without any public acrimony.

Packers gave up any real leverage when they redid his contract last year. Hopefully he has enough good will towards the Packers that he doesn't use it against them now.

Denver cannot reach out and talk to Rodgers about playing for them. That is the definition of tampering. I don't even know if they can talk to AR's agent...

[Pugger]

The thing I can't get beyond is James Jones saying he thinks Arod is back in GB next year.

James Jones is in the "inner circle". I think it would make more sense for him to say at this point, "man all I know is Rodgers is the best there ever was in GB. I know he loves GB and the fans and I know he ultimately will take the take the time to follow his heart and do the best thing for all"

something like that. But instead he says he expects Rodgers to be back in GB. I always take his words heavier than anyone else's.

Leroy leaned that way, Silverstien, plenty of people with more info then us have said it too.

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

Does Andrew Brandt still have inside info on the Packers today? That is the real question about his credibility. He could just be guessing like everyone else.

[NCF]

Does Andrew Brandt still have inside info on the Packers today? That is the real question about his credibility. He could just be guessing like everyone else.

He is openly removed from any inside info. He is just guessing like everyone else. The difference is he isn't wrong nearly as often as everyone else.

[BF004]

I said Denver was number one. I always said that. Good grief.

All I said is Philly could be an underdog here.

Yes I think Denver makes the playoffs with Rodgers. I also know Philly makes the playoffs with Rodgers. Both teams have a lot of cap and both can bring on Adams.

So what Reagor isn't as good as Juedy. He would be a 3rd WR. And if you have read me on this forum long enough, you know my feelings on getting so hell bent over shape on a 3rd and 4th WR talk...

If Philly comes in and offers us 2 1st rounders in 2022 (they have 3 1st rounders), a 2023 1st and a 2024 1st for Rodgers and Adams...I'm taking it.

Rodgers then goes to Philly. He has 3 great WRs. He has a RB. He has a defense. AND the Eagles still have plenty of draft picks to continue to build for the short run.

That is why I am saying Philly is an underdog here. I think people are sleeping on them. They got a lot of draft capital that can outbid other teams if they want. The biggest thing is if they want.

The problem is they don't offer that if Rodgers has told them he won't play for them. And Rodgers probably doesn't want his new team to be down multiple first round draft picks if he can help it.

That's why a simple one team list, a quiet agreement of modest compensation of maybe a 1st and a 2nd, ensures it's in the interest of the Packers to accept and sets up Rodgers nicely without any public acrimony.

Packers gave up any real leverage when they redid his contract last year. Hopefully he has enough good will towards the Packers that he doesn't use it against them now.

Denver cannot reach out and talk to Rodgers about playing for them. That is the definition of tampering. I don't even know if they can talk to AR's agent...

He can if GB grants him permission, and it that need to be publicly available information.

[Realist]

I said Denver was number one. I always said that. Good grief.

All I said is Philly could be an underdog here.

Yes I think Denver makes the playoffs with Rodgers. I also know Philly makes the playoffs with Rodgers. Both teams have a lot of cap and both can bring on Adams.

So what Reagor isn't as good as Juedy. He would be a 3rd WR. And if you have read me on this forum long enough, you know my feelings on getting so hell bent over shape on a 3rd and 4th WR talk...

If Philly comes in and offers us 2 1st rounders in 2022 (they have 3 1st rounders), a 2023 1st and a 2024 1st for Rodgers and Adams...I'm taking it.

Rodgers then goes to Philly. He has 3 great WRs. He has a RB. He has a defense. AND the Eagles still have plenty of draft picks to continue to build for the short run.

That is why I am saying Philly is an underdog here. I think people are sleeping on them. They got a lot of draft capital that can outbid other teams if they want. The biggest thing is if they want.

The problem is they don't offer that if Rodgers has told them he won't play for them. And Rodgers probably doesn't want his new team to be down multiple first round draft picks if he can help it.

That's why a simple one team list, a quiet agreement of modest compensation of maybe a 1st and a 2nd, ensures it's in the interest of the Packers to accept and sets up Rodgers nicely without any public acrimony.

Packers gave up any real leverage when they redid his contract last year. Hopefully he has enough good will towards the Packers that he doesn't use it against them now.

Denver cannot reach out and talk to Rodgers about playing for them. That is the definition of tampering. I don't even know if they can talk to AR's agent...

Its pretty obvious that the Rams tampered to get Stafford. It goes on all the time. Enough of the Rodgers thing for me. He is our only chance to be in the mix going forward but I am cutting off my nose off to spite my face. A legend in his own mind. Only way to keep him is to back up the brinks truck. For what? Regular season hero.

[Acrobat]

Does Andrew Brandt still have inside info on the Packers today? That is the real question about his credibility. He could just be guessing like everyone else.

He is openly removed from any inside info. He is just guessing like everyone else. The difference is he isn't wrong nearly as often as everyone else.

Yep, he's very level headed, and I tend to agree with him.

The only thing that makes me wonder if he will indeed be wrong this time is because of the fact that it seems like the conditions he originally based his opinion on may have changed, that being that he really thought both sides wanted a divorce after this season.

[BF004]

[salmar80]

The thing I can't get beyond is James Jones saying he thinks Arod is back in GB next year.

James Jones is in the "inner circle". I think it would make more sense for him to say at this point, "man all I know is Rodgers is the best there ever was in GB. I know he loves GB and the fans and I know he ultimately will take the take the time to follow his heart and do the best thing for all"

something like that. But instead he says he expects Rodgers to be back in GB. I always take his words heavier than anyone else's.

This idea that giving up a lot for Aaron hurts his new team... I don't buy it so much and definitely not in the short-term. If Aaron wants to get traded, accepting that it's going to take a lot for a team to get him has to be part of the deal.

I agree. The draft trade compensation should mean little to Rodgers. Whoever Rodgers goes to can build a winner if they have a decent foundation (which is every top 20 NFL team) and not in terrible cap issue.

The team can buy a winner. They can defer cap hits like crazy to make it work. They don't need 1st round picks to be a winner.

And while the Packers love leverage, AR should love his when it comes to the team he's traded to, as well.

If he wants control over some decision, he'd be smart to play hard to get, even if it costs the franchise he's going to picks and the future beyond the couple of year he'll be there.

Even tho sometimes picks provide instant impact, they're mostly long-term investments. The only thing that could really threaten AR is a high 1st rounder. So if the team he's traded to has high 1st round picks, they might use one on a QB for the long term...

[Labrev]

But that's what I don't understand. I don't see "long term QB decision" being the number one 2022 thing if we move on from Rodgers. We hold Love for 3 years. If Love sucks in 2022, you draft another one in 2023 and still hold Love for 2 years (I can't imagine his 5th year option is too expensive)

If it "clicks" for Love in year 4, you make a decision with the other QB on your roster at that time.

If it never clicks, you are in the same situation and hope the other guy you drafted shows upside.

That assumes that the development would follow the same linear path whether we play him or not, whereas they may feel like his development would be hampered by playing him too early and make him less likely to click. It may or may not be a correct belief, but there are sound reasons to believe that (e.g. ingrain bad habits, destroy confidence).

We have gone ad nauseum on how its more about "team" than "QB" since the loss. Get the team right and everything else starts to fall into place.

Plenty of teams have seen success with average or below QBs. Philly, TEN, CLE, LAR (2020 and earlier), NO's, PIT, just to name a few the last few years

I'm with you on that, just not sure the Packers as an organization are willing to embrace this philosophy.

Every team has a "thing" if you will. One of our "things" is having some of the best QB play. Institutions tend to resist drastically changing the culture away from what they have always done (especially if they can believe they have had success with it).

Besides, we got *this* close to a SuperBowl in the last two years, and probably would have this year if we did not play one of the teams that always beats us.

'Not saying it's what I would do, but... imagine how badly Gute, Mark, and Matt must want it. It's been so close the past couple years now they could almost taste it. No matter how you slice it, Love will be a step back from that in the near-term (even if there is an argument to be made that you can go the distance with lesser QB play). I don't think the guys in charge right now can willingly take a step back from another championship run. Maybe if Love had flashed ala 2007 Rodgers. He didn't, though.

[British]

I think Philly is underrated from a Rodgers desired place standpoint.

They have Reagor and Smith to supplement Adams at WR. Miles Sanders at RB. Their defense overall was around top 10 in 2021.

The big thing with Philly is their coach is unknown. But just because it's unknown doesn't mean it's a bad place to play. Their division is also significantly easier these next two years compared to the AFC West.

Reagor?! F that.
If Rodgers goes to Denver he can hand pick his own WRs from the free agent pool. Adams, MVS, Tonyan and probably Godwin, Allen Robinson etc. Not to mention Jeudy, Patrick, Sutton, Fant and Albert O blows the Eagles WR corps out the water.

Siriani v Hackett is a no brainer.

Plus, I really don't think Rodgers on a tooled up Denver squad fears any team, be they in the AFC West or not. He's planning to win the Superbowl, not the the NFC East. We all know the self belief Rodgers has. If he can't handle a couple of decent teams in the AFC West then he may as well retire now. Plus, the Chargers didn't even make the playoffs this year. When you factor in the fact 7 teams now make the playoffs, Denver could even finish 3rd and still get in. Also, he's a West Coast boy with a fiancé in Colorado.

The main advantage to Rodgers for keeping the list of teams he would play for to 1 is that it could keep the compensation down. It's not in his interest for their to be a bidding war for him. If he wants a 3 year window at his next team, those draft picks are an important part of building that winning roster. Denver giving up a 1st and a 3rd is much better than 3 1sts and a 2nd.

You guys talk like he's a FA and he can pick and choose. It will be up to Gute where he will go if Rodgers is traded. Of course if Rodgers asks respectfully Gute will oblige but Gute will do what is best for us in the end.

Rodgers almost *does* have the freedom of a free agent since the Packers cut a year off his contract last season.

Rodgers can make it known he only wants to play in one place. That can be done pretty easily. Either his agent or someone else uses back channels to tell the teams, or he leaks it to Schefter or just comes out with it on Macafee.

He's already floated retirement. The Packers were convinced enough he wouldnt play last season they bent over backwards to sign his friends and cut a year off his deal giving him maximum leverage this off-season.

If he does that then how many other teams are going to trade three 1sts for him?

Any trading team also needs to sign him to a new contract immediately. They can't inherit his current deal as it just has one year at $45m on it. So a team will only trade for him if they know he's on board.

Packers could force him to stay for the year, have to cut lots of their best players and either make him sit on the bench or play him and miss out on a year to assess if Love is ready. They need to decide on Love's 5th year option after this season.

No, Packers have to either extend him or trade him.

We just have to hope that Rodgers gives the Packers more than one team he's happy to go to and let's the Packers auction him off. If he says there's only one team he wants to go to then who are they going to be bidding against?

If I'm Rodgers I'd rather not lose a ton of draft capital from my new team if I didn't have to.

[wallyuwl]

Story in a Denver paper today I saw that said Packers want to make AR highest paid in NFL, and interpreted that as a blow to Broncos trading for him.

[dsr]

Denver cannot reach out and talk to Rodgers about playing for them. That is the definition of tampering. I don't even know if they can talk to AR's agent...

They are not allowed to reach out and talk to Rodgers, and they are not allowed to reach out and talk to his agent.

But that's not the same as saying they can't do it. They can be direct and talk to Rodgers anyway, and as long as the Broncos and Rodgers are both willing to deny the phone calls happened, then there's nothing can be done. If they're really paranoid they can buy a single-purpose mobile phone to talk on.

Or more obliquely, the Broncos can talk to Rodgers' agent about other players and mention Rodgers in passing to test the water. If Rodgers has no interest, the agent can say so and that doesn't come anywhere near tampering. If Rodgers is interested, the agent will know how to say so in a code all GMs would understand, and the discussions can proceed, again, off the record.

They could even go indirectly through Rodgers' friends. Any player who is interested in a move will have ways of letting it be known.

Not saying any of this will happen, only that it could. And you can be pretty sure no team will make a blockbuster offer for Rodgers unless they have tested the water first to see if he is interested. It would cause no end of angst on all sides if a deal is done or even discussed, and then Rodgers turns it down.

[Scott4Pack]

The thing I can't get beyond is James Jones saying he thinks Arod is back in GB next year.

James Jones is in the "inner circle". I think it would make more sense for him to say at this point, "man all I know is Rodgers is the best there ever was in GB. I know he loves GB and the fans and I know he ultimately will take the take the time to follow his heart and do the best thing for all"

something like that. But instead he says he expects Rodgers to be back in GB. I always take his words heavier than anyone else's.

Leroy leaned that way, Silverstien, plenty of people with more info then us have said it too.

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

I read one of Brandt's Tweets about that. He specifically said that you DRAFT a player in the first round so that you can PLAY him. You NEVER release or trade or let go of a first round pick, EVER.

Brandt was suggesting that this is the basis that the Packers will use to prioritize letting Aaron go.

I'm not going to suggest that Brandt is right or not. But he has been in this business with the Packers and he has sound reasoning.

[Yoop]

Leroy leaned that way, Silverstien, plenty of people with more info then us have said it too.

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

I read one of Brandt's Tweets about that. He specifically said that you DRAFT a player in the first round so that you can PLAY him. You NEVER release or trade or let go of a first round pick, EVER.

Brandt was suggesting that this is the basis that the Packers will use to prioritize letting Aaron go.

I'm not going to suggest that Brandt is right or not. But he has been in this business with the Packers and he has sound reasoning.

thing is though, what would you expect a football guy to say, teams are built around high draft picks, D&D is still the corner stone for team building, with that in mind we know most draft picks even top 10 selections are a better player in the 2nd or 3rd seasons then they are as rookies, so if your a GM and trading for big time QB what would you prefer to give up, the 2nd or 3rd year mostly developed player, or a 1st round draft pick, pretty easy answer to me, I'd give up that first round draft pick in a NY minute and so would Andy Brandt.

It's like the the bird in hand being far more valuable then the 2 in the bushes, it's any ones guess what that top 10 draft pick will become, against what you already know what that 2nd or 3rd year player is, teams intending a trade for Rodgers will offer draft picks versus proven players.

Denver has a number 9 over all, that pick and more belongs to GB should we trade Rodgers to Denver, Guty wouldn't entertain anything less, and should not.

[Pugger]

Leroy leaned that way, Silverstien, plenty of people with more info then us have said it too.

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

I read one of Brandt's Tweets about that. He specifically said that you DRAFT a player in the first round so that you can PLAY him. You NEVER release or trade or let go of a first round pick, EVER.

Brandt was suggesting that this is the basis that the Packers will use to prioritize letting Aaron go.

I'm not going to suggest that Brandt is right or not. But he has been in this business with the Packers and he has sound reasoning.

This quote of Brandt's that I highlighted is false. It has happened in 2010 with JaMarcus Russell and the Oakland Raiders, for example. It is rare for sure. I also googled how often first round picks bust out and the number I found is 50%! So it won't be a shock if Love isn't turning out.

[BF004]

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

I read one of Brandt's Tweets about that. He specifically said that you DRAFT a player in the first round so that you can PLAY him. You NEVER release or trade or let go of a first round pick, EVER.

Brandt was suggesting that this is the basis that the Packers will use to prioritize letting Aaron go.

I'm not going to suggest that Brandt is right or not. But he has been in this business with the Packers and he has sound reasoning.

This quote of Brandt's that I highlighted is false. It has happened in 2010 with JaMarcus Russell and the Oakland Raiders, for example. It is rare for sure. I also googled how often first round picks bust out and the number I found is 50%! So it won't be a shock if Love isn't turning out.

I don't think you understood was Scott was saying. You don't draft someone in the first round and NOT play him, before trading or releasing them.

Russell played a lot.

[Acrobat]

I get the concept of the "You have to play your 1st round pick", but that rule is definitely flexible when you draft a guy because it looks like your Franchise QB might be on a decline (and actually had been for 2 years, actually longer minus a crazy 8 game stretch in 2016), and then suddenly that guy has back to back MVP seasons.

Or to state it this way, if the Packers find a way to make it work financially with Rodgers to the point where the rest of the roster isn't completely handcuffed, I don't think you're going to see many arguments saying "But they really needed to see what they had in Love". Just consider it a mistake and move on because plenty of other 1st round picks don't work out for other teams.

[packman114]

I'm sure it may have been mentioned somewhere in the 200,000 posts of this subject, but wouldn't we still be in salary cap hell and have to make a decision on Rodgers/Adams etc, if Love had NOT been picked? Isn't the Love pick irrelevant unless they think he is better than Rodgers like the decision they made in 2008? And isn't the decision solely based on how the team can continue to stay competitive if they pay Rodgers & Adams what they are worth?

Or is the cap increase coming up, so big that they can do all this without crippling the team?

[Scott4Pack]

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

I read one of Brandt's Tweets about that. He specifically said that you DRAFT a player in the first round so that you can PLAY him. You NEVER release or trade or let go of a first round pick, EVER.

Brandt was suggesting that this is the basis that the Packers will use to prioritize letting Aaron go.

I'm not going to suggest that Brandt is right or not. But he has been in this business with the Packers and he has sound reasoning.

thing is though, what would you expect a football guy to say, teams are built around high draft picks, D&D is still the corner stone for team building, with that in mind we know most draft picks even top 10 selections are a better player in the 2nd or 3rd seasons then they are as rookies, so if your a GM and trading for big time QB what would you prefer to give up, the 2nd or 3rd year mostly developed player, or a 1st round draft pick, pretty easy answer to me, I'd give up that first round draft pick in a NY minute and so would Andy Brandt.

It's like the the bird in hand being far more valuable then the 2 in the bushes, it's any ones guess what that top 10 draft pick will become, against what you already know what that 2nd or 3rd year player is, teams intending a trade for Rodgers will offer draft picks versus proven players.

Denver has a number 9 over all, that pick and more belongs to GB should we trade Rodgers to Denver, Guty wouldn't entertain anything less, and should not.

Walk it back, man. Brandt's point is a basic point and philosophy that he indicates the Packers have used for years.

Whatever the D&D stuff... Nobody denies that. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Brandt's point is that first round picks are drafted to play - period. There isn't a plan B unless they bust. Even "bust" comes after playing.

Now, if the Pack wants to say that there are extenuating circumstances... After all, how many teams have a 37 year old MVP/HOF QB who might exercise an option of playing 2-5 more years? How many teams face the issue of how to replace that QB, or to deal him and let the new QB play?

I have short memory, but I don't know of a single team that has faced this.

[Scott4Pack]

Andrew Brandt hasn't. There is one guy that can just sit on the sidelines, assess the situation for both parties for what it is, and if he says Aaron is likely gone, I will tend to believe him over just about anyone right now.

I read one of Brandt's Tweets about that. He specifically said that you DRAFT a player in the first round so that you can PLAY him. You NEVER release or trade or let go of a first round pick, EVER.

Brandt was suggesting that this is the basis that the Packers will use to prioritize letting Aaron go.

I'm not going to suggest that Brandt is right or not. But he has been in this business with the Packers and he has sound reasoning.

This quote of Brandt's that I highlighted is false. It has happened in 2010 with JaMarcus Russell and the Oakland Raiders, for example. It is rare for sure. I also googled how often first round picks bust out and the number I found is 50%! So it won't be a shock if Love isn't turning out.

Brandt's point is not false. Russell PLAYED in his rookie season and he flopped in a big way. His release was AFTER he proved himself on the field. Brandt's point is that the first round picks always play. They get their opportunity on the field before any trade or release occurs.