Page 2 of 18
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 07 Jun 2021 23:38
by Yoop
texas wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:37
Yoop wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:18
texas wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:06
Ok but to me, the issue of whether the FO could have done a better job is completely separate from the current squabble. Like he is going to quit on the team and our fans because he thinks Damarious Randall sucked? Russ Ball could have signed Jimmy Graham to a slightly better deal so that means Rodgers is justified trying to implode the team 4 years later?
I mean maybe that is a valid reason if we're the Lions and the player is Megatron or Barry Sanders, but even in those cases they didn't act like little bitches and demand to be traded the way Rodgers has. And then the passive aggressive silent treatment? I'm talking my way into not wanting him back at all, even if he wants to come back lol
<snip>
I own the Packers, so he legally does owe me something unless he chooses to retire. That's how contracts work.
everyone here owns the Packers, your right though, he is under contract, unless he retires he should honor it, and was all set to, then the length of that extension turned into 1 year deals dependent on the ability of Love.
now this may seem like standard procedure, and I guess it is, but easy to see why a player like Rodgers resents it, if he had known back prior to the signing of the extension this would be the course of things, it's debatable that he would have signed on to it, he feels double crossed, and after last season felt he had the leverage to get some sort of written guarantee's he'll finish his career as the starter here provided his skill set doesn't decline, and it is beyond rediculous if the FO doesn't figure out some way to get this done.
as a packer owner ( was that suppose to be a joke Tex? I can't always tell
I took it as such) anyway as owner myself, I expect this FO to do everything within there power to put the best team on the field every season, and imo that is with Rodgers at QB, if Guty has to auction off his left testicle then that is what he should do, if he has to trade Love then thats what he should do, not to, and lose, and he wont need that testicle, this will probably be his last station as a GM for any nfl team, he is really playing with fire, yes the team may have the leverage, but that doesn't mean squat if we lose, people wont care what the reason are for Rodgers not playing, they'' only care that he isn't playing
now a lot of fans think we'll roll out with Love and win a bunch of games, no one knows what the word bunch translates to, imo missing the playoffs would be a loss or two to many.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 00:09
by bud fox
This thread reeks of scab labor.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 05:22
by lupedafiasco
Acrobat wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:38
texas wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:06
Ok but to me, the issue of whether the FO could have done a better job is completely separate from the current squabble. Like he is going to quit on the team and our fans because he thinks Damarious Randall sucked? Russ Ball could have signed Jimmy Graham to a slightly better deal so that means Rodgers is justified trying to implode the team 4 years later?
I mean maybe that is a valid reason if we're the Lions and the player is Megatron or Barry Sanders, but even in those cases they didn't act like little bitches and demand to be traded the way Rodgers has. And then the passive aggressive silent treatment? I'm talking my way into not wanting him back at all, even if he wants to come back lol
Exactly my thoughts. I think a lot of us are frustrated with certain moves and draft picks from the last 5-10 years. And I get why Rodgers would be pissed about the Love draft pick. I just don’t know why he’d pick this off season to act like this…which still leads me to believe something else happened and we don’t know the details yet.
How would you feel if your employer no longer believed in you? That is literally what the Love pick is to Rodgers.
Rodgers stuck it to the Packers by winning MVP as he said in the interview with that dude.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 06:56
by APB
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 05:22
Acrobat wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:38
texas wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:06
Ok but to me, the issue of whether the FO could have done a better job is completely separate from the current squabble. Like he is going to quit on the team and our fans because he thinks Damarious Randall sucked? Russ Ball could have signed Jimmy Graham to a slightly better deal so that means Rodgers is justified trying to implode the team 4 years later?
I mean maybe that is a valid reason if we're the Lions and the player is Megatron or Barry Sanders, but even in those cases they didn't act like little bitches and demand to be traded the way Rodgers has. And then the passive aggressive silent treatment? I'm talking my way into not wanting him back at all, even if he wants to come back lol
Exactly my thoughts. I think a lot of us are frustrated with certain moves and draft picks from the last 5-10 years. And I get why Rodgers would be pissed about the Love draft pick. I just don’t know why he’d pick this off season to act like this…which still leads me to believe something else happened and we don’t know the details yet.
How would you feel if your employer no longer believed in you? That is literally what the Love pick is to Rodgers.
Rodgers stuck it to the Packers by winning MVP as he said in the interview with that dude.
Rodgers play had regressed. He's also at an age where nearly every player continues to regress, even the great ones. There is no denying that. You can argue players around him got worse but, in reality, last year's roster was basically the same roster that saw Rodgers struggle the year prior so that argument doesn't hold much water.
Anyway, the Packers had no idea if Rodgers was gonna be able to turn things around. Nor did Rodgers at that point. The Packers did what any prudent management team would do and should do. They addressed Rodgers' play regression by drafting another player and putting the organization in position to continue to be competitive should Rodgers' regression continue. It obviously did not, kudos for Rodgers - and kudos to the Packers new coaching staff for continuing to work through the scheme transition.
Had Rodgers play continued to decline or, at best, plateau then many would have been posting complaints over the next decade over why the FO didn't address his decline in play when, combined with his age, was inevitable and he clearly showed signs. It'd have been Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and Dom Capers all over again. Instead, the FO addressed it at the onset, developed a contingency plan should they need it, but continued to work with the aging vet in hopes of improvement. It worked. Plan A is back on.
All except the QB, anyway. He's butthurt because the organization had the gall to plan for what happens to every single player without exception. Yeah, they likely over-estimated Rodgers pending demise but at least they weren't organizationally negligent and leave all their eggs in the Rodgers basket when evidence pointed to trouble. Again, kudos for Rodgers for adapting his game and, once again, showing the world that he's still a great player. The Packers could not have known that at the time and prudently jumped at the opportunity for a viable contingency when it presented itself. That's smart, capable, and emotion free decision making where you need it, not incompetence.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 07:03
by YoHoChecko
I mean we’ve discussed this to death, but like…
I don’t even care about the details? About his decline or lack of decline. About the various moves he likes or didn’t like…
The Packers current management has built a very strong team around Rodgers and no ONE mistake or detail or slight changes that. That is their job. There is no one draft pick worth this.
I get desiring to control your own life and destiny and outcomes. It’s why I didn’t remain in the Army. No one contests that the front office made errors, either.
But Rodgers is overreacting and being immature and refusing to clarify any sort of wants or demands and his options are to suck it up and play football or take his ball and go home. The latter is a universal sign of selfishness and weakness; a literal Cartman joke from South Park. So if that’s what he’s picking, call the spade a spade. That’s all there is to it
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 07:34
by RingoCStarrQB
Any way you want to slice it, dice it, invert it, convolute it, debate it, stink on it, get ready for it, rationalize it, crab about it, crank about it ..... whatever. T'was a bold intelligent move on Gutey's part to draft #10. Getting Bortles in camp ist gut as well.
I'm a Packers owner as well. Go Pack Go!
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 07:34
by Acrobat
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 05:22
Acrobat wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:38
texas wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:06
Ok but to me, the issue of whether the FO could have done a better job is completely separate from the current squabble. Like he is going to quit on the team and our fans because he thinks Damarious Randall sucked? Russ Ball could have signed Jimmy Graham to a slightly better deal so that means Rodgers is justified trying to implode the team 4 years later?
I mean maybe that is a valid reason if we're the Lions and the player is Megatron or Barry Sanders, but even in those cases they didn't act like little bitches and demand to be traded the way Rodgers has. And then the passive aggressive silent treatment? I'm talking my way into not wanting him back at all, even if he wants to come back lol
Exactly my thoughts. I think a lot of us are frustrated with certain moves and draft picks from the last 5-10 years. And I get why Rodgers would be pissed about the Love draft pick. I just don’t know why he’d pick this off season to act like this…which still leads me to believe something else happened and we don’t know the details yet.
How would you feel if your employer no longer believed in you? That is literally what the Love pick is to Rodgers.
Rodgers stuck it to the Packers by winning MVP as he said in the interview with that dude.
If my performance was on the decline and my employer hired someone to potentially replace me, and then my performance went up, I wouldn't expect my employer to immediately fire the other guy, give me a raise or a promotion, just because my performance improved after they drafted my replacement. That's not how business works.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 07:43
by Yoop
APB wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 06:56
Rodgers play had regressed. He's also at an age where nearly every player continues to regress, even the great ones. There is no denying that. You can argue players around him got worse but, in reality, last year's roster was basically the same roster that saw Rodgers struggle the year prior so that argument doesn't hold much water.
Rodgers play didn't regress any more then any other player on this team, you people just make stuff up to support your viewpoints, McCarthys schemes regressed, the WR position regressed, we didn't run the ball, yet through it all Murphy saw fit to make him the richest player in the league, while keeping the biggest problem, McCarthy, and the first year with Lafluer was a learning experience for everyone, all the players and Lafluer himself tinkered with his new offense the whole season, yet Rodger and the players did well enough to take us to the NFCCG, Rodger showed very little decline, Yet Guty took it upon himself to draft his replacement.
the following season the scheme and Rodgers gelled so well we had the #1 offense and a MVP QB.
there has been no talk from Rodgers, and Murphy said they are trying to work something out, and no one really knows what that means, yet ya'll want to blame Rodgers and start threads that divide this forum, well done Texas it worked.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 07:49
by NCF
We have a laundry list of microaggressions from the Front Office, but nothing on that list would make me side with Rodgers. There really has to be something behind the scenes that no one has been able to get ahold of yet. Like, someone said something that no one knows but Aaron and that was the straw that broke the camel's back. I don't know what and I don't know where and I don't know when, but just little tiny tea leaves still makes me think this is far more Rodgers vs Murphy than it is Rodgers vs Gute.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 07:58
by Acrobat
APB wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 06:56
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 05:22
Acrobat wrote: ↑07 Jun 2021 22:38
Exactly my thoughts. I think a lot of us are frustrated with certain moves and draft picks from the last 5-10 years. And I get why Rodgers would be pissed about the Love draft pick. I just don’t know why he’d pick this off season to act like this…which still leads me to believe something else happened and we don’t know the details yet.
How would you feel if your employer no longer believed in you? That is literally what the Love pick is to Rodgers.
Rodgers stuck it to the Packers by winning MVP as he said in the interview with that dude.
Rodgers play had regressed. He's also at an age where nearly every player continues to regress, even the great ones. There is no denying that. You can argue players around him got worse but, in reality, last year's roster was basically the same roster that saw Rodgers struggle the year prior so that argument doesn't hold much water.
Anyway, the Packers had no idea if Rodgers was gonna be able to turn things around. Nor did Rodgers at that point. The Packers did what any prudent management team would do and should do. They addressed Rodgers' play regression by drafting another player and putting the organization in position to continue to be competitive should Rodgers' regression continue. It obviously did not, kudos for Rodgers - and kudos to the Packers new coaching staff for continuing to work through the scheme transition.
Had Rodgers play continued to decline or, at best, plateau then many would have been posting complaints over the next decade over why the FO didn't address his decline in play when, combined with his age, was inevitable and he clearly showed signs. It'd have been Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and Dom Capers all over again. Instead, the FO addressed it at the onset, developed a contingency plan should they need it, but continued to work with the aging vet in hopes of improvement. It worked. Plan A is back on.
All except the QB, anyway. He's butthurt because the organization had the gall to plan for what happens to every single player without exception. Yeah, they likely over-estimated Rodgers pending demise but at least they weren't organizationally negligent and leave all their eggs in the Rodgers basket when evidence pointed to trouble. Again, kudos for Rodgers for adapting his game and, once again, showing the world that he's still a great player. The Packers could not have known that at the time and prudently jumped at the opportunity for a viable contingency when it presented itself. That's smart, capable, and emotion free decision making where you need it, not incompetence.
All fantastic points right here.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:12
by Yoop
I'll always support the franchise, but over the years that often didn't include those running it, I said so often in the 70's and 80's and received plenty of kick back from fans then to, specially when Greg and Starr where coaching, fan loyalty is often mis guided.
I think Rodgers should just come back and play out the season, but if he's convinced this will be his last year and he intends to play 3 or even more years longer somewhere else then he'd be taking a big risk that he could have a career ending injury and wipe out that future, so his position does have validity.
as to the future of this team, it's a no brainer, Rodgers by far gives us the best chance to win now and for the next 3 to 4 years, why people are so convinced Love will be any more then a average QB is mind boggling, I can't even entertain the idea that he wont hurt our chances of winning let alone carry us to success once a few of the costly stars on this team depart in a year or two.
but that may end up the outcome unless the FO does whatever it takes to persuad Rodgers to return, this would have never happened had this FO used some tact and shown Rodgers a little more respect.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:21
by Drj820
When talking about how Rodgers play may have regressed..it is important to consider whether any other QB in the league could have still won games with a declining offensive roster, a coach that couldnt transition to the way the NFL was moving, incompetent STs play, and incompetent Defensive play. (All things Brady never had to deal with). Considering all of those factors, I think Rodgers impacted winning more than almost any QB in the league could have under those circumstances.
What league QB wouldnt regress in a situation like that? Probably none, maybe one or two.
Certain people here like to bop Rodgers 2019 play. He still led a team that had horrible STs and couldnt stop the run at all to the NFCCG. It wasnt that bad. Sure, he may have needed an extra year in the system to really shine...can someone name a QB who wouldnt need an extra year? People might say Brady In Tampa, But the transition for Rodgers would have been much easier with a top 5 defense, Gronk, Antonio Brown, Leonard Fournette, Godwin, and Mike Evans. Im sure Rodgers would have thrived in year one under a circumstance like that too. Yet, 12 still took Devante, Aaron Jones, and the three stooges to the NFCCG.
My point in saying this is that...yes, the FO did give up on Rodgers when they drafted Love. Yes, that move was egregious and the cause for all this. No, it was NOT justified. Yes, if Love stinks then heads must roll. The FO started thinking anyone could win at QB under Lafleur and they got tired of dealing with Rodgers Diva ways..well now they get to see if they should have just dealt with him.
Again..that said..Rodgers signed the deal and he should have demanded to sign a deal that he could live with at the time he demanded a new contract.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:30
by Acrobat
Yoop wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:12
I'll always support the franchise, but over the years that often didn't include those running it, I said so often in the 70's and 80's and received plenty of kick back from fans then to, specially when Greg and Starr where coaching, fan loyalty is often mis guided.
I think Rodgers should just come back and play out the season, but if he's convinced this will be his last year and he intends to play 3 or even more years longer somewhere else then he'd be taking a big risk that he could have a career ending injury and wipe out that future, so his position does have validity.
as to the future of this team, it's a no brainer, Rodgers by far gives us the best chance to win now and for the next 3 to 4 years, why people are so convinced Love will be any more then a average QB is mind boggling, I can't even entertain the idea that he wont hurt our chances of winning let alone carry us to success once a few of the costly stars on this team depart in a year or two.
but that may end up the outcome unless the FO does whatever it takes to persuad Rodgers to return, this would have never happened had this FO used some tact and shown Rodgers a little more respect.
So I actually agree with a lot of, if not most of what you said here.
One thing that I've been thinking about a lot lately is the "chip" on Rodgers' shoulder. Maybe he does have a valid reason to be pissed off at the FO. But what worries me more is that the Rodgers of old would have said "You know what, I'm going to make the FO look even more dumb and go out and win another MVP in 2021", not sit out like he is, which if anything worries me more about a long term commitment to Rodgers past the next year or two. Does he still have that fire?
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:32
by NCF
Drj820 wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:21
My point in saying this is that...yes, the FO did give up on Rodgers when they drafted Love. Yes, that move was egregious and the cause for all this. No, it was NOT justified. Yes, if Love stinks then heads must roll. The FO started thinking anyone could win at QB under Lafleur and they got tired of dealing with Rodgers Diva ways..well now they get to see if they should have just dealt with him.
Again..that said..Rodgers signed the deal and he should have demanded to sign a deal that he could live with at the time he demanded a new contract.
First, yes, I agree so much with the last statement.
Second, I have only really seen [mention]Waldo[/mention] come to a similar stance, but I DO NOT believe the Packers bet against Aaron Rodgers. They covered their bases and drafted a QB in the 1st-round. Traditional sense says that guy HAS to play. Does he? Why? If Rodgers keeps the job and Jordan Love never plays a snap that is a wasted 1st-round pick. So what? Then Love is Datone Jones. He's Dumbarious Randall. He's Harrell. He's Sherrod. You can find good players throughout The Draft, but no position is more difficult than QB. When you have a chance and have the conviction, you have to pull the trigger and live with the consequences. Again, so what?
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:33
by Drj820
Acrobat wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:30
Yoop wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:12
I'll always support the franchise, but over the years that often didn't include those running it, I said so often in the 70's and 80's and received plenty of kick back from fans then to, specially when Greg and Starr where coaching, fan loyalty is often mis guided.
I think Rodgers should just come back and play out the season, but if he's convinced this will be his last year and he intends to play 3 or even more years longer somewhere else then he'd be taking a big risk that he could have a career ending injury and wipe out that future, so his position does have validity.
as to the future of this team, it's a no brainer, Rodgers by far gives us the best chance to win now and for the next 3 to 4 years, why people are so convinced Love will be any more then a average QB is mind boggling, I can't even entertain the idea that he wont hurt our chances of winning let alone carry us to success once a few of the costly stars on this team depart in a year or two.
but that may end up the outcome unless the FO does whatever it takes to persuad Rodgers to return, this would have never happened had this FO used some tact and shown Rodgers a little more respect.
So I actually agree with a lot of, if not most of what you said here.
One thing that I've been thinking about a lot lately is the "chip" on Rodgers' shoulder. Maybe he does have a valid reason to be pissed off at the FO. But what worries me more is that the Rodgers of old would have said "You know what, I'm going to make the FO look even more dumb and go out and win another MVP in 2021", not sit out like he is, which if anything worries me more about a long term commitment to Rodgers past the next year or two. Does he still have that fire?
Oh I think he wants to win another MVP in '21 or '22. He just doesnt want Murphy or Gute to recieve any profit or credit for it. He wants to win that award elsewhere.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:34
by Acrobat
NCF wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:32
Drj820 wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:21
My point in saying this is that...yes, the FO did give up on Rodgers when they drafted Love. Yes, that move was egregious and the cause for all this. No, it was NOT justified. Yes, if Love stinks then heads must roll. The FO started thinking anyone could win at QB under Lafleur and they got tired of dealing with Rodgers Diva ways..well now they get to see if they should have just dealt with him.
Again..that said..Rodgers signed the deal and he should have demanded to sign a deal that he could live with at the time he demanded a new contract.
First, yes, I agree so much with the last statement.
Second, I have only really seen @Waldo come to a similar stance, but I DO NOT believe the Packers bet against Aaron Rodgers. They covered their bases and drafted a QB in the 1st-round. Traditional sense says that guy HAS to play. Does he? Why? If Rodgers keeps the job and Jordan Love never plays a snap that is a wasted 1st-round pick. So what? Then Love is Datone Jones. He's Dumbarious Randall. He's Harrell. He's Sherrod. You can find good players throughout The Draft, but no position is more difficult than QB. When you have a chance and have the conviction, you have to pull the trigger and live with the consequences. Again, so what?
YES YES YES! Way too much is put on the fact that it was a 1st round pick. A late one too when the WR's we really wanted were gone.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:35
by Acrobat
Drj820 wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:33
Acrobat wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:30
Yoop wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:12
I'll always support the franchise, but over the years that often didn't include those running it, I said so often in the 70's and 80's and received plenty of kick back from fans then to, specially when Greg and Starr where coaching, fan loyalty is often mis guided.
I think Rodgers should just come back and play out the season, but if he's convinced this will be his last year and he intends to play 3 or even more years longer somewhere else then he'd be taking a big risk that he could have a career ending injury and wipe out that future, so his position does have validity.
as to the future of this team, it's a no brainer, Rodgers by far gives us the best chance to win now and for the next 3 to 4 years, why people are so convinced Love will be any more then a average QB is mind boggling, I can't even entertain the idea that he wont hurt our chances of winning let alone carry us to success once a few of the costly stars on this team depart in a year or two.
but that may end up the outcome unless the FO does whatever it takes to persuad Rodgers to return, this would have never happened had this FO used some tact and shown Rodgers a little more respect.
So I actually agree with a lot of, if not most of what you said here.
One thing that I've been thinking about a lot lately is the "chip" on Rodgers' shoulder. Maybe he does have a valid reason to be pissed off at the FO. But what worries me more is that the Rodgers of old would have said "You know what, I'm going to make the FO look even more dumb and go out and win another MVP in 2021", not sit out like he is, which if anything worries me more about a long term commitment to Rodgers past the next year or two. Does he still have that fire?
Oh I think he wants to win another MVP in '21 or '22. He just doesnt want Murphy or Gute to recieve any profit or credit for it. He wants to win that award elsewhere.
If that's really the truth, then I don't want Rodgers playing another snap for the Packers.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:37
by paco
My side, the one that is done talking about this. I will not care again until Aaron says something, the team says something significant, or until they start playing some preseason games.
There is not enough info to put blame on either side more than the other. So option "C" it is.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:37
by Drj820
Acrobat wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:35
Drj820 wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:33
Acrobat wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 08:30
So I actually agree with a lot of, if not most of what you said here.
One thing that I've been thinking about a lot lately is the "chip" on Rodgers' shoulder. Maybe he does have a valid reason to be pissed off at the FO. But what worries me more is that the Rodgers of old would have said "You know what, I'm going to make the FO look even more dumb and go out and win another MVP in 2021", not sit out like he is, which if anything worries me more about a long term commitment to Rodgers past the next year or two. Does he still have that fire?
Oh I think he wants to win another MVP in '21 or '22. He just doesnt want Murphy or Gute to recieve any profit or credit for it. He wants to win that award elsewhere.
If that's really the truth, then I don't want Rodgers playing another snap for the Packers.
I do because I want to have the best chance to win a super bowl in 2021 on the field.
Re: Whose Side Are You On?
Posted: 08 Jun 2021 08:37
by BF004
lupedafiasco wrote: ↑08 Jun 2021 05:22
How would you feel if your employer no longer believed in you?
Wait, you guys have had employers that believed in you? And treated you like a human being and not an asset?
