Packers Huddle

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 16:13

I guess it depends who has been pushing for Aaron the most, Hackett, Saleh, Douglas or Johnson.

But if it was anyone other than Johnson and he had to convinced...

Douglas is 20-46 an Saleh is 11-23. If they fail on getting Aaron and have another losing season, they are going to be fired, like no questions asked.

And if it was Johnson pushing most for it, then you basically got a free pass just getting it done and won't be 2nd guessed giving up the picks, internally.

As Packers, like I said, I'd probably come back to the table late next week and put forward a good faith, somewhat compromised offer, but otherwise, just sit and wait for NY to wisen up.

I have always had the impression from the media sourcing and circumstantial evidence that this is driven by Woody Johnson. That he is demanding, openly, to get the QB fix this year, and that Rodgers has been his first choice. I mean he publicly said in a post-season presser he will do anything to get a QB. That's what makes this so crazy to me.

Like "Aaron Rodgers or Paris Johnson, Jr? Aaron Rodgers or trade up for a CHANCE to develop Will Levis? Aaron Rodgers or Miles Murphy?"

You can't sell that to a fanbase! Johnson knows it. Give up the 13th pick, men. Your boss wants you to. No one will be mad at you. You get a free pass on this trade.

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 12:55

Pckfn23 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 12:47

lupedafiasco wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 12:14

I do find it odd so many knock Rodgers for not having more Super Bowls and the same criticism isn’t applied to the GM who has entirely more control over the outcome of the team than the QB.

Who is knocking Rodgers for not having more Super Bowls?

There is a misunderstanding between the two parties:

1) - I will absolutely say Rodgers not winning more than 1 ring does impact his legacy in being in that next tier. I think there is something to be said for rising up in the postseason and Rodgers just hasn't consistently done that. He didn't have the Mahommes postseason. He has for a game. But not a string of games.

2) - I however never wanted to "fire" Rodgers or say his performance was unforgiveable until I saw the actual team window end. Moving on from Rodgers is far more about the state of the Packers than it was about Rodgers. It was and is clearly time. We had a great shot in 2020 and 2021 and didn't get it done. It was easy to see we would never be that good again so I was ready to reload and move on. But again. Rodgers time is done and not winning another ring is part of that legacy calculation.

As for BG, he too didn't win one. That will be part of his legacy. He did have weak spots on his roster. That being said, I don't blame a GM for poor team building when his players were in position and just didn't make the play. Hard for me to blame BG for a Davante Adams TD drop which would have been enough for us.

BG isn't legendary status GM. Nobody is putting him there. But he also isn't "needs to be fired now GM". As usual, this place is so extreme it is absolutely ridiculous. It is so ridiculous that the group that is saying, "3 13 win seasons is enough to see how 2023 and 2024 goes" is somehow a radical thought.

If I get what you’re saying, on a personal note, this is how you are making peace with the evolution of the Packers recently? I can dig that.

I’m looking at it with various perspectives.
1. I can believe that it’s time for the Packers to move on simply because Love is ready.
2. I can believe it’s time for the Packers to move on because Rodgers is ready.
3. …because Guty and MLF and Murphy are ready.
4. …because the cap for Rodgers dictates that it be done now.
5. …because the FO has enough of “their guys” filling the roster that it’s time. (Even Rodgers spoke directly to this.)
6. …because there won’t be a better time to load new and young (inexpensive) talent onto the roster.
7. …because you have enough high performers in place that you can support an otherwise “weak” transition of the roster.
8. …because this is a fulfilling moment (milestone) of the plan that the FO has had in place. (In other words, we’ve reached a critical mass of the types of people that the FO wanted to move forward with.)
9. …because at least one other team has genuine interest in Rodgers.
10. …because it’s possible that Rodgers’ physical skills have begun a decline.
11. …because it’s fair to question whether Rodgers has the motivation/fire that he used to have.
12. …because it’s reasonable to wonder if this roster might actually underachieve with Rodgers (not so much having anything to do with him).

As I think about it, I could probably think of more reasons. I’m not even interested in being critical of Rodgers or the FO. I just feel like these reasons and more indicate that Rodgers is probably not the best fit for the 2023 Packers at this time. And I think they are both okay with that too.

So if jets don't trade for Rodgers, do the Packers

Start Rodgers
Sit him
Or cut him

On the other hands jets can promote wilson in the offseason get media to put out good stories which validates them giving him his 3rd year make it season.

Rodgers is gonna be great for the Jets, barring injury. I’m simply ready to see gute and love do their thing without Rodgers around.

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 16:55

So if jets don't trade for Rodgers, do the Packers

Start Rodgers
Sit him
Or cut him

On the other hands jets can promote wilson in the offseason get media to put out good stories which validates them giving him his 3rd year make it season.

We would survive the scenario, it would be unfortunate. And I think Rodgers has more or less said it’s Jets or retire.

Douglas and Saleh would end up losing their jobs. Maybe they could string out a .500 season if they go get like a Teddy Bridgewater and squeak out another year and be in this exact same place. There is zero chance they can trot out Wilson this year and be successful. That would be the ugliest locker room ever.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 16:57

Rodgers is gonna be great for the Jets, barring injury. I’m simply ready to see gute and love do their thing without Rodgers around.

me too, if Love is as good as most seem to think

I think Love will have better offensive impact talent then Rodgers did last year, I know thats not saying much, but Watson was exciting when healthy towards the second half of the season, and if Doubs can stay healthy and hold onto the ball, add a TE and other receiver or two

I also think the OL will be better, that should help Love and our RB's, and all that talent on defense has to play up to promise, Maybe Barry did some ayahuasca, left overs of Rodgers stash left in his locker last year

With all those talented receivers in Jersey, Rodgers will be right back to PB form, and I think everyone here expects that whether they'll say so or not, but I have to admit, 2018, or 21 would have been the time to trade Rodgers, instead we gave him a raise, course we can't over look a 39-9 record, and 2 mvp's, the losses in the PO's over shadow those accomplishments, made Lafleur a very respected coach though, but some have there doubts, was it Lafleur or Rodgers, I think it was both, and till last season never saw them disagree about the play calling, when things go wrong, lots of second guessing snow balls the situation.

looking forward to hopefully a extra 1st round pick, but actually expect a 2nd, maybe a 4th, a pick next year to be determined, maybe a bench shiner..I'am watching the Rodgers, Watson show against the Eagles last year, been so long since he's had a big guy with that agility, Jordy had a smooth gait to, but not the change of direction imo, so quick

Leroy Butler was tough on 12 on his appearance on the herd yesterday. Interesting.

Seemed strongly in Loves camp. Said he’s been wondering when the packers were gonna push back on 12.

“Somebody in that building had to give some push back”

“Now Matt Lafleur can sleep good at night with no anxiety that no one’s gonna change his offense that he wants to run!”

Wow!

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 17:28

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 16:55

So if jets don't trade for Rodgers, do the Packers

Start Rodgers
Sit him
Or cut him

On the other hands jets can promote wilson in the offseason get media to put out good stories which validates them giving him his 3rd year make it season.

We would survive the scenario, it would be unfortunate. And I think Rodgers has more or less said it’s Jets or retire.

Douglas and Saleh would end up losing their jobs. Maybe they could string out a .500 season if they go get like a Teddy Bridgewater and squeak out another year and be in this exact same place. There is zero chance they can trot out Wilson this year and be successful. That would be the ugliest locker room ever.

Doubt it and wait till you see how ugly it gets with Rodgers on macfee every.

Packers have no leverage

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 18:04

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 17:28

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 16:55

So if jets don't trade for Rodgers, do the Packers

Start Rodgers
Sit him
Or cut him

On the other hands jets can promote wilson in the offseason get media to put out good stories which validates them giving him his 3rd year make it season.

We would survive the scenario, it would be unfortunate. And I think Rodgers has more or less said it’s Jets or retire.

Douglas and Saleh would end up losing their jobs. Maybe they could string out a .500 season if they go get like a Teddy Bridgewater and squeak out another year and be in this exact same place. There is zero chance they can trot out Wilson this year and be successful. That would be the ugliest locker room ever.

Doubt it and wait till you see how ugly it gets with Rodgers on macfee every.

Packers have no leverage

Everyone entitled to their own opinion, but I think yours is wrong, as it would appear most people disagree as well.

And who cares if Rodgers goes on MacAfee again?

I mean many have laid out very well thought out arguments about who has leverage. I could see an argument where Jets have more leverage, but I’d moderately disagree with that. I don’t think either side has much, but I think we have more.

Guess I can’t really comprehend how your stance could be Packers have no leverage after the thinking things through. Tell me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking your primary justification is ‘I think Gutenkunst is awful?’ Or something along those lines.

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 18:19

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 18:04

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 17:28

We would survive the scenario, it would be unfortunate. And I think Rodgers has more or less said it’s Jets or retire.

Douglas and Saleh would end up losing their jobs. Maybe they could string out a .500 season if they go get like a Teddy Bridgewater and squeak out another year and be in this exact same place. There is zero chance they can trot out Wilson this year and be successful. That would be the ugliest locker room ever.

Doubt it and wait till you see how ugly it gets with Rodgers on macfee every.

Packers have no leverage

Everyone entitled to their own opinion, but I think yours is wrong, as it would appear most people disagree as well.

And who cares if Rodgers goes on MacAfee again?

I mean many have laid out very well thought out arguments about who has leverage. I could see an argument where Jets have more leverage, but I’d moderately disagree with that. I don’t think either side has much, but I think we have more.

Guess I can’t really comprehend how your stance could be Packers have no leverage after the thinking things through. Tell me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking your primary justification is ‘I think Gutenkunst is awful?’ Or something along those lines.

No I just think the Packers have to get rid of Rodgers now.

He can't come back to the team.

The Jets don't need him as much as the pack3rs need to get rid of him.

That is why the leverage is in their favour.

What is your plan it Jets don't trade for him? You just believe Rodgers says oh well and retires? When the Jets have said they want him but the Packers stop it happening b3cause they want to drain more value out of a guy who won them a superbowl?

Will be a mess.

Every time Rodgers goes on McAfee, the Packers draft stock rises.

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 20:29

Every time Rodgers goes on McAfee, the Packers draft stock rises.

Because Rodgers comes across well?

Not sure what you mean. If it is Rodgers looks poor then it is worse for the packerz with respect to the trade. Unless you mean just Rodgers v Packers sentiment.

In a fan poll Rodgers was just named the 2nd most liked player in the nfl behind mahomes.

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 20:46

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 20:29

Every time Rodgers goes on McAfee, the Packers draft stock rises.

Because Rodgers comes across well?

Not sure what you mean. If it is Rodgers looks poor then it is worse for the packerz with respect to the trade. Unless you mean just Rodgers v Packers sentiment.

In a fan poll Rodgers was just named the 2nd most liked player in the nfl behind mahomes.

Yup. Exactly.

And which fans have the Rodgers fever?

These guys do.

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 20:59

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 20:46

go pak go wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 20:29

Every time Rodgers goes on McAfee, the Packers draft stock rises.

Because Rodgers comes across well?

Not sure what you mean. If it is Rodgers looks poor then it is worse for the packerz with respect to the trade. Unless you mean just Rodgers v Packers sentiment.

In a fan poll Rodgers was just named the 2nd most liked player in the nfl behind mahomes.

Yup. Exactly.

And which fans have the Rodgers fever?

These guys do.

Well played sir.

Rodgers can keep tanking his trade value like he has all along by just re-emphasizing that he wants to retire 90% of the time lol

RingoCStarrQB wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 16:30

Yoop wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 09:30

Labrev wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 09:01

Finley was on IR that year. Nelson emerged as one of the top wideouts in the league the the year after the SuperBowl. He and Jones decent players in 2010, but not stars, and both of them struggled with drops early in their careers (including 2010, and even had a few in the Bowl game).

Jennings was, at the time, the only true star player at WR. Driver was established but well past his prime by that point.

Jennings and Nelson combined for 3 TD's

Nelson was 9 catches 140 yrds
Jennings 4 " 64
Jones " 50

Nelson was a star in 2010 SB

Jordy made the cover of Sports Illustrated in 2010 playoffs, as Antonio Freeman did in 1996 playoffs and Max McGee did in 1966 Super Bowl. These were the best of times IMHO. It wasn't just the SI cover WRs....it was the other receivers that contributed significantly to their team's successes as well. These were: Boyd Dowler, Carroll Dale, Andre Rison, Keith Jackson, James Jones, Donald Driver, Greg Jennings. Now we're starting over with Christian Watson and Romeo Doubs. More to come ....

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 19:49

BF004 wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 18:19

bud fox wrote: ↑

17 Mar 2023 18:04

Doubt it and wait till you see how ugly it gets with Rodgers on macfee every.

Packers have no leverage

Everyone entitled to their own opinion, but I think yours is wrong, as it would appear most people disagree as well.

And who cares if Rodgers goes on MacAfee again?

I mean many have laid out very well thought out arguments about who has leverage. I could see an argument where Jets have more leverage, but I’d moderately disagree with that. I don’t think either side has much, but I think we have more.

Guess I can’t really comprehend how your stance could be Packers have no leverage after the thinking things through. Tell me if I’m wrong, but I’m thinking your primary justification is ‘I think Gutenkunst is awful?’ Or something along those lines.

No I just think the Packers have to get rid of Rodgers now.

He can't come back to the team.

The Jets don't need him as much as the pack3rs need to get rid of him.

That is why the leverage is in their favour.

What is your plan it Jets don't trade for him? You just believe Rodgers says oh well and retires? When the Jets have said they want him but the Packers stop it happening b3cause they want to drain more value out of a guy who won them a superbowl?

Will be a mess.

I don't know about that. Who do they have under center if they don't get Rodgers? Zack Wilson and Chris Streveler.

Here is the Packers’ leverage: the cost of the alternatives.

If the Jets want Lamar Jackson, it costs 2 first round picks

If the Jets want to draft a rookie who can play early, it costs pick 13 and a package of picks to move up to at least 6, if not 3. A trade with the value of a second round pick at the least.

If the Jets don’t want to trade assets, the best remaining free agents might be Matt Ryan and… Carson Wentz? I mean the position is totally dry right now.

So anything less than pick 13 and a second round pick is a bargain compared to the alternatives of Lamar or a rookie. I know he’s old. I know he might only play one year. But they need a QB this season and the cost of drafting one should be the absolute floor of these negotiations

YoHoChecko wrote: ↑

18 Mar 2023 09:13

Here is the Packers’ leverage: the cost of the alternatives.

If the Jets want Lamar Jackson, it costs 2 first round picks

If the Jets want to draft a rookie who can play early, it costs pick 13 and a package of picks to move up to at least 6, if not 3. A trade with the value of a second round pick at the least.

If the Jets don’t want to trade assets, the best remaining free agents might be Matt Ryan and… Carson Wentz? I mean the position is totally dry right now.

So anything less than pick 13 and a second round pick is a bargain compared to the alternatives of Lamar or a rookie. I know he’s old. I know he might only play one year. But they need a QB this season and the cost of drafting one should be the absolute floor of these negotiations

Yup. And they have a team that everyone is starting to believe is a "quarterback away". And your owner said he is going to make a hard push to bring in a big time QB. And the fans are now expecting something fun because they never have fun things. And then Rodgers goes on national television and says he intends on playing in 2023 for the New York Jets.

The Jets fans have Rodgers fever. Pick 13 and a 2024 2nd rounder is a bargain compared to staying at Pick 13 and selecting Paris Johnson.

All you should need to know about this year's crop of QB's is that the 2nd ranked QB is 5' 10" and the 3rd ranked QB has accuracy issues and only started 1 year in college.

If the Jets don't get Rodgers because they won't part with that #13 pick their fans are going to be livid

Rodgers got complacent in GB. He did not help his rookie receivers and did not play in the preseason, big mistakes. A new team and a chip on his shoulder will be good for him and he probably will play 2 years. Maybe more