The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
The tweet was in response to Doubs from budfox saying how immature and unprofessional Romeo Doubs was for saying he never really hung out with Aaron outside the facility to have a funny story.
Thank you, was just gunna repost this for [mention]Yoop[/mention] as well.
I think there IS something in this report and the problem is NOT Doubs. It would be very interesting to ask Doubs if he ever hung out with Jordan Love or for that matter with Mercedes Lewis who IS in the same generation as Rodgers. Odds are pretty good that he has, that most of the players have hung out with most of the other players regardless of age or race.
I think what Ingall's (and I earlier) was trying to highlight is Rodgers doesn't have a no-trade clause, he basically has a retirement option. If he doesn't like the team he's being dealt to, his only option is to retire. I'm sure there'd be some clause involved outlining no trade compensation would be rendered if Rodgers is a no-show but a new team could take on his contract along with his rights and there is nothing Rodgers could do about it.bud fox wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 19:17He doesn't tell the Packers. He tells other teams and they pull their offers.APB wrote: ↑31 Jan 2023 14:56lupedafiasco wrote: ↑25 Jan 2023 17:13
Rodgers definitely has a no trade clause. Its called retirement. He mentions that word to any team trying to trade for him and that deal over.
Ingalls is an idiot.
what agenda? I never saw this clip before, if I had, my opinion may have been different, I rarely go to packer wire, or other football related media sources, I get most football info right here, so naturally I'am a day behind often, which is the case concerning what Doubs actually said.
I know I fail to do so too.why because he said " there are conversations going on that I'am not a part of" ? obviously thats true, Packer Beat writers have Rodgers packing his bags already, your assuming something Rodgers never said to my knowledge, and this front office has a history of not informing players till after the deal is done.Labrev wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 11:48I don't believe for a second that Mgmt is not including Rodgers in any of their conversations about his future. I'm sure they are having -some- internal (and external, i.e. trade offer) conversations that he is not a part of, but the idea that Rodgers isn't part of the talks at all is ludicrous.
It sounds to me like Rodgers sees some other team(s) he would rather play for, but doesn't want the legions of fans that still admire him to think he'd choose another team over theirs, that would break their hearts, or maybe even (worse yet) sour their opinion of him.
I think he wants to promote the idea that the team just does not want him back in GB, much as he *wants* to be back, so don't hate/blame me for asking to go to [__insert his eventual next team here__].
If you look two posts above your post I am quoting here, you will find an agenda.Yoop wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 11:51what agenda? I never saw this clip before, if I had, my opinion may have been different, I rarely go to packer wire, or other football related media sources, I get most football info right here, so naturally I'am a day behind often, which is the case concerning what Doubs actually said.
I wish when people would read something like this they would post it right away, that way we would all be more informed when we discuss or voice our opinions
I thought someone here said he has hung out after hours with Love and some of the other younger players.
but over all it is a nothing burger, and is a lousy question to ask a rookie.
again, post the tweets, Bud probably didn't see it either, point is without actually hearing what he said, it did come off as disrespectful of Rodgers, which if your honest seems like the intent of the question in the first place, she was baiting him to diss Rodgers, and to his credit he didn'tBF004 wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 12:01If you look two posts above your post I am quoting here, you will find an agenda.Yoop wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 11:51what agenda? I never saw this clip before, if I had, my opinion may have been different, I rarely go to packer wire, or other football related media sources, I get most football info right here, so naturally I'am a day behind often, which is the case concerning what Doubs actually said.
I wish when people would read something like this they would post it right away, that way we would all be more informed when we discuss or voice our opinions
I thought someone here said he has hung out after hours with Love and some of the other younger players.
but over all it is a nothing burger, and is a lousy question to ask a rookie.
And I believe that exact tweet was posted like 2 days ago, which sparked the topic.
re: "history" of not informing players till after... more recently than said history, Rodgers has said that the FO's communication with him has been great.Yoop wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 11:58why because he said " there are conversations going on that I'am not a part of" ? obviously thats true, Packer Beat writers have Rodgers packing his bags already, your assuming something Rodgers never said to my knowledge, and this front office has a history of not informing players till after the deal is done.
I mean yeah, what else are they gonna say?actually the TEAM is on record for saying they want him back
the loudest voice not to are you and Skeptic
Ingalls whole point was Rodgers can threaten gb he will retire to influence trade options.APB wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 10:55I think what Ingall's (and I earlier) was trying to highlight is Rodgers doesn't have a no-trade clause, he basically has a retirement option. If he doesn't like the team he's being dealt to, his only option is to retire. I'm sure there'd be some clause involved outlining no trade compensation would be rendered if Rodgers is a no-show but a new team could take on his contract along with his rights and there is nothing Rodgers could do about it.
Now, that said, I'm sure the Packers would try and make an amicable deal that benefits both the team AND Rodgers but to say Rodgers has final say in a deal, or a no-trade clause, is overstating things.
Side note: I think this tangent has been explored (trade/draft pick compensation) about as far as it needs to go, relative to the topic. We can continue this conversation in the Rodgers thread if you all care to continue to explore the trivialities of his trade/no-trade status.
Yeah I don't think he intended it to be bad but it was. It is a mistake that shouldn't happen.BF004 wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 07:03If you watch his interview, I don’t think he did anything wrong. He was asked point blank a question.
It’s just this 24/7 media cycle, we just hear and see everything. To be a nobody and make the news in the 90’s, you’d have to do something really big. This was a nothing, imo.
Yeah, in the 90's, if you wanted to know anything at all about the inner goings-on or non-star players, you had to put in the work, so to speak. I loved reading Packers Plus in those days just to get the info that didn't make ESPN or the nightly sports. That was before Bob McGinn got all cranky, too, so his articles were among the best.BF004 wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 07:03If you watch his interview, I don’t think he did anything wrong. He was asked point blank a question.
It’s just this 24/7 media cycle, we just hear and see everything. To be a nobody and make the news in the 90’s, you’d have to do something really big. This was a nothing, imo.
we don't really know who he was referring to, just there are conversations, and just like this one we are having right now, it's just speculation, basically another nothing, nothing Burger, we'll know whether it's edible once the condiments are on the tableLabrev wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 12:30re: "history" of not informing players till after... more recently than said history, Rodgers has said that the FO's communication with him has been great.Yoop wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 11:58why because he said " there are conversations going on that I'am not a part of" ? obviously thats true, Packer Beat writers have Rodgers packing his bags already, your assuming something Rodgers never said to my knowledge, and this front office has a history of not informing players till after the deal is done.
And when communication was bad, Rodgers was so angry over it that he wanted out.
So if communication is still good, the idea that they are not communicating with him about his future on the team is not credible.
But if you would have us believe that the communication has gotten bad again (as before), then that is more reason to believe Rodgers wants to go somewhere else, because that's what he wanted last time communication was bad.
I mean yeah, what else are they gonna say?actually the TEAM is on record for saying they want him back
Either they really do want him back, so acting like they are open to moving him will just risk alienating the guy to a point where he may not want to play for them.
-OR-
They do want to move on, in which case, all they do by admitting it in public is lose leverage.
the loudest voice not to are you and Skeptic
are you serious? so then you think it's the norm for news people to be inquisitive about whether rookies spend after hour time with HOF QB's twice there age, that was a totally off the wall question, what Doubs should have said is, what did Rodgers say, I don't want to put my QB on the spot.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑01 Feb 2023 13:30It was a video. It was a fairly innocuous question. I do not believe there was any nefarious motive behind the question. I do not believe there is anything wrong with the answer Doubs gave. I do not believe the answer implicated Aaron Rodgers in anything or cast him a poor light.