Packers Huddle

TheSkeptic wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:02

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 06:57

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 06:52

I don't see Rodgers retiring. He knows he can still play at a high level. Unless he and other players restructure their contracts we cannot keep the core of this roster together. The cap IMO is why this run is over. The most likely scenario is we trade Rodgers for picks and see what we have in Love going forward. 2022 will be a challenging year but so was Rodgers' first year starting back in 2008.

Yeah that's what I've been saying in every one of my posts since last April.

The only reason I brought up retirement is because Rodgers has been bringing it up himself a lot more these days. Something he never uttered a year ago.

Now the talk is already about Brady retiring too. And frankly he looks like he is 34 while Rodgers looks like he is 44. Father time wins every time.

IMO the reason Rodgers looks like a old man is because of that scruffy beard and hair. He looks like a billy goat.

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 06:57

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 06:52

I don't see Rodgers retiring. He knows he can still play at a high level. Unless he and other players restructure their contracts we cannot keep the core of this roster together. The cap IMO is why this run is over. The most likely scenario is we trade Rodgers for picks and see what we have in Love going forward. 2022 will be a challenging year but so was Rodgers' first year starting back in 2008.

Yeah that's what I've been saying in every one of my posts since last April.

The only reason I brought up retirement is because Rodgers has been bringing it up himself a lot more these days. Something he never uttered a year ago.

Maybe because he fears Gute will trade him to a team like the Jets, Texans or NYG for picks.

He goes where we get the best offer. But only a team who knows they can build a squad for a 2 to 3 year run will actually offer something big.

There are going to be a lot of QB movements this offseason.

Cousins, Rodgers, Jimmy G, Rodgers, Wentz will all be likely moving around. Plus you may have Brady and Roethlesberger retiring.

That's a ton of movement.

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:10

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 06:57

Yeah that's what I've been saying in every one of my posts since last April.

The only reason I brought up retirement is because Rodgers has been bringing it up himself a lot more these days. Something he never uttered a year ago.

Maybe because he fears Gute will trade him to a team like the Jets, Texans or NYG for picks.

He goes where we get the best offer. But only a team who knows they can build a squad for a 2 to 3 year run will actually offer something big.

There are going to be a lot of QB movements this offseason.

Cousins, Rodgers, Jimmy G, Rodgers, Wentz will all be likely moving around. Plus you may have Brady and Roethlesberger retiring.

That's a ton of movement.

For some reason, unless Tampa has salary cap issues, I don't see Brady retiring. He, along with AR, still played at a high level this year. Big Ben is history.

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:10

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:05

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 06:57

Yeah that's what I've been saying in every one of my posts since last April.

The only reason I brought up retirement is because Rodgers has been bringing it up himself a lot more these days. Something he never uttered a year ago.

Maybe because he fears Gute will trade him to a team like the Jets, Texans or NYG for picks.

He goes where we get the best offer. But only a team who knows they can build a squad for a 2 to 3 year run will actually offer something big.

There are going to be a lot of QB movements this offseason.

Cousins, Rodgers, Jimmy G, Rodgers, Wentz will all be likely moving around. Plus you may have Brady and Roethlesberger retiring.

That's a ton of movement.

Unless things have changed Rodgers has the right of first or maybe even more refusals to go where we want him to go, hopefully he settles on a team that will compensate us well.

I think it's wise to trade him soon so we can tag and trade Adams, get a pick or two for him as well.

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:38

Unless things have changed Rodgers has the right of first or maybe even more refusals to go where we want him to go, hopefully he settles on a team that will compensate us well.

I think it's wise to trade him soon so we can tag and trade Adams, get a pick or two for him as well.

I don't think that is actually the case. I'm not sure anyone really knows for sure, but I do not believe Rodgers has full veto power over any trade destination. I think it is more of a gentlemen's agreement, but I am sure we will here more about that as time moves along.

In terms of Adams, they cannot move Rodgers before tagging Adams. The way the process works, it is actually impossible. Rodgers cannot be traded until the new league year opens. If they want to tag Adams, that decision has to be made before the new league year opens. Ingalls has been pretty all over this, but it is almost (if not truly, by definition) impossible to tag Adams.

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:22

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:10

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:05

Maybe because he fears Gute will trade him to a team like the Jets, Texans or NYG for picks.

He goes where we get the best offer. But only a team who knows they can build a squad for a 2 to 3 year run will actually offer something big.

There are going to be a lot of QB movements this offseason.

Cousins, Rodgers, Jimmy G, Rodgers, Wentz will all be likely moving around. Plus you may have Brady and Roethlesberger retiring.

That's a ton of movement.

For some reason, unless Tampa has salary cap issues, I don't see Brady retiring. He, along with AR, still played at a high level this year. Big Ben is history.

Brady's age is creeping up on him, and pro football is far more demanding then most of us think, he's been lucky concerning injury's, but even the little dingys pile up and make it harder to stay in top conditioning, plus there is the time away from family the game requires.

Maybe I'am just wishing and hoping he retires because I'am tired of one player dominating every news source

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:42

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:38

Unless things have changed Rodgers has the right of first or maybe even more refusals to go where we want him to go, hopefully he settles on a team that will compensate us well.

I think it's wise to trade him soon so we can tag and trade Adams, get a pick or two for him as well.

I don't think that is actually the case. I'm not sure anyone really knows for sure, but I do not believe Rodgers has full veto power over any trade destination. I think it is more of a gentlemen's agreement, but I am sure we will here more about that as time moves along.

In terms of Adams, they cannot move Rodgers before tagging Adams. The way the process works, it is actually impossible. Rodgers cannot be traded until the new league year opens. If they want to tag Adams, that decision has to be made before the new league year opens. Ingalls has been pretty all over this, but it is almost (if not truly, by definition) impossible to tag Adams.

why would Silverstein even suggest it then, obviously there must be a way.

I remember something about Favre having a couple choices before accepting the trade to the Jets, could be your right though and that was just Ted being a Gentleman toward Brett, I'll have to put my research cap on to find out more about this

it may not be in writing, but I certainly remember it being "reported" that part of the offer to get Rodgers back in the building was "hey please just come back for one more year, and after this year...we will help you get to where you want to go, or we will decide in partnership"

Something to that effect

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:38

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:10

Pugger wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:05

Maybe because he fears Gute will trade him to a team like the Jets, Texans or NYG for picks.

He goes where we get the best offer. But only a team who knows they can build a squad for a 2 to 3 year run will actually offer something big.

There are going to be a lot of QB movements this offseason.

Cousins, Rodgers, Jimmy G, Rodgers, Wentz will all be likely moving around. Plus you may have Brady and Roethlesberger retiring.

That's a ton of movement.

Unless things have changed Rodgers has the right of first or maybe even more refusals to go where we want him to go, hopefully he settles on a team that will compensate us well.

I think it's wise to trade him soon so we can tag and trade Adams, get a pick or two for him as well.

When asked if that was a clause last summer, Rodgers said that was false. There is no "first refusal" clause in the Rodgers camp.

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:49

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:42

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:38

Unless things have changed Rodgers has the right of first or maybe even more refusals to go where we want him to go, hopefully he settles on a team that will compensate us well.

I think it's wise to trade him soon so we can tag and trade Adams, get a pick or two for him as well.

I don't think that is actually the case. I'm not sure anyone really knows for sure, but I do not believe Rodgers has full veto power over any trade destination. I think it is more of a gentlemen's agreement, but I am sure we will here more about that as time moves along.

In terms of Adams, they cannot move Rodgers before tagging Adams. The way the process works, it is actually impossible. Rodgers cannot be traded until the new league year opens. If they want to tag Adams, that decision has to be made before the new league year opens. Ingalls has been pretty all over this, but it is almost (if not truly, by definition) impossible to tag Adams.

why would Silverstein even suggest it then, obviously there must be a way.

I remember something about Favre having a couple choices before accepting the trade to the Jets, could be your right though and that was just Ted being a Gentleman toward Brett, I'll have to put my research cap on to find out more about this

The story with Brett has also been said by Andrew Brandt.

The story with Brett goes like this:

"Brett, we have two trade offers for you. One is to Tampa and the other is the New York Jets"

Brett said he wanted to go to Tampa. So the Packers sent him to the Jets.

Drj820 wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:52

it may not be in writing, but I certainly remember it being "reported" that part of the offer to get Rodgers back in the building was "hey please just come back for one more year, and after this year...we will help you get to where you want to go, or we will decide in partnership"

Something to that effect

It was absolutely reported. And then when asked about it, Rodgers said that report was incorrect.

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:00

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:49

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:42

I don't think that is actually the case. I'm not sure anyone really knows for sure, but I do not believe Rodgers has full veto power over any trade destination. I think it is more of a gentlemen's agreement, but I am sure we will here more about that as time moves along.

In terms of Adams, they cannot move Rodgers before tagging Adams. The way the process works, it is actually impossible. Rodgers cannot be traded until the new league year opens. If they want to tag Adams, that decision has to be made before the new league year opens. Ingalls has been pretty all over this, but it is almost (if not truly, by definition) impossible to tag Adams.

why would Silverstein even suggest it then, obviously there must be a way.

I remember something about Favre having a couple choices before accepting the trade to the Jets, could be your right though and that was just Ted being a Gentleman toward Brett, I'll have to put my research cap on to find out more about this

The story with Brett has also been said by Andrew Brandt.

The story with Brett goes like this:

"Brett, we have two trade offers for you. One is to Tampa and the other is the New York Jets"

Brett said he wanted to go to Tampa. So the Packers sent him to the Jets.

show me, that does not sound like anything Andy Brandt would do, why would he reneg on a two destination offer

also I remember reading ( could have changed with new CBA) that tenured vets did have the right of first refusal, maybe thats been changed.

But for you to come here and say we will send Rodgers any where we want minus anything that says we can do that sounds very controlling on your part, and in reality I doubt it'll end up working out that way.

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:49

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:42

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:38

Unless things have changed Rodgers has the right of first or maybe even more refusals to go where we want him to go, hopefully he settles on a team that will compensate us well.

I think it's wise to trade him soon so we can tag and trade Adams, get a pick or two for him as well.

I don't think that is actually the case. I'm not sure anyone really knows for sure, but I do not believe Rodgers has full veto power over any trade destination. I think it is more of a gentlemen's agreement, but I am sure we will here more about that as time moves along.

In terms of Adams, they cannot move Rodgers before tagging Adams. The way the process works, it is actually impossible. Rodgers cannot be traded until the new league year opens. If they want to tag Adams, that decision has to be made before the new league year opens. Ingalls has been pretty all over this, but it is almost (if not truly, by definition) impossible to tag Adams.

why would Silverstein even suggest it then, obviously there must be a way.

I remember something about Favre having a couple choices before accepting the trade to the Jets, could be your right though and that was just Ted being a Gentleman toward Brett, I'll have to put my research cap on to find out more about this

Thanks, sounds like Silverstein was whistling dixie, would have been nice to get something for Adams to go with what we get for Rodgers.

Basically, if Adams wants the richest WR contract (which he has publicly stated that he deserves), it will be a foregone conclusion that he walks. He will not be a Packer next year unless there are very major concessions. Isn't that the case here?

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:43

Thanks, sounds like Silverstein was whistling dixie, would have been nice to get something for Adams to go with what we get for Rodgers.

Absolutely. It would probably be a lot, too.

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:28

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:00

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 07:49

why would Silverstein even suggest it then, obviously there must be a way.

I remember something about Favre having a couple choices before accepting the trade to the Jets, could be your right though and that was just Ted being a Gentleman toward Brett, I'll have to put my research cap on to find out more about this

The story with Brett has also been said by Andrew Brandt.

The story with Brett goes like this:

"Brett, we have two trade offers for you. One is to Tampa and the other is the New York Jets"

Brett said he wanted to go to Tampa. So the Packers sent him to the Jets.

show me, that does not sound like anything Andy Brandt would do, why would he reneg on a two destination offer

also I remember reading ( could have changed with new CBA) that tenured vets did have the right of first refusal, maybe thats been changed.

But for you to come here and say we will send Rodgers any where we want minus anything that says we can do that sounds very controlling on your part, and in reality I doubt it'll end up working out that way.

you like to fight a lot.

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:59

you like to fight a lot

disagreeing is not fighting, when you say stuff I find disagreeable to what I've witnessed take place over the years then I will speak up, so when you say Rodgers will go wherever the team decides to trade him I have my doubts, if Rodgers decides to say no I wont go there, I doubt that Murphy or Gute will force him, and will come up with a alternate trade.

NCF wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:54

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:43

Thanks, sounds like Silverstein was whistling dixie, would have been nice to get something for Adams to go with what we get for Rodgers.

Absolutely. It would probably be a lot, too.

our loss, to bad to because keeping most of the other talent wont be easy or cheap either.

Yoop wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 09:28

go pak go wrote: ↑

24 Jan 2022 08:59

you like to fight a lot

disagreeing is not fighting, when you say stuff I find disagreeable to what I've witnessed take place over the years then I will speak up, so when you say Rodgers will go wherever the team decides to trade him I have my doubts, if Rodgers decides to say no I wont go there, I doubt that Murphy or Gute will force him, and will come up with a alternate trade.

A few things:

1. You primarily argued my Andrew Brandt story and told me to bring the article. It wasn't an article. It was an interview and no I am not brining that in. You bring in plenty of stuff without any backup. I am doing that here as well. I am not going to sift through Brandt interviews to find the right time stamp for that story. But my memory is pretty darned good.

2. Obviously you can take this from an extreme standpoint like, "we are sending you to the Jets no matter what". This obviously won't happen for a few reasons:
a) - The Jets or Texans are not spending draft capital for Rodgers. That would be stupid on their end to spend a lot of resources on their end to bring in a QB while their team is not ready to win.

b) - Rodgers would just retire and again any offer by these low teams would not get considered. Therefore these low teams won't even put their hat in the ring.

c) - There will be plenty of teams who are in that "we are a QB and some big sign FA's away from being contenders" that we won't need offers from low teams anyways.

I thought all of this was common sense and didn't even need to be stated where I guess I was wrong.

The thing Rodgers could do is play hardball becuase he knows he could get away with it. He knows the Packers don't have much room to bargain if he forces our hand because of our cap situation. However, GB can easily turn this on its head by releasing the Smith boys, Cobb, Crosby, etc. prior to the new league year to get us under cap. At that point, Rodgers baragaining power is gone. He either plays for a rebuidling Packers, plays for the highest bidder, or retires.

It's why I don't think Rodgers can just pick where he wants to go while at the same time negotiate a small trade compensation to screw the Packers. Once the Packers decide 2022 is a rebuild year, Rodgers loses his bargaining power. They will come to an agreement quite easily and work with each other well.