Packers Huddle

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:05

If I am Las Vegas, Denver, Philly, Pittsburgh....

I absolutely, positively do whatever I can to bring in Rodgers and Adams and hope for a legit 2 year run. The cap can be managed to make it happen and you are an instant threat for a SB if you do it.

I would give up 3 1st rounders plus another pick equivalent. No question. Your run is about FA at this point. Not drafting and your cap deferral can make it happen.

The Bengals defense is mainly comprised of FA's. The Rams team is mainly comprised of trades and FA's. There are more ways to build football teams now beyond Draft and Develop because of the way teams are managing the cap. Even the Packers did it and saw success.

I think Philly and Denver have the best shot because they have the most to offer us. They will simply be able to outbid anyone else.

If I'm Rodgers, Philly isn't on the list of teams I will be traded to.

In fact if I'm Rodgers it would be a list of 1. Denver.

Yoop wrote: ↑

13 Feb 2022 10:44

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

13 Feb 2022 10:37

I concur with the idea that the Packers are "posturing" with the Aaron-speak. But I also think they are serious/sincere about it. They could say all of the ambiguous love-notions that they want. But once they say, "We'll make you the highest paid QB..." that is sincere.

I'm still not against bringing back Aaron. But unless they can pull off a salary cap miracle to keep the core, they can't say that their goal is to win the SB. They just won't have the tools. First, Aaron shows how he lays eggs in January. Second, will the rest of the team help get past the divisional round that it hasn't done this year? Might be. But I doubt it.

tools, we had the tools this year with 4 all pro types on the side lines, seriously Scott did it seem like we had the tools in 2010? tools is highly over rated buddy, what wins SB's are teams that get hot, jell up and don't peak out early, thats what we did in 2010, thats what the Giants did in 2011, and it's what the Pats did a half doz times, in fact I'd say that it's less then common for sure that the best or most talented teams win it all each year, we could win next year with far less talent then we had this year.

Tools. Don't start on a chat that tools don't matter. I'll give you credit that you don't mean to make it sound that way. Tools do matter.

The Rams had tools. Could name several without trying. They won it all. And teams with tools have lost.
So, without dragging this out, let's just agree that it's better to have tools than to not have tools. Okay?

Raptorman wrote: ↑

13 Feb 2022 13:16

Tell you what. I'll make a prediction right now. Next year the Patriots will take the division and will win at least 2 playoff games. But then maybe you can explain how they went 11-5 in 2008 with Brady out? The great Matt Cassel was QB that year. 10 of those games his defense held the other team to 21 points or less, He won 9 of those. The others were higher than 21 ppg and he won 2. But it was all Brady in NE.

It's easy enough to look at Brady's and Rodgers' relative records based on the number of points scored by the opposition.

In play-off games where the opponents scored 21 or less, Brady is 23 wins out of 27, Rodgers is 8 wins out of 9. Call it a draw.

In play-off games where the opponents scored 22 or more, Brady is 10 wins out of 18, Rodgers is 3 wins out of 12. We have a winner.

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:49

Yoop wrote: ↑

13 Feb 2022 10:44

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

13 Feb 2022 10:37

I concur with the idea that the Packers are "posturing" with the Aaron-speak. But I also think they are serious/sincere about it. They could say all of the ambiguous love-notions that they want. But once they say, "We'll make you the highest paid QB..." that is sincere.

I'm still not against bringing back Aaron. But unless they can pull off a salary cap miracle to keep the core, they can't say that their goal is to win the SB. They just won't have the tools. First, Aaron shows how he lays eggs in January. Second, will the rest of the team help get past the divisional round that it hasn't done this year? Might be. But I doubt it.

tools, we had the tools this year with 4 all pro types on the side lines, seriously Scott did it seem like we had the tools in 2010? tools is highly over rated buddy, what wins SB's are teams that get hot, jell up and don't peak out early, thats what we did in 2010, thats what the Giants did in 2011, and it's what the Pats did a half doz times, in fact I'd say that it's less then common for sure that the best or most talented teams win it all each year, we could win next year with far less talent then we had this year.

Tools. Don't start on a chat that tools don't matter. I'll give you credit that you don't mean to make it sound that way. Tools do matter.

The Rams had tools. Could name several without trying. They won it all. And teams with tools have lost.
So, without dragging this out, let's just agree that it's better to have tools than to not have tools. Okay?

sure, but the Rams are one of the few that sold out there future to win now, and succeeded, Tampa did it last year in a less extreme fashion, but we saw Philly try and fail, as well as us Packers these last couple seasons, in reality we both know it takes more then just a talented roster to win it all.

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:13

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:05

If I am Las Vegas, Denver, Philly, Pittsburgh....

I absolutely, positively do whatever I can to bring in Rodgers and Adams and hope for a legit 2 year run. The cap can be managed to make it happen and you are an instant threat for a SB if you do it.

I would give up 3 1st rounders plus another pick equivalent. No question. Your run is about FA at this point. Not drafting and your cap deferral can make it happen.

The Bengals defense is mainly comprised of FA's. The Rams team is mainly comprised of trades and FA's. There are more ways to build football teams now beyond Draft and Develop because of the way teams are managing the cap. Even the Packers did it and saw success.

I think Philly and Denver have the best shot because they have the most to offer us. They will simply be able to outbid anyone else.

If I'm Rodgers, Philly isn't on the list of teams I will be traded to.

In fact if I'm Rodgers it would be a list of 1. Denver.

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.

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:56

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:49

Yoop wrote: ↑

13 Feb 2022 10:44

tools, we had the tools this year with 4 all pro types on the side lines, seriously Scott did it seem like we had the tools in 2010? tools is highly over rated buddy, what wins SB's are teams that get hot, jell up and don't peak out early, thats what we did in 2010, thats what the Giants did in 2011, and it's what the Pats did a half doz times, in fact I'd say that it's less then common for sure that the best or most talented teams win it all each year, we could win next year with far less talent then we had this year.

Tools. Don't start on a chat that tools don't matter. I'll give you credit that you don't mean to make it sound that way. Tools do matter.

The Rams had tools. Could name several without trying. They won it all. And teams with tools have lost.
So, without dragging this out, let's just agree that it's better to have tools than to not have tools. Okay?

sure, but the Rams are one of the few that sold out there future to win now, and succeeded, Tampa did it last year in a less extreme fashion, but we saw Philly try and fail, as well as us Packers these last couple seasons, in reality we both know it takes more then just a talented roster to win it all.

It takes players to step up when the moment is there to have a play to be made.

It is why I have so much respect for Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald. Kupp made two amazing TD grabs (one was called off from a penalty) plus key catches on that final drive.

But Stafford let it slip when his opportunity was there by overthrowing Jefferson in the EZ so I can't put him in the conversation. He needed to be bailed out by the Wilson penalty.

But Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald did what I have wanted our stars to do for years. What Rashan Gary did for us this year. Have your best players be their best when you need them to be their best.

When the play is there to be made....go and make the play. That's what separates champions from non champions.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:00

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:13

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:05

If I am Las Vegas, Denver, Philly, Pittsburgh....

I absolutely, positively do whatever I can to bring in Rodgers and Adams and hope for a legit 2 year run. The cap can be managed to make it happen and you are an instant threat for a SB if you do it.

I would give up 3 1st rounders plus another pick equivalent. No question. Your run is about FA at this point. Not drafting and your cap deferral can make it happen.

The Bengals defense is mainly comprised of FA's. The Rams team is mainly comprised of trades and FA's. There are more ways to build football teams now beyond Draft and Develop because of the way teams are managing the cap. Even the Packers did it and saw success.

I think Philly and Denver have the best shot because they have the most to offer us. They will simply be able to outbid anyone else.

If I'm Rodgers, Philly isn't on the list of teams I will be traded to.

In fact if I'm Rodgers it would be a list of 1. Denver.

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.

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:14

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.

Oh I know he has that for his best interest.

And if he wants to play like that, than the Packers need to stand up for themselves. If he would try and sneak something by with lowering trade compensation to the Packers then he can either play for us or retire. And we need to be willing to stand by that.

If he wants a good communication, act in good faith, etc...he needs to understand it goes both ways.

He can have his "favorite". I don't think there is any question Denver is the best landing spot for him. But that doesn't mean we have to oblige by that if Denver isn't willing to give us a good offer.

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:05

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:56

Scott4Pack wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:49

Tools. Don't start on a chat that tools don't matter. I'll give you credit that you don't mean to make it sound that way. Tools do matter.

The Rams had tools. Could name several without trying. They won it all. And teams with tools have lost.
So, without dragging this out, let's just agree that it's better to have tools than to not have tools. Okay?

sure, but the Rams are one of the few that sold out there future to win now, and succeeded, Tampa did it last year in a less extreme fashion, but we saw Philly try and fail, as well as us Packers these last couple seasons, in reality we both know it takes more then just a talented roster to win it all.

It takes players to step up when the moment is there to have a play to be made.

It is why I have so much respect for Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald. Kupp made two amazing TD grabs (one was called off from a penalty) plus key catches on that final drive.

But Stafford let it slip when his opportunity was there by overthrowing Jefferson in the EZ so I can't put him in the conversation. He needed to be bailed out by the Wilson penalty.

But Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald did what I have wanted our stars to do for years. What Rashan Gary did for us this year. Have your best players be their best when you need them to be their best.

When the play is there to be made....go and make the play. That's what separates champions from non champions.

he had to throw high on the pass to Jefferson or the safety would have gotten a hand on it.

also besides Cooper Kupp the Rams had another receiver that Stafford had great chemistry with, I'am not defending Rodgers or Adams, and Jones, another impactful receiver would have helped the others, plus Lafluer is responsible to for some of the tunnel vision with Adams as well, hell both he and Jones did there part, it's to simple to say if only Rodgers would have thrown to Lazard on that one play when he was open.

Gary, Clark, Smith etc. etc. played very well, both the Rams and Bengals had more offensive impact players, which translates to harder for even very good defenses to defend successfully for a whole game.

you expect our couple to be perfect on every play, it's to much to ask.

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:22

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:05

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:56

sure, but the Rams are one of the few that sold out there future to win now, and succeeded, Tampa did it last year in a less extreme fashion, but we saw Philly try and fail, as well as us Packers these last couple seasons, in reality we both know it takes more then just a talented roster to win it all.

It takes players to step up when the moment is there to have a play to be made.

It is why I have so much respect for Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald. Kupp made two amazing TD grabs (one was called off from a penalty) plus key catches on that final drive.

But Stafford let it slip when his opportunity was there by overthrowing Jefferson in the EZ so I can't put him in the conversation. He needed to be bailed out by the Wilson penalty.

But Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald did what I have wanted our stars to do for years. What Rashan Gary did for us this year. Have your best players be their best when you need them to be their best.

When the play is there to be made....go and make the play. That's what separates champions from non champions.

he had to throw high on the pass to Jefferson or the safety would have gotten a hand on it.

also besides Cooper Kupp the Rams had another receiver that Stafford had great chemistry with, I'am not defending Rodgers or Adams, and Jones, another impactful receiver would have helped the others, plus Lafluer is responsible to for some of the tunnel vision with Adams as well, hell both he and Jones did there part, it's to simple to say if only Rodgers would have thrown to Lazard on that one play when he was open.

Gary, Clark, Smith etc. etc. played very well, both the Rams and Bengals had more offensive impact players, which translates to harder for even very good defenses to defend successfully for a whole game.

you expect our couple to be perfect on every play, it's to much to ask.

So now tools are important again?

"Couple of hours ago Yoop" has an argument to have with you.

I knew you couldn't stay away from your tools don't matter stance long.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:20

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:14

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.

Oh I know he has that for his best interest.

And if he wants to play like that, than the Packers need to stand up for themselves. If he would try and sneak something by with lowering trade compensation to the Packers then he can either play for us or retire. And we need to be willing to stand by that.

If he wants a good communication, act in good faith, etc...he needs to understand it goes both ways.

He can have his "favorite". I don't think there is any question Denver is the best landing spot for him. But that doesn't mean we have to oblige by that if Denver isn't willing to give us a good offer.

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

the FO just offered to make Rodgers the highest paid player to stay with us, if he says NO, how would it look if we played hard ball with him to get a extra draft pick? imo it's best to just part ways for fair compensation, threatening to not trade him or forcing him to play or retire wont happen, your dreaming.

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:30

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:20

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:14

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.

Oh I know he has that for his best interest.

And if he wants to play like that, than the Packers need to stand up for themselves. If he would try and sneak something by with lowering trade compensation to the Packers then he can either play for us or retire. And we need to be willing to stand by that.

If he wants a good communication, act in good faith, etc...he needs to understand it goes both ways.

He can have his "favorite". I don't think there is any question Denver is the best landing spot for him. But that doesn't mean we have to oblige by that if Denver isn't willing to give us a good offer.

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

the FO just offered to make Rodgers the highest paid player to stay with us, if he says NO, how would it look if we played hard ball with him to get a extra draft pick? imo it's best to just part ways for fair compensation, threatening to not trade him or forcing him to play or retire wont happen, your dreaming.

Yup. You are right.

Fair compensation. A 1st and a 3rd is not fair compensation. Not even close.

Fair compensation is a couple of firsts plus extra picks at minimum. And if Rodgers and the Broncos think they can just steal Rodgers for below market compensation, then yes...you have to play hardball.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:24

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:22

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:05

It takes players to step up when the moment is there to have a play to be made.

It is why I have so much respect for Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald. Kupp made two amazing TD grabs (one was called off from a penalty) plus key catches on that final drive.

But Stafford let it slip when his opportunity was there by overthrowing Jefferson in the EZ so I can't put him in the conversation. He needed to be bailed out by the Wilson penalty.

But Cooper Kupp and Aaron Donald did what I have wanted our stars to do for years. What Rashan Gary did for us this year. Have your best players be their best when you need them to be their best.

When the play is there to be made....go and make the play. That's what separates champions from non champions.

he had to throw high on the pass to Jefferson or the safety would have gotten a hand on it.

also besides Cooper Kupp the Rams had another receiver that Stafford had great chemistry with, I'am not defending Rodgers or Adams, and Jones, another impactful receiver would have helped the others, plus Lafluer is responsible to for some of the tunnel vision with Adams as well, hell both he and Jones did there part, it's to simple to say if only Rodgers would have thrown to Lazard on that one play when he was open.

Gary, Clark, Smith etc. etc. played very well, both the Rams and Bengals had more offensive impact players, which translates to harder for even very good defenses to defend successfully for a whole game.

you expect our couple to be perfect on every play, it's to much to ask.

So now tools are important again?

"Couple of hours ago Yoop" has an argument to have with you.

I knew you couldn't stay away from your tools don't matter stance long.

they matter, but don't always make the difference, you yourself have said often that ya don't need a HOF QB

Id say more teams win without having the best roster then those that do.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:20

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:14

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.

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

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.

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:13

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 07:05

If I am Las Vegas, Denver, Philly, Pittsburgh....

I absolutely, positively do whatever I can to bring in Rodgers and Adams and hope for a legit 2 year run. The cap can be managed to make it happen and you are an instant threat for a SB if you do it.

I would give up 3 1st rounders plus another pick equivalent. No question. Your run is about FA at this point. Not drafting and your cap deferral can make it happen.

The Bengals defense is mainly comprised of FA's. The Rams team is mainly comprised of trades and FA's. There are more ways to build football teams now beyond Draft and Develop because of the way teams are managing the cap. Even the Packers did it and saw success.

I think Philly and Denver have the best shot because they have the most to offer us. They will simply be able to outbid anyone else.

If I'm Rodgers, Philly isn't on the list of teams I will be traded to.

In fact if I'm Rodgers it would be a list of 1. Denver.

I don’t think TB has the cap room to add Aaron and maintain a good team, likely to lose Godwin, so can’t imagine adding Davante.

But Denver, LV, and Pittsburgh I’d probably be intrigued by if I’m Aaron. Coach, defense, decent teams, credible franchises.

I could see Miami and Washington both making big plays. But I’d be veto’ing/causing all loads of drama and make it not work if I was Aaron.

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:36

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:20

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:14

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.

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

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.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:33

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:30

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:20

Oh I know he has that for his best interest.

And if he wants to play like that, than the Packers need to stand up for themselves. If he would try and sneak something by with lowering trade compensation to the Packers then he can either play for us or retire. And we need to be willing to stand by that.

If he wants a good communication, act in good faith, etc...he needs to understand it goes both ways.

He can have his "favorite". I don't think there is any question Denver is the best landing spot for him. But that doesn't mean we have to oblige by that if Denver isn't willing to give us a good offer.

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

the FO just offered to make Rodgers the highest paid player to stay with us, if he says NO, how would it look if we played hard ball with him to get a extra draft pick? imo it's best to just part ways for fair compensation, threatening to not trade him or forcing him to play or retire wont happen, your dreaming.

Yup. You are right.

Fair compensation. A 1st and a 3rd is not fair compensation. Not even close.

Fair compensation is a couple of firsts plus extra picks at minimum. And if Rodgers and the Broncos think they can just steal Rodgers for below market compensation, then yes...you have to play hardball.

I figured Denver would give 2 first and maybe a 3rd rounder., that seems fair to me.

but the FO is making it crystal clear that they want Rodgers to retire as a Packer and are willing to make him more rich to accomplish it, so don't be shocked if he takes the deal.

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:44

British wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:36

go pak go wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:20

And you're talking about Denver making the playoffs etc.....uh Philly did make the playoffs. Even with a QB who is just as bad as Bridgewater. If not worse.

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.

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:50

but the FO is making it crystal clear that they want Rodgers to retire as a Packer and are willing to make him more rich to accomplish it, so don't be shocked if he takes the deal.

I am always cynical until I see very credible reports.

There is definitely gunna be some posturing and PR stunts played here I am sure. Maybe not even directly from the main source, just side players. If the Packers do part ways with Aaron, they are certainly going to want the impression that they did everything they could to keep him and it was simply Aaron's decision.

So I don't know, just the reports coming out that we are going to give Aaron $45 million a year and then the same guy says we are going to franchise Davante.

I just never tend to believe 'reports' from 'sources', and more often than not, I feel justified in waiting on forming my opinions.


I am definitely not implying it isn't true, just that report of offering $45 million per means pretty much nothing to me right now.

And frankly, it would be asinine to offer $45 million per. That is what Mahomes got before COVID salary cap hits, over a 12 year period, when salary caps were expected to be astronomical, in the 300's. Plus his contract is designed to be redone by 2027, when he is due a $59 million dollar roster bonus, it was really more like a 6 year contract where he got like 38-40 per if memory serves correctly.

We are dealing with 208 and likely like 225 caps the next two years, give or take next year. That would just simply be stupid, in my opinion.

BF004 wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 09:52

Yoop wrote: ↑

14 Feb 2022 08:50

but the FO is making it crystal clear that they want Rodgers to retire as a Packer and are willing to make him more rich to accomplish it, so don't be shocked if he takes the deal.

I am always cynical until I see very credible reports.

There is definitely gunna be some posturing and PR stunts played here I am sure. Maybe not even directly from the main source, just side players. If the Packers do part ways with Aaron, they are certainly going to want the impression that they did everything they could to keep him and it was simply Aaron's decision.

So I don't know, just the reports coming out that we are going to give Aaron $45 million a year and then the same guy says we are going to franchise Davante.

I just never tend to believe 'reports' from 'sources', and more often than not, I feel justified in waiting on forming my opinions.


I am definitely not implying it isn't true, just that report of offering $45 million per means pretty much nothing to me right now.

I know it doesn't make sense to us to do all they will need to to satisfy Rodgers, as he made clear it's not just MONEY, he doesn't want to hang around for a rebuild, so obviously the team will have to kick a ton more contract money down the road to keep both Rodgers and most of the supporting cast for the next couple years, I don't expect Rodgers back for another season, several other teams situations must be very attractive to him.

I've asked every Packer fan I know what they think, and both of em lol said they want Rodgers back, seriously though that seems the consensus from most everyone, and I'am sure the FO takes that into consideration, Rodgers makes this team a lot of molla, remember how hard Ted and McCarthy tried to get Favre to come back, same thing now.