The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
Yes. Rodgers' age and high salary could make some GMs pause. Plus a team can sign Carr and not have to give up any assets ( draft picks and/or players) and have him for more than just a couple of years.
I don't know if I'd categorize a top 15 QB pick as "developmental". To me, that'd be admitting they're not confident in Love and they basically begged Rodgers back to cover their butts another year.Labrev wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 10:07I think one of the things our Mgmt will want Aaron to agree to is, in addition to him accepting that some guys he likes like Cobb are not gonna be here, that they are going to want to get a new developmental QB to groom behind him, and that he has to be okay with that.
On the one hand, I don't think Rodgers is too unreasonable to accept that. On the other hand, it means our Round 1 pick is not being used to win now, and that could be tough to swallow
Few things...first off, you make good points.Labrev wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 10:07So as we know, the Packers say they will take Rodgers back if he is "all-in" on being back. And as I have said before and will say again, we don't get to keep both Rodgers and Love, Love is in a contract year and has to play or he misses out on tens of millions (trust me, we don't want to be the a-hole org that does him dirty by denying that).
I think one of the things our Mgmt will want Aaron to agree to is, in addition to him accepting that some guys he likes like Cobb are not gonna be here, that they are going to want to get a new developmental QB to groom behind him, and that he has to be okay with that.
On the one hand, I don't think Rodgers is too unreasonable to accept that. On the other hand, it means our Round 1 pick is not being used to win now, and that could be tough to swallow (reminds me of how Ben Roethlisberger complained about PIT drafting Mason Rudolph in Round 2 because it doesn't help them win now, even though it was like the third or fourth year in a row he flirted with retiring... QB1s are such divas).
I actually believe the org would let Rodgers return even if they think Love can play, with the idea that Rodgers has earned the right to remain QB1 given how much he has done for the 'org. And for them to be Classy Organization[TM].APB wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 10:35I don't know if I'd categorize a top 15 QB pick as "developmental". To me, that'd be admitting they're not confident in Love and they basically begged Rodgers back to cover their butts another year.Labrev wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 10:07I think one of the things our Mgmt will want Aaron to agree to is, in addition to him accepting that some guys he likes like Cobb are not gonna be here, that they are going to want to get a new developmental QB to groom behind him, and that he has to be okay with that.
On the one hand, I don't think Rodgers is too unreasonable to accept that. On the other hand, it means our Round 1 pick is not being used to win now, and that could be tough to swallow
There's some interesting comments in there - but I gotta say- the comments the article leans on are pretty lame.Take this one for example:
Interesting article. Unfortunately it won't be well received by some and they will dismiss it out of hand without critically looking at it.Labrev wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 11:13
I saw this, was going to post it as well.
They seem to have observed a lot of the same things that I did, which a few folks mindlessly denied. Such as, the arm has lost some juice. It's still the arm of a viable QB1, it's just not elite anymore. Another point I made was that Rodgers's magic comes largely from plays *outside* the pocket, but that now he's lost a step in foot speed and it's made him considerably less formiddible. The scout saw that too.
The claim that Rodgers doesn't put in the work is new, and a pretty bold one. I haven't heard anything like that before. That said, this is a guy who skips OTAs/minicamp and says "I'm not all ball all the time" so it would not exactly be out-of-character, either.
The largest issue I had last year was defensive coordinators knew how Rodgers and the Packers would respond to their looks (think Jets, Pats, Washington, Lions). Last year was the first time I felt our offense truly got outsmarted by the opposing defense and I think that is where this comment comes from.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 11:55Interesting article. Unfortunately it won't be well received by some and they will dismiss it out of hand without critically looking at it.Labrev wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 11:13
I saw this, was going to post it as well.
They seem to have observed a lot of the same things that I did, which a few folks mindlessly denied. Such as, the arm has lost some juice. It's still the arm of a viable QB1, it's just not elite anymore. Another point I made was that Rodgers's magic comes largely from plays *outside* the pocket, but that now he's lost a step in foot speed and it's made him considerably less formiddible. The scout saw that too.
The claim that Rodgers doesn't put in the work is new, and a pretty bold one. I haven't heard anything like that before. That said, this is a guy who skips OTAs/minicamp and says "I'm not all ball all the time" so it would not exactly be out-of-character, either.
I did find that put in the work part interesting. I took it to mean film dive, but I can also see where it means taking care of himself physically. I am not sure if he is known for working on his body as Tom Brady was, for example.
The observations made about Rodgers here relate to things that exist independently of the players around him.Yoop wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 11:53another attempt to claim Rodgers lost it, never mind the lack of experience at WR, or poor pass pro which forced him to evade, Lafleur has dialed back the pitch point of our routes, which should have helped Rodgers get rid of the ball quicker ( when receivers get open on schedule his release is near quickest in the league), again the receiver situation last season ( not getting open, dropped passes, wrong routes)
Maybe it is lame, but maybe it does have SOME credibility. If defenses are changing to take advantage of Rodgers' skill set, but Rodgers is not changing the way he plays to combat that, wouldn't that kind of mean he isn't putting in the work? Doesn't that kind of go along with everything the article is talking about?BSA wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 11:55There's some interesting comments in there - but I gotta say- the comments the article leans on are pretty lame.Take this one for example:
“He probably doesn’t put the work in,” the scout thought. “He thinks he knows everything, so he doesn’t put the work in to really understand what teams are doing to him."
This isn't based on anything factual - its what some random dude "thinks". WTF ?
And the writer uses the fact that its coming from a scout to give it credibility. It doesn't in this case. Show me some supporting data that Rodgers was unprepared on Sunday. You can't. The anonymous scout 100% just made that up. That's pretty lame
Would you say Rodgers' play this season was inexplicable at times? Like, things happened that you didn't expect from a 4 time MVP? While I agree with you to a point, there may be something to it, and then again, there may not be.Everybody and their brother has an opinion on Rodgers, but way too much of it is lousy quality and reeks of an agenda. I don't care if you want AR in GB or someplace else, but kindly stop throwing imaginary &%$@ at the wall just to get clicks.
yep, I've never understood either of his last 2 contracts, the first seemed a way to pacify him when Ted and Mike, Capers where replaced, and this last one because they didn't want to start Love, right now I think they'd like to trade him, but there fo sure not wanting to do it with zero comp, imho they know what went wrong last season was not as much Rodgers but a culmination of several other big issues, so if they can't find a trade partner ( Rodgers comments tend to mean he doesn't want them to) he will stay and be the starting QB, thats how I see it.Drj820 wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 10:43Few things...first off, you make good points.Labrev wrote: ↑15 Feb 2023 10:07So as we know, the Packers say they will take Rodgers back if he is "all-in" on being back. And as I have said before and will say again, we don't get to keep both Rodgers and Love, Love is in a contract year and has to play or he misses out on tens of millions (trust me, we don't want to be the a-hole org that does him dirty by denying that).
I think one of the things our Mgmt will want Aaron to agree to is, in addition to him accepting that some guys he likes like Cobb are not gonna be here, that they are going to want to get a new developmental QB to groom behind him, and that he has to be okay with that.
On the one hand, I don't think Rodgers is too unreasonable to accept that. On the other hand, it means our Round 1 pick is not being used to win now, and that could be tough to swallow (reminds me of how Ben Roethlisberger complained about PIT drafting Mason Rudolph in Round 2 because it doesn't help them win now, even though it was like the third or fourth year in a row he flirted with retiring... QB1s are such divas).
Now:
The contract the Packers gave Rodgers last year was beyond egregious. Absolutely ridiculous to put ourselves in cap hell for such an unstable dance partner. There should be absolutely no decision for Rodgers based on the contract he signed. It should just be understood that when he signed it, he was committed for a two year process. That thinking would also give some justification for drafting rookies and bringing in only hammy watkins..because the plan all along was to give the rookies two years to develop with Rodgers
Next, I agree now is the time for Love to either play here or somewhere else. We have to give him the chance to earn his bag next year. The decision is simple..if we think Love can play..he should be our QB, despite the bad contract we gave 12. If we do not think he can play, then we have to once again beg 12 back, and we should just cut bait with Love. You see, I dont believe the coaches should have to see Love for a year on the field before they judge him. That would be nice, but its not necessary. Theyve seen him for three years now. He run the PS offense every day. They know what he is. They have enough information to make a decision.
Finally, if the decision is that "we have to placate Rodgers because we dont trust Love"...I demand some accountability because the decision to draft Love has cost division, pain, and real assets. It cost us a 4th rounder that we dont know who it would be, and it cost us a player that could have been helping us all along. A player that could have helped us beat Tampa two years ago.
That was a legacy defining move for Gutey, if he whiffed, he should be held to account.
This is an interesting comment and one the article does explicitly comment on. 100%, Rodgers does not need to be the player he was 5 years ago, but he does need to change his game to match the player he is now to remain at the top of the game.He doesn't need to be the player he was 5 years ago.
I think you can find plenty of articles and quotes talking about how AR works on his body all year round and has a full routine to get himself physically ready for the season. He also trains in the offseason at ProActive Performance with Bakh, Clark, Love ( and Matthews ) and others in Westlake Village. Not sure about the TB12 avocado toast, but there's plenty of info on Rodgers training/nutrition to keep his body & mind sharp over the course of his 18 yr career. No chance you can last that long in this league if you're slacking.
This is exactly my point.
