What to do at QB?

[jsthomp2007]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Which is why we BOTH agreed that the offer was at best unrealistic.   Except I'm not the one using an unrealistic trade offer and painting the picture the trade package is what's expected in an Aaron Rodgers deal.  It'd be like me arguing that Broncos' fans are only willing to do the deal proposed a few pages back where the Packers receive a FRP if the Broncos go to the Super Bowl, but nothing if they don't.

Let's see if I can articulate my point a little better for you (and the rest of the subforum).  I'd argue that going into this offseason, there were 3 QBs who were inherently more valuable than Aaron Rodgers including Deshaun Watson, Patrick Mahomes, and Trevor Lawrence.  If you want to include Josh Allen into that group, I wouldn't fight you too hard.  Rodgers is in a similar tier to a number of other players I'd argue like Zach Wilson, Russell Wilson, Lamar Jackson, and Justin Herbert.  The problem is the opportunity cost.  Lamar Jackson isn't available.  Justin Herbert isn't available.  Russell Wilson reportedly isn't available.  Who is the best QB available?  Right now, the QB free agent class consists of Jeff Driskel, Matt Barkley, and Blake Bortles.  That's quite the list of world beaters.  Which leads into my next point...

Right now, Denver is poised to go into the 2021 season with either Drew Lock (who played as a bottom 6 QB this past season) and Teddy Bridgewater (whom Carolina dealt to make Sam Darnold their starting QB).  Realistically speaking, how far do you think Bridgewater (or Lock) can take the Broncos?  Since 2002, the "worst" starting QB to win the Super Bowl was Nick Foles who played at an absolutely unsustainable level in the playoffs.  Other then that, you're looking at Tom Brady (6), Ben Roethilsburger (2), Peyton Manning (2), Eli Manning (2), Drew Brees (1), Aaron Rodgers (1), Joe Flacco (1), Russell Wilson (1), and Patrick Mahomes (1).  So we're talking about a "low-end" starting QB being at the level of Joe Flacco or Eli Manning to realistically expect to win a Super Bowl.  Do you believe that Teddy Bridgewater (or Drew Lock) can play at that level?

If Denver's defense is poised to be as good as Broncos' fans think it'll be (something I agree with), they're not going to be in range to draft a QB.  And given the lack of future draft capital, the Broncos probably have to hand over a RG3/Trey Lance-level package in order to move up for a QB in the hopes that they're good enough to win a Super Bowl before the inevitable salary cap issues start to come together.  If you want to bet on Bridgewater/Lock to take you to the Super Bowl, all the power to you.

I think if the Broncos can put together a 2002 type Ravens defense, and make Bridgewater do what he's best at in managing a game like Trent Silver, then we have a shot.

[AnAngryAmerican]

Interestingly, heard today that some guys on the beat - some of the more team-friendly “reporters” - have been asked to try to tamp down the enthusiasm for Rodgers. 

The news comes, according to my source, not because they (Paton) doubt their chances at landing him but because a “some higher-ups” want to have fanbase enthusiasm for the team whether Aaron lands here or not. Hence, expect some local media to begin expressing doubt about landing Aaron. 

Ellis being Ellis it sounds like. 

[BroncoBruin]

16 minutes ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

Interestingly, heard today that some guys on the beat - some of the more team-friendly “reporters” - have been asked to try to tamp down the enthusiasm for Rodgers. 

The news comes, according to my source, not because they (Paton) doubt their chances at landing him but because a “some higher-ups” want to have fanbase enthusiasm for the team whether Aaron lands here or not. Hence, expect some local media to begin expressing doubt about landing Aaron. 

Ellis being Ellis it sounds like. 

I can imagine there’s some frustration from Paton, just with the timing of it all. He’s put together a hell of an offseason but the Rodgers stuff puts everything in a new context. I heard he wasn’t happy with the reaction to the Surtain pick and having to answer questions about the QBs that night.

 

[AkronsWitness]

3 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

I can imagine there’s some frustration from Paton, just with the timing of it all. He’s put together a hell of an offseason but the Rodgers stuff puts everything in a new context. I heard he wasn’t happy with the reaction to the Surtain pick and having to answer questions about the QBs that night.

 

Well he should have probably just taken the blatantly obvious QB in that situation then hehe

Paton HAD to have known that was going to happen

 

Edited May 11, 2021 by AkronsWitness

[HuskieBear]

47 minutes ago, jsthomp2007 said:

I think if the Broncos can put together a 2002 type Ravens defense, and make Bridgewater do what he's best at in managing a game like Trent Silver, then we have a shot.

trent dilfer?

[AnAngryAmerican]

1 hour ago, BroncoBruin said:

I can imagine there’s some frustration from Paton, just with the timing of it all. He’s put together a hell of an offseason but the Rodgers stuff puts everything in a new context. I heard he wasn’t happy with the reaction to the Surtain pick and having to answer questions about the QBs that night.

There is a lot of that, from what I understand. I think there’s just been so much negativity around the team that they don’t want a deflated fanbase going into next year. 

The thinking (from a PR perspective) is that they want to tamp down enthusiasm for Aaron because a) if we don’t get him, the fans don’t look at the QB situation and thus the season as a lost cause and b) if we do get him, it only serves to boost enthusiasm.

Interestingly, not an hour after I made that post I listened to Klis’ segment from Sandy and Orlando this morning, and was saying it’s 60-40 the Packers keep Aaron but if he is traded we are the favorites to land him. 

[BroncoBruin]

1 hour ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

There is a lot of that, from what I understand. I think there’s just been so much negativity around the team that they don’t want a deflated fanbase going into next year. 

The thinking (from a PR perspective) is that they want to tamp down enthusiasm for Aaron because a) if we don’t get him, the fans don’t look at the QB situation and thus the season as a lost cause and b) if we do get him, it only serves to boost enthusiasm.

Interestingly, not an hour after I made that post I listened to Klis’ segment from Sandy and Orlando this morning, and was saying it’s 60-40 the Packers keep Aaron but if he is traded we are the favorites to land him. 

You got a good tip. I tuned in to BCT to confirm this and sure enough, Allbright and Edwards emphasized several times that people need to temper their expectations for Rodgers and should mentally prepare themselves for a Lock/Bridgewater battle, very clearly walking things back some. 

[AKRNA]

4 hours ago, AkronsWitness said:

Well he should have probably just taken the blatantly obvious QB in that situation then hehe

Paton HAD to have known that was going to happen

 

Sure he knew, but he made his choice in spite of that. I loved it!

He's going to build this team the way he want's, not the fan base or the press. If he produces a winner that's great, if not he'll be fired. 

Either way, it'll be by decisions he's made, not pressure from outside.

[jolly red giant]

1 hour ago, AKRNA said:

Sure he knew, but he made his choice in spite of that. I loved it!

He's going to build this team the way he want's, not the fan base or the press. If he produces a winner that's great, if not he'll be fired. 

Either way, it'll be by decisions he's made, not pressure from outside.

He can build the best roster in the NFL over the next six years - but minus a QB it will be a waste of talent.

[jolly red giant]

10 hours ago, CWood21 said:

And ironically speaking, he's on the books for whichever team trades for him with cap hits of $22M in 2021, $25.5M in 2022, and $25.5M in 2023.  In terms of cap hits, than an AAV of $24.3M which would rank 16th in the NFL.  You're getting a top 5 QB at a middle-of-the-pack rate.  That's a bargain.  So the notion that Rodgers is expensive is a farce given the fact that the Broncos (or another team) would only be on the hook for the base salary, roster bonus (even though it's already been paid out), and the workout bonus.  I can't find anything firm, but the roster bonus might actually stay with Green Bay, and if that's the case then Rodgers' cap hit drops to $15.2M.  Again, a bargain price.

And Rodgers isn't going to retire anytime soon.  He's already stated multiple times that he wants to play into his 40s.

1. Any team that trades for Rodgers is going to have to give him a new contract - he will not play for them without it. By the start of the season, assuming he doesn't retire, Rodgers will be costing somewhere in the $35-$40million range per year (and that would also be in GB if they managed to salvage their mess). It is possible Rodgers gives a discount for roster building purposes, but I doubt it - it doesn't seem to be in his nature to compromise on contract (and is part of the reason why he felt slighted by GB).

2. Rodgers wants another ring - and, like Manning, he could retire when he gets one. And with the current Broncos roster he could well win it this year. Now he could also decide - hey, I'm feeling good, let's see if we can go back-to-back and stick it to Brady - in which case I would be delighted. Furthermore, I suspect that if he suffered any kind of a serious injury he would pack his bags and go do Jeopardy.

Now - I think the best trade for someone like the Broncos (and possibly for GB as well) would be something like what has already been mentioned. A FRP next year with a player for Rodgers. If the Broncos make the play-offs a third rounder, say the AFC championship game upgraded to a second rounder, if the SB upgraded to a FRP the following year - the same the year after. You could add in say a fifth rounder for every year that Rodgers plays after year 1. If Rodgers played for another four years and was very successful GB could get a haul of 4 FRPs, a player, and 3 day 3 picks. And it would protect the receiving team if Rodgers decided to pack it in after a year.

[jsthomp2007]

Chad Kelly getting a look from the Packers.  That should solidify the fact that Rogers is coming to Denver. 

[AkronsWitness]

6 hours ago, AKRNA said:

Sure he knew, but he made his choice in spite of that. I loved it!

He's going to build this team the way he want's, not the fan base or the press. If he produces a winner that's great, if not he'll be fired. 

Either way, it'll be by decisions he's made, not pressure from outside.

Oh I get it I'm just saying he had to have known some fan backlash was going to come of that and questions about it.

[thebestever6]

7 hours ago, AKRNA said:

Sure he knew, but he made his choice in spite of that. I loved it!

He's going to build this team the way he want's, not the fan base or the press. If he produces a winner that's great, if not he'll be fired. 

Either way, it'll be by decisions he's made, not pressure from outside.

I'm super impressed by what Paton has done as a gm so far. Impressed to the point where I really don't wanna give up future picks only because I think he can do something with those picks. 

I mean the way he managed the draft boards in the second and third rounds was simply fantastic.

[champ11]

Paton is pretty unaware of the cultural zeitgeist if he was surprised by the reaction on draft night, tbh

[AKRNA]

9 hours ago, jolly red giant said:

He can build the best roster in the NFL over the next six years - but minus a QB it will be a waste of talent.

You're missing the point. He obviously isn't as concerned as you.

Edited May 11, 2021 by AKRNA