Jump to content

Rhetorical: If Packers were offered a first round pick for Jordan Love, should they take it?


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

1) Rodgers was not the 3rd string in his first year the Packers drafted him.  He was the #2.   His 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th year is irrelevant here. 

2) Again, you can't name any 1st round QBs who couldn't beat out the 2nd string in his year because that simply doesn't happen unless there is a real reason for it.

That's the point here. That's why it says alot about how the staff felt about Love and it's not just something to shrug off.

Now, I will say it's possible that COVID may have played a part in all of this ---since no offseason programs---but even with that...there is still too much to explain as to why he couldn't win the #2 job IMO.

You keep saying he couldn’t beat out Boyle but the reason is simple. There was no competition. The intention was to sit him for the year no matter what. Then you say COVID may have had an impact? It absolutely did. With no off-season work and no ore season games he was behind the eight ball to start. It was clear Boyle was going to offer more stability if needed in year one. So no he didn’t lose the competition because there was no competition. Without Covid that may be different. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Short answer: Easy Yes.

Longer answer: After Rodgers' good, but not worth his salary level play in 2019, combined with his age, I totally understood the Love pick. I expected, and I imagine management expected Rodgers would stay around that 2019 level play for 2 more years and then they could move on with relatively few bumps.

But Rodgers turned it around, and is now playing hardball and putting management in a tough spot. I think Rodgers wants more years on his contract and some signs that they'll be building around him. And he's not going to cooperate with restructures or anything unless they commit to him.

If they can get a first round, or an early second round pick, for Love right now then I think you do it and extend Rodgers a little while longer. And then you maybe make a similar pick again in a couple of years. No guarantees that will be doable though. And you obviously run the risk of Love becoming a star around the time Rodgers retires, and then it's the whole Favre situation again but in an alternate universe where the Packers keep Favre and trade Rodgers.

Honestly though, as a Packers fan, I like having a first round pick backing up the most important position on the field. Especially after the misery that was those two years Rodgers broke his collarbone.

Edited by Coffee & Contemplation
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, incognito_man said:

Aaron Rodgers was 3rd string in his 3rd year.

Craig Nall played before him in 2007.

lol

This is such a stupid argument. Aaron Rodgers was a 3rd string QB his 3rd year in the NFL. And some of you think it has any meaning whatsoever that Jordan Love was 3rd string his rookie year.

Craig Nall did not play in 2005, which was Aaron Rodgers' rookie year and what we are discussing.

Aaron Rodgers was also not the third string QB in 2007. Everyone and their mother knows this because that was the year Favre got hurt early against the Dallas Cowboys, and Aaron Rodgers came on to complete the game. The only time Craig Nall played that year was in Week 17, when Green Bay had the No. 2 seed locked up, and the Packers clearly did not want to risk Favre or his backup getting hurt.

This is a very stupid argument because you keep claiming things that are demonstrably untrue, then moving the goalposts when you're proven wrong.

8 hours ago, incognito_man said:

Aaron Rodgers was 3rd string his 3rd year.

Explain that.

He was not 3rd string. Easy enough to explain.

2 hours ago, Eagles23 said:

where Jordan Love is on the depth chart is irrelevant. If Rodgers went down, theres no chance in hell theyre rolling out Tim Boyle

Tim Boyle would have come into the game if Rodgers went down last year for every single game because he was the only other active QB on the roster for game days. The NFL increased game day active rosters to 46 and abolished the emergency QB rule back in 2011, and LaFleur clearly didn't think Jordan Love was one of their 46 best players on the roster. If they thought Love was competent enough to run the offense, they wouldn't have left Tim Boyle, whom they clearly had no intention of bringing back as a backup for 2021, as the only in-game option behind Rodgers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, incognito_man said:

you're wrong

I'm not, but clearly you're either an idiot or a troll, so not wasting my time with you anymore.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CrazyJoeDavola said:

You keep saying he couldn’t beat out Boyle but the reason is simple. There was no competition. The intention was to sit him for the year no matter what. Then you say COVID may have had an impact? It absolutely did. With no off-season work and no ore season games he was behind the eight ball to start. It was clear Boyle was going to offer more stability if needed in year one. So no he didn’t lose the competition because there was no competition. Without Covid that may be different. 

"No competition" so training camp didn't happen? Every other first round QB from his draft class made starts last year. That obviously wasn't going to happen with Rodgers, but Love wasn't competing against Rodgers--he was competing against Tim Boyle, whom I hope we can all agree is not the same caliber of player as Tyrod Taylor or Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Love had the entire season to learn the playbook. He was drafted primarily on his athleticism and natural talent. If the Packers still didn't think he gave them a better chance to win a game if Rodgers went down than Tim Boyle did in Week 17, and in fact thought so little of his ability that they didn't even activate him for game day, that's a brutal indictment of where his development is at.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Blue said:

I'm not,

Yes you are. Craig Nall played before Rodgers in 2007. This is EXTREMELY easy to find with google. You're just flat our wrong, and you have a bad argument regardless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think there is a wrong answer to this question.  It's more a matter of the opinion of the Packers coaching staff.  Packer fans shouldn't really need to get defensive if Love didn't look that great in practice last year, because nobody should have expected otherwise.  He was a rookie who came in during a weird year (Covid) with no off-season practices to speak of.  It would have been a miracle if he had come in and lit it up.

At this point, it's probably more a question of money than of his abilities.  They probably haven't seen enough of him to have an informed opinion of what he can be on the field.  If the Pack is offered a first round pick for him, do they trade him, roll with Rodgers for another year, and try to find a replacement for Love maybe next year and start the rookie contract again from Day 1?  I think I would probably do that, for no other reason than because Rodgers played decently in 2020.  They probably still have some time to find a replacement for him.  No need to force something and put themselves in a bad situation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

His 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th year is irrelevant here

No it's not lol

Aaron Rodgers was 3rd string his 3rd year. Imagine your stance if Jordan Love was 3rd string his 3rd year.

Readers aren't idiots here. Everyone knows what the implication you (and others) are trying to push forward: That Jordan Love being 3rd string his rookie year is indicative of his current and future playing ability.

I just showed your side that the best QB in the NFL was 3rd string his 3rd year. Context matters. Like this case. I don't understand why there's a race to be so simple. @Blue desperately wants to defend a position he developed after "thinking" about the situation for 30 seconds. He is incapable (or unwilling) to think beyond the first, very, VERY simple "fact" that was presented to him. He prefers to go through life believing that rather than actually understanding.

I don't think you're the same - but the key to realize is that 2020 was full of...odd...circumstances (with COVID, no training camps, etc. etc.) and that the plan for Jordan Love was never to be 2nd string REGARDLESS of how he looked in practice. It was a redshirt year. He never got training camp, or pre-season. He was drafted a long-term investment, he was NOT going to see regular season action (especially on a #1 seed team). 

His position on the depth chart is so, so SO irrelevant. From now on, anytime you hear anyone bring that "fact" up in a debate involving Jordan Love I command you to immediately disregard the entirety of their opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They should absolutely take that trade. They then should trade up in the first, and use that pick on a quarterback, then wonder why they barely lose and don't get over the hump again in the NFCCG again this upcoming season, when they were just short this past season.

It's truly a mystery wrapped in an enigma. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. About the secondary debate...

It looks like Rodgers was on the game day roster seven times through his first three years. That isn't a primary backup.

What difference does draft position make after that first contract is signed though? That's sunk cost. Shouldn't the question be what quarterback rose to franchise player level after being 3rd on the depth chart for a season?

Some guy named Tom was third on the Patriots his first year, I hear he did respectably well after that though.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the below, looks like Rodgers played in week 10 and 13, Nall played in week 17

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/N/NallCr00/gamelog/2007/

Craig Nall
    Passing Rushing
Rk Date G# Week Age Tm   Opp Result GS Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Rate Sk Yds Y/A AY/A Att Yds Y/A TD
  1 Games             1-0-0   7 15 46.67 88 1 0 87.6 1 10 5.87 7.20 5 6 1.20 0
1 2007-09-30 4 4   BUF   NYJ W 17-14 Did Not Play
2 2007-10-08 5 5   BUF   DAL L 24-25 Did Not Play
3 2007-11-04 9 9   HOU @ OAK W 24-17 Did Not Play
4 2007-11-18 10 11   HOU   NOR W 23-10 Inactive
5 2007-12-09 13 14   GNB   OAK W 38-7 Did Not Play
6 2007-12-16 14 15   GNB @ STL W 33-14 Did Not Play
7 2007-12-23 15 16   GNB @ CHI L 7-35 Did Not Play
8 2007-12-30 16 17 28.253 GNB   DET W 34-13   7 15 46.67 88 1 0 87.6 1 10 5.87 7.20 5 6 1.20 0

 

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RodgAa00/gamelog/2007/

Aaron Rodgers

  Passing Rushing
Rk Date G# Week Age Tm   Opp Result GS Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Rate Sk Yds Y/A AY/A Att Yds Y/A TD
  2 Games             1-1-0   20 28 71.43 218 1 0 106.0 3 24 7.79 8.50 7 29 4.14
1 2007-09-09 1 1   GNB   PHI W 16-13 Did Not Play
2 2007-09-16 2 2   GNB @ NYG W 35-13 Did Not Play
3 2007-09-23 3 3   GNB   SDG W 31-24 Did Not Play
4 2007-09-30 4 4   GNB @ MIN W 23-16 Did Not Play
5 2007-10-07 5 5   GNB   CHI L 20-27 Did Not Play
6 2007-10-14 6 6   GNB   WAS W 17-14 Did Not Play
7 2007-10-29 7 8   GNB @ DEN W 19-13 Did Not Play
8 2007-11-04 8 9   GNB @ KAN W 33-22 Did Not Play
9 2007-11-11 9 10 23.344 GNB   MIN W 34-0   2 2 100.00 17 0 0 102.1 0 0 8.50 8.50 2 -1 -0.50 0
10 2007-11-18 10 11   GNB   CAR W 31-17 Did Not Play
11 2007-11-22 11 12   GNB @ DET W 37-26 Did Not Play
12 2007-11-29 12 13 23.362 GNB @ DAL L 27-37   18 26 69.23 201 1 0 104.8 3 24 7.73 8.50 5 30 6.00 0
13 2007-12-09 13 14   GNB   OAK W 38-7 Inactive
14 2007-12-16 14 15   GNB @ STL W 33-14 Inactive
15 2007-12-23 15 16   GNB @ CHI L 7-35 Inactive
16 2007-12-30 16 17   GNB   DET W 34-13 Inactive

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what my memory tells me concerning young Aaron Rodgers.  Man, he looked rough in the pre-season games for 2-3 years.  He had the benefit of quarterback schools and training camps.  And still...he was rough.  Went through a lot of changes regarding his throwing motion.

He had kind of a coming out party against Dallas.  I remember thinking at least he had quick feet and legs to scramble.  I don't remember much about his throws that game.  But once we became a starter, well, that was shaky to start as well.  But he kept getting better and better until he became what he is.  

Jordan Love is in a very similar situation.  GB can afford to be patient with him.  Not beating out Boyle, who is no slouch, is not an indictment against Love.  He's had no quarterback schools, very little training camp and no pre-season games.  He was in no position to come in and be better than a veteran who knew the offense and more importantly, knew the guys he was working with.  

If GB had to get out of a game, or try to win a game with prep time, Boyle gave them the best chance.

Let's give the kid a nice full camp and a few pre-season games before we cut bait on him.  It kind of worked out nicely with Rodgers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...