Jump to content

Report: Rodgers Wants Out of Green Bay


Recommended Posts

Just now, cannondale said:

Way early --- but what % chance do you give Rodgers being the Opening Day starter ??? 

I'm gonna say 20% - I think we might see a standoff

3 options for end game

1.  compromised is reached  

2.  both sides dig in and Rodgers sits

3.  Rodgers is traded

 

The trade option really lost value with the 2021 draft in the rearview mirror.  A trade now gets picks in 2022 and after with a team that is likely going to be picking much later in the rounds.    Not to say that some picks might have been made with a trade in mind.... Denver and Surtain

Both sides digging in seems pretty high on the % options as we have seen Rodgers take a stance and hold firm and the GB front office has been down the Farve road before.  

Based on reports, the compromise might be hard to achieve.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

you sound like you can only imagine one side of the bargaining table. Nowhere in the world does one side assume all the risk...

I'm just doing my best to explain what I think are rational behaviors by a QB who feels slighted, underpaid from a gty perspective, and insecure about his future with the team.

I don't think Rodgers has a huge amount of leverage.  His best leverage is winning popular locker room support and the nuclear option of "not playing", but it's not super solid ground he's standing on.  

 

Still, he does have *some* leverage as the best player on a team friendly deal playing at the top of his game in a season where a 43 year old QB won the super bowl.  Rodgers is only 38.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it realistic that Rodgers sits? He is not a young player looking to make more money. He is in the twilight of his career and wasting a year sitting is more detrimental to him than our team. He will be out of the league in another 3-4 years. We are not going anywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

yeah that's the team's side of the argument.  Rodgers' side is "im the MVP".  the reality will be somewhere in the middle.

 

The packers already offered him an extension, it just wasn't up to his standards/expectations.  The packers already believe he's underpaid or undervalued or w/e term you want to use otherwise they wouldn't offer him an extension.

Unless the extension was just cap fluff with void years or something, and the "extension" is a myth.

Did you really just bold that as if it was actually factual? Really? You're better than this man. Stop that nonsense. You want something factual? Here it is ... You don't know WHEN/WHY or IF the Packers offered him an extension. Period. How many false reports have you seen regarding this entire Aaron Rodger's and Green Bay Packers situation have there been? Do you know? Me either, but I do know not everything the media is reporting is 100% factual that much is true. So, do yourself a favor, take what they say with a grain of salt and stop using it as your be all say all. 

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

Is it realistic that Rodgers sits? He is not a young player looking to make more money. He is in the twilight of his career and wasting a year sitting is more detrimental to him than our team. He will be out of the league in another 3-4 years. We are not going anywhere.

No .. doesn't seem to make much sense unless the Packers cave and deal him a couple weeks into the season.  Rodgers will also have to pay back a bunch of signing bonus and face huge fines if he sits out.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, squire12 said:

3 options for end game

1.  compromised is reached  

2.  both sides dig in and Rodgers sits

3.  Rodgers is traded

 

The trade option really lost value with the 2021 draft in the rearview mirror.  A trade now gets picks in 2022 and after with a team that is likely going to be picking much later in the rounds.    Not to say that some picks might have been made with a trade in mind.... Denver and Surtain

Both sides digging in seems pretty high on the % options as we have seen Rodgers take a stance and hold firm and the GB front office has been down the Farve road before.  

Based on reports, the compromise might be hard to achieve.  

If the compromise is: trade Love for a pick, bring in a journeyman to back up Rodgers, and extend Rodgers, how would you rank the likelyhood of achievment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Way early --- but what % chance do you give Rodgers being the Opening Day starter ??? 

I'm gonna say 20% - I think we might see a standoff

I actually think that he either plays or retires at this point. I think it's more likely that he ends up working things out and plays, but it is conceivable that he ends up retiring. I'd probably lean more like 70-30 or him playing versus him retiring.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Scoremore said:

Nah I'll take the other side.  I'd give it about an 80% chance he'll be the opening day starter.  He's either going to play or sit.  The Packers aren't going to trade him they have made that abundantly clear.  It's going to be an ugly summer but in the end Rodgers will report.

Rodgers isn't sitting.  Green Bay isn't the Bengals.  All holding Aaron Rodgers hostage does is destroy the locker room for the foreseeable future and bring some of the nastiest negative publicity imaginable.  If Rodgers is on the roster and not playing football this is a team that will be picking in the lottery next year.  The trade offers will be too big to justify leaving him on the roster only to watch the trade value rapidly decrease.  The 2 million dollars in cap saving isn't worth the headache. If Rodgers is truly done and comes out and says that he's done with Green Bay he's going to get traded after June 1st and I'd bet any amount of money on it.  

IMO there are 2 scenarios.  He's extended for the next 4-5 years giving him the security that he clearly values or he's traded.  I don't see any other scenario that he's a Packer next year unless these reports are 100% incorrect.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pgwingman said:

If the compromise is: trade Love for a pick, bring in a journeyman to back up Rodgers, and extend Rodgers, how would you rank the likelyhood of achievment?

I don't like the idea of trading Love now .. totally would seem like Rodgers forced that move and make the Packers look weak in their convictions.  The Packers were fine in drafting Love .. Rodgers was showing his age a bit, and the Packers wanted some cover in case Rodgers was injured or starting to falter as a player.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

Did you really just bold that as if it was actually factual? Really? You're better than this man. Stop that nonsense. You want something factual? Here it is ... You don't know WHEN/WHY or IF the Packers offered him an extension. Period. How many false reports have you seen regarding this entire Aaron Rodger's and Green Bay Packers situation have there been? Do you know? Me either, but I do know not everything the media is reporting is 100% factual that much is true. So, do yourself a favor, take what they say with a grain of salt and stop using it as your be all say all. 

This is from Gute
 

Quote

He’s willing to give Rodgers a market correction. Thanks to a deal Rodgers signed three years ago that was front-loaded with a $57.5 million signing bonus and $66.9 million in Year 1, his remaining numbers are now relatively low ($73 million on the three years left), and there’s not a dollar left guaranteed. That, and Rodgers’s trade value, gives the Packers flexibility to move on with Jordan Love pretty much whenever they please. Which is likely why someone in his spot might get pushy about getting a new deal. But for his part, Gutekunst said the Packers are willing to take care of Rodgers on that front. “Yeah, absolutely,” he said. “We’ve been working on it for quite a while now. I don’t think that would be something standing in the way.”

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

If the compromise is: trade Love for a pick, bring in a journeyman to back up Rodgers, and extend Rodgers, how would you rank the likelyhood of achievment?

That is possible, but the window to trade Love to a team needing a developmental QB got smaller following the draft.    Trading Love likely wouldn't get Rodgers a new contract

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

I get that Aaron doesn't like it but GB can't just commit guaranteed money for 3+ years every time the guarantees run out, and so on until he decides to retire. If he really wants to retire a Packer he should follow what other guys like Drew Brees have been doing with their contracts - more guarantees, less years, more frequent contracts.

Yeah I agree here.  It would be unwise to offer him another 5 year deal with gty that extend into 2024.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, {Family Ghost} said:

I don't like the idea of trading Love now .. totally would seem like Rodgers forced that move and make the Packers look weak in their convictions.  The Packers were fine in drafting Love .. Rodgers was showing his age a bit, and the Packers wanted some cover in case Rodgers was injured or starting to falter as a player.

I don't like the idea of trading Love either, but I also thought it was stupid to draft him after extending Rodgers in the first place. 

I'm just comparing the situation to the Brady/Garrapolo situation. Brady forced ownership to choose, and they chose Brady.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bjenks said:

I actually think that he either plays or retires at this point. I think it's more likely that he ends up working things out and plays, but it is conceivable that he ends up retiring. I'd probably lean more like 70-30 or him playing versus him retiring.

I think it will come down to what he wants. I still don't quite understand what he is looking for at this time? What kind of contract is he looking for with Green Bay? Or is it beyond that point now and a trade is all he will accept? If its the latter, I don't care, let him retire. If its. the former, it has to be something that makes sense to the team. Sacrificing our future for one player, even a superstar like Rodgers, is not going to be good in the long run.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...