Report: Rodgers Wants Out of Green Bay

[squire12]

27 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Here's the issue. If Rodgers retires or sits out, things get hellaciously ugly for him financially.

If he chooses to hold out:

He eats 2.35 million in training camp no-show fees. Since the CBA was redone, the team can no longer waive those fees.

He waives his 14.7 million in base salary.

The Packers likely come after him for his $6.8 million dollar roster bonus on the grounds he had no plans to be on the roster.

More importantly, he doesn't gain an accrued season, so he comes right back to where he was contract wise this year.

So he goes from a positive cash flow of +22 million, to a negative cash flow of -9 million.

+++

If he chooses to retire:

The Packers likely come after him for 31 million in signing bonus money.

The Packers likely come at him for his 6.8 million dollar roster bonus

So he goes from a positive cash flow of +22 million to a negative cash flow of -38 million. 

+++

And I'm sure Rodgers is really smart with his money and rakes in a ton of cash in side gigs and the like, but I'm not sure I've ever met an athlete who was setup financially to eat 3 million in costs with no revenue coming in. It's just not in anybody's nature. Maybe Rodgers is the exception, but that is a rough ask of anybody. And it's not just that, it's also leaving probably another $100 million in future earnings on the table, because I doubt the Packers are going to feel particularly motivated to trade Rodgers if he comes back. 

Now maybe the Packers are soft enough that they compromise and let him walk off with half of his money if he retires, but that would be a hard sell to the board. 

Agree fully.   I don't think Rodgers would have any desire to write those checks back to GB, Murphy, Russ Ball, Gutekunst.   

[packfanfb]

Can't believe I'm citing Florio here, but I think this is pretty spot on regarding the situation.

[40Year Pack Fan]

46 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Agree fully.   I don't think Rodgers would have any desire to write those checks back to GB, Murphy, Russ Ball, Gutekunst.   

I think it's pretty safe to say AR knows what financial losses would be incurred should he decide to continue on the path this is going...

What I find interesting is AR is not the first person to ask for remunerations in regards to post season honors....

[soulman]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Here's the issue. If Rodgers retires or sits out, things get hellaciously ugly for him financially.

So what does Rodgers want more.  The money or the satisfaction of having gotten free of his contract in GB?  Which tugs harder, his checkbook or his ego?

I don't think he's hurting for money that can't be made up elsewhere but who knows what he'll decide.  At the moment he's decided to sit it out for awhile to see which way the wind blows.  Seems to me he's kinda pissed but I suppose that could all change by August.

But the bottom line there is if he's extended with significantly more guaranteed money it more or less takes Love replacing him out of the equation for several more years.  If that's the case what do you do with Love?  Trade him instead?

[squire12]

9 minutes ago, 40Year Pack Fan said:

I think it's pretty safe to say AR knows what financial losses would be incurred should he decide to continue on the path this is going...

It's not the Financials, Rodgers can afford that.  The principle of giving back money to the place/people that he would have been "driven out of playing" would not sit well with him.

 

[soulman]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

If he chooses to retire:

The Packers likely come after him for 31 million in signing bonus money.

The Packers likely come at him for his 6.8 million dollar roster bonus

So he goes from a positive cash flow of +22 million to a negative cash flow of -38 million. 

I tally the numbers a bit less than you do with just $23 mil of unamortized signing bonus remaining which they would still have to press him for and the roster bonus was earned when he was on the roster at the beginning of the league year so it's unlikely they'd be able to retrieve that without a battle either since it's already been paid.

To a degree both sides end up in a costly battle if he wants out and won't reconsider.

[AlexGreen#20]

10 minutes ago, soulman said:

So what does Rodgers want more.  The money or the satisfaction of having gotten free of his contract in GB?  Which tugs harder, his checkbook or his ego?

I don't think he's hurting for money that can't be made up elsewhere but who knows what he'll decide.  At the moment he's decided to sit it out for awhile to see which way the wind blows.  Seems to me he's kinda pissed but I suppose that could all change by August.

But the bottom line there is if he's extended with significantly more guaranteed money it more or less takes Love replacing him out of the equation for several more years.  If that's the case what do you do with Love?  Trade him instead?

You're assuming Rodgers wants out of Green Bay. I really don't think that's the case. He wants to be in Green Bay, that's why he's demanding the additional guarantees. He wants to be the guaranteed starter until 2025. 

As far as the money being made up elsewhere, where? If he retires, the Packers still retain his rights so he's not playing for another team. Sure he could make some money doing ads and the reality tv circuit, but that's not nearly the same thing.

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, soulman said:

I tally the numbers a bit less than you do with just $23 mil of unamortized signing bonus remaining which they would still have to press him for and the roster bonus was earned when he was on the roster at the beginning of the league year so it's unlikely they'd be able to retrieve that without a battle either since it's already been paid.

To a degree both sides end up in a costly battle if he wants out and won't reconsider.

You have to factor in the restructure money as well.

If Rodgers retires, the Packers absolutely have grounds to take that to arbitration. That's like the exact definition of bad faith. 

[40Year Pack Fan]

6 minutes ago, squire12 said:

It's not the Financials, Rodgers can afford that.  The principle of giving back money to the place/people that he would have been "driven out of playing" would not sit well with him.

 

No question, he can definitely afford it...I was just saying, he's well aware of money he will have to reimburse the team....

[soulman]

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're assuming Rodgers wants out of Green Bay. I really don't think that's the case. He wants to be in Green Bay, that's why he's demanding the additional guarantees. He wants to be the guaranteed starter until 2025. 

As far as the money being made up elsewhere, where? If he retires, the Packers still retain his rights so he's not playing for another team. Sure he could make some money doing ads and the reality tv circuit, but that's not nearly the same thing.

Anytime a player sits out over whatever issue is on his mind it's not totally out of the question to assume leaving is also on the table.  He seems to have an issue with "people" in charge and we all know that will not change and may or may not be fixable.

If we assume that he does want to remain with GB through 2025 what do you do about Love?  By 2023 Gutekunst has a decision to make about picking up his 5th year option. If Rodgers is still around that would seem kind of impractical wouldn't it?

You'd be in much the same situation NE was with Garopollo but it's entirely possible Love would have played even less and yet you have a decision to make.  Do you exercise his option and/or sign a guy whose played very little to a longer term deal?

Yes the Packers retain his rights if he retires and his contract is essentially frozen where it is now but if he un-retires a year later do you honestly believe they'll welcome him and his cap hits back after they've already made the switch to Love as a starter?

I believe they'd only end up having to trade him a year from now if somehow they can't call off the impending divorce now.  I realize we all have our own opinions but I believe Rodgers has far more leverage then some believe he has.  JMHO

[soulman]

16 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You have to factor in the restructure money as well.

If Rodgers retires, the Packers absolutely have grounds to take that to arbitration. That's like the exact definition of bad faith. 

I believe the restructure money is to the Packers benefit and would not be part of the equation.  Players restructure to help a team over cap humps because they're asked to do it. No doubt the entire deal may go to arbitration but is that the way you want to go?

As an outsider what I see is a top shelf MVP whose unhappy with the organization over whatever.  The plan was very likely to trade him after the 2021 season anyway but he tossed a bomb into that and is forcing the play a year earlier than anticipated.

If it's possible to resolve this with more money you're gonna be tied to him for at least another 3-4 seasons and Love gets set aside or he gets pushed out the door and you draft another QB somewhere else along the line to eventually replace Rodgers.

Or, you simply accept that you're gonna have to implement the shift to Love a year early and move on with a pretty nice return in exchange for trading away one of the best QBs in the NFL and you rebuild faster around Love with picks, players, and cap savings.

And again....JMHO.

[Dubz41]

1 minute ago, soulman said:

I believe the restructure money is to the Packers benefit and would not be part of the equation.  Players restructure to help a team over cap humps because they're asked to do it. No doubt the entire deal may go to arbitration but is that the way you want to go?

As an outsider what I see is a top shelf MVP whose unhappy with the organization over whatever.  The plan was very likely to trade him after the 2021 season anyway but he tossed a bomb into that and is forcing the play a year earlier than anticipated.

If it's possible to resolve this with more money you're gonna be tied to him for at least another 3-4 seasons and Love gets set aside or he gets pushed out the door and you draft another QB somewhere else along the line to eventually replace Rodgers.

Or, you simply accept that you're gonna have to implement the shift to Love a year early and move on with a pretty nice return in exchange for trading away one of the best QBs in the NFL and you rebuild faster around Love with picks, players, and cap savings.

And again....JMHO.

Bolded: As a Bronco fan.........

Your JMHO is funny because you want this to happen now.  If he sits out a year there will be more teams that will line up and a bidding war could ensue.  You want it to happen now because your team is one of the few in a situation to take on the ego of the reigning MVP.

JMHO? LOL.

[packfanfb]

44 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're assuming Rodgers wants out of Green Bay. I really don't think that's the case. He wants to be in Green Bay, that's why he's demanding the additional guarantees. He wants to be the guaranteed starter until 2025. 

This. It's funny because the very title of this thread is misleading. Rodgers doesn't want out of GB. He wants in long term. 

 

[soulman]

3 minutes ago, Dubz41 said:

Bolded: As a Bronco fan.........

Your JMHO is funny because you want this to happen now.  If he sits out a year there will be more teams that will line up and a bidding war could ensue.  You want it to happen now because your team is one of the few in a situation to take on the ego of the reigning MVP.

JMHO? LOL.

LOL.....I'm laughing because you're so off base.  Living in Denver doesn't make me a Bronco fan anymore than living in Green Bay for 18 years made a Packer fan out of me.

I'm sure Elway would love to have him.  It's almost a redux of his having signed Manning to take the Broncos to a Super Bowl and not doubt the intent would be the same with Rodgers.  So there's no doubt Denver is a player right now if GB wants to make a deal.

I'm just looking at all of the options from both sides without even considering who might be on the end of a trade if it were to happen now.  I'm not even looking at what could happen a year from now because the entire picture could change dramatically.

Signed.....Not a Bronco Fan not that I wouldn't be happy to see him end up in Denver.

[{Family Ghost}]

1 hour ago, packfanfb said:

Can't believe I'm citing Florio here, but I think this is pretty spot on regarding the situation.

Agreed .. considering a draft pick heavy trade it makes no sense to deal now.  Wait until the offseason and see where teams will actually be picking at that time.  There also will be more teams in the market for Rodgers' services and a potential windfall of draft picks and players.  I think Rodgers is kind of screwed unless he wants to sit out a season and then try again next year.