Jump to content

Report: Rodgers Wants Out of Green Bay


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, 15412 said:

I would never trade him at a reduced value.  We're better off with him retiring, and that should be made clear to him.   

He plays on terms the team can live with (that means no long term guaranteed deal) or he retires and pays the team 8 digits.  With the team option of trading him but only on the teams terms, which means our choice of team and return.  That return can only be giant.  Otherwise, play or stay retired and never play the game again.

That doesn't mean much unless we know what you consider reduced value. Better than a third rounder comp pick, sure..................but how much better ?

Edited by OneTwoSixFive
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

AR seems to be the type of person that feels they need to "win" in this standoff. I don't think he simply shows up at camp and balls out and gives GB leverage to move him to whichever team after 2021 season. 

What's a "win" in Rodgers POV

A) new money guarantees B) NTC C) Opt-out after 2021 D) Showing up but looking terrible, not doing much (having Love appear better), GB looks to trade him

For Rodgers a win is 

  • Securing his spot as Packers QB for a multiple years (possibly three or more)
  • Getting a trade to a team he wants to be traded to 

What isn't a win for Rodgers would be retiring at pretty much his peak, giving up an insane amount of money and the chance to cement his legacy with another super bowl win. Its possible that he is OK with this at the moment but in the future he will be bitterly disappointed with himself if he takes that route.

As a player who cares about his legacy. Having a go through the motions year when he performs below his own standards isn't going to be a win by any stretch. Rightly or wrongly, a down year will be assumed to be because he is in a sulk which is going to put a messy stain on the end of his Packers career. Its not going to be what he wants.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

That doesn't mean much unless we know what you consider reduced value. Batter than a third rounder comp pick, sure..................but how much better ?

I have stated many times what I consider value.  I want 2 1's, 2 2's, and a player or two.  If it's Denver I ask for Jeudy and Surtain, and maybe settle for Surtain and Browning along with the picks.  The team should do him no favors trade wise, if we can't get a haul then no trade.  Ever.  He can suit up on reasonable terms or retire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Anybody else think this is finally going to be the year the defense is legit good, not just pretend good?  The type of good where we actually escape the red zone without giving up points?  The type where we FORCE takeaways instead of them being practical punts/shot plays?  The type where it will be a legit grind for offenses to move down the field?

Only for Rodgers to get traded and we end up a 10-7 divisional round loss?

Z. Smith talking about Gary being dominant this year, Preston Smith fighting for another contract (or to not get cut), Jaire, Savage breaking out, Devondre Campbell (which flew under the radar @packfanfb), Barnes and Martin fighting for that ILB spot, Stokes, Jackson with a new DC, Adrian, Z being Z…

 

 

This is why playing 2021 for Packers and then being traded should really be great for Rodgers. He clearly sees this as a loss and what he doesn't want (and can see why) but maybe he should embrace it.

Packers are all-in this season. We have sacrificed the future to put out a strong a team as we can in 2021. Nothing is guaranteed (half the OL could do their ACL in training camp) but on paper this gives him a fantastic chance to get another ring.

The cap in 22 looks a car crash. The team could be significantly weaker - with a new QB as well, you could be looking at a bottom 5 team. Surely that's great for Rodgers ego - he gets use of the all-in roster and results fall off a cliff when he leaves and Love walks into cap hell.

Surely that's better for him than Love gets use of what looks a very strong roster this season meaning the drop off in results isn't as sharp. Maybe Love even gets us into the playoffs and there's a 'who needs Rodgers vibe'

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, 15412 said:

I have stated many times what I consider value.  I want 2 1's, 2 2's, and a player or two.  If it's Denver I ask for Jeudy and Surtain, and maybe settle for Surtain and Browning along with the picks.  The team should do him no favors trade wise, if we can't get a haul then no trade.  Ever.  He can suit up on reasonable terms or retire.

There’s no way in hell we’re getting two 1sts, two 2nds, Jeudy AND Surtain.  Tbh I’d settle for two 1sts and Jeudy (or Surtain but I don’t think they’d include him). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, 15412 said:

I have stated many times what I consider value.  I want 2 1's, 2 2's, and a player or two.  If it's Denver I ask for Jeudy and Surtain, and maybe settle for Surtain and Browning along with the picks.  The team should do him no favors trade wise, if we can't get a haul then no trade.  Ever.  He can suit up on reasonable terms or retire.

I thought so. Totally unrealistic expectation of 2x 1's +  2x 2's, + 2x 1st round picks for a QB who is 38 in December...........    Very much an unrealistic expectation, with an "if not, we cut off our nose to spite our face" kind of deal.

If GB were offered 2x 1's and one good player I'd consider that a fine deal (and I just noticed @thrILL! in the post above has a similar idea). You'd reject that deal just to make him retire ? You have grown to really, really hate AR. We are not talking about trading someone of Mahomes age. 

Edited by OneTwoSixFive
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

Anybody else think this is finally going to be the year the defense is legit good, not just pretend good?  The type of good where we actually escape the red zone without giving up points?  The type where we FORCE takeaways instead of them being practical punts/shot plays?  The type where it will be a legit grind for offenses to move down the field?

Only for Rodgers to get traded and we end up a 10-7 divisional round loss?

Z. Smith talking about Gary being dominant this year, Preston Smith fighting for another contract (or to not get cut), Jaire, Savage breaking out, Devondre Campbell (which flew under the radar @packfanfb), Barnes and Martin fighting for that ILB spot, Stokes, Jackson with a new DC, Adrian, Z being Z…

 

Two things: 

1. Rodgers isn't going anywhere, except maybe his couch, this season. If he plays, it'll be making another run with us. 

2. Defensively, I agree when you look at the defense from a talent perspective, there isn't much more you can ask for. DL as a whole may be a little underwhelming but that's being nit-picky. Overall, there is talent everywhere. It all comes down to Barry and executing a scheme that works. If it clicks, maybe this is finally the year we get back to being a top 10 unit. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

I thought so. Totally unrealistic expectation of 2x 1's +  2x 2's, + 2x 1st round picks for a QB who is 38 in December...........    Very much an unrealistic expectation, with an "if not, we cut off our nose to spite our face" kind of deal.

If GB were offered 2x 1's and one good player I'd consider that a fine deal (and I just noticed @thrILL! in the post above has a similar idea). You'd reject that deal just to make him retire ? You have grown to really, really hate AR. We are not talking about trading someone of Mahomes age. 

With all due respect, let's look at what the Lions got for Stafford and ask yourself, is Rodgers worth more? 

The Lions got 2 - 1st, 1 - 3rd and a former #1 overall pick in exchange for a guy who has never won anything. A guy who is not in Rodgers league. Rodgers is healthy and has 5 years left if he want to play that long. The price for the reigning MVP is going to be steep, or at least it should be. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You always start high in negotiations of such, and I know I'm asking for a lot.  That's because in the end he's not getting traded, unless I get a lot.  The Stafford deal even with a little age differential is indeed a stepping stone example.  Bottom line is the team does not want to trade him.  To change their mind somebody is going to step up big time.  AKA Chuckie Doll.

Such a trade is indeed possible.  Otherwise, this: packfanfb

"1. Rodgers isn't going anywhere, except maybe his couch, this season. If he plays, it'll be making another run with us."

Edited by 15412
Link to post
Share on other sites

You missed one main point @Old Guy

@15412 would rather force AR to retire than get 2x 1's and a good player in return.

Besides that, AR is 38 in December, while Stafford is 33 (birthday in Feb). You can reasonable expect several good years from Stafford, while Rodgers future is less certain.

As for AR having 5 years left, this is unknown. Rodgers may fall apart this year or he may last 5 years, but this kind of projection is a risk, and GMs tend to be risk-averse. They will look at worst-case scenarios just as much as best case.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, vegas492 said:

So.

Woodley vs. Patrick vs. Munn.  Who yah got?  Hottest to least hot.  

Me?  Munn.  Patrick.  Distant third, Woodley.

Best for the team at the time?  Patrick, Munn, Woodley.

#1a Olivia Munnolivia_munn3.jpg

1b. Shailene Woodley

 

shailene-woodley-s1248x1920-455311-1020.

 

#3. Danica Patrick

08_danica-patrick_14jpg.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said:

You missed one main point @Old Guy

@15412 would rather force AR to retire than get 2x 1's and a good player in return.

Besides that, AR is 38 in December, while Stafford is 33 (birthday in Feb). You can reasonable expect several good years from Stafford, while Rodgers future is less certain.

As for AR having 5 years left, this is unknown. Rodgers may fall apart this year or he may last 5 years, but this kind of projection is a risk, and GMs tend to be risk-averse. They will look at worst-case scenarios just as much as best case.

It's football, next week is unknown. You don't give up 2 - 1st, 1 - 3rd and a former #1 overall for 'reasonably good years'. Stafford has never been in Rodgers league as far as QB's go. Do you agree with that statement or no? 

I'm not giving Rodgers away and he's not going to retire. Also, the bidding war would be very interesting with Vegas, Den, Wash and others probably involved. 

If I'm the GM the only way I can trade Rodgers is to break the bank of the other team so you can say, 'how could I pass up that offer?'

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dubz41 said:

This is exactly it! 

Laughed my a** off.  Have seen a lot of references to the Cat lately for some reason.

"Schrodinger's Cat jokes have been beaten to death!  Or have they?"

I wasn't going to do it because it's so overused but this was pretty much perfect. 

 

And lol 

Edited by Norm
Link to post
Share on other sites

Say what you will about Stephen A. Smith, but today on First Take part of his rant included him asking (paraphrase) 'why no one is asking Gutekunst what in the hell did he do that made Rodgers, the face of the franchise and NFL, a player who has signed contract after contract, basically done everything asked of him, and a superstar who has publicly stated he wants to retire as a Packer... that has caused this response from Rodgers?'

Professionally Rodgers has never been a player to cause waves in the locker room or within the organization (to our knowledge).

Personally, this situation makes me sick. Aaron Rodgers is the best player and most important person in the organization. I'm not saying you give the man the entire kingdom, but I do believe you make damn sure he is 100% on page with the direction of the organization is pursuing and if that means the GM includes him in the discussion of the direction the team plans to go, especially when it involves the management's feeling of Aaron's role on the team. As it has been more eloquently stated by numerous national media pundits, the NFL and the treatment of its biggest stars has evolved and it is totally acceptable and is expected that someone like Aaron Rodgers have a seat at the table when teams are discussing direction, some personnel moves, and are definitely included in the discussions involving their future with the team. That is how todays NFL and its superstars interact with each other.

If there is no resolution that results in Rodgers returning to the team, I'm not only concerned about this season but my greatest concern is how our other All-Pro/Veteran leaders respond.

Bakhtiari and Adams have been outspoken in their support of Rodgers. I know Bahk recently signed a multi year deal, but what are the chances Adams stays if the divorce between Rodgers and the Packers remains ugly and publicly the team continues to look the bad guy and an organization that has issues with their relationships with the veteran players, and how the organization is known for mishandling the two most important players on the team in the past 30 years and shockingly repeating their mistakes with Rodgers and learning nothing from the Brett Favre exodus.

This is how things appear to the average NFL fan. I am aware of the differences in the situations. However, Rodgers has been the face of the franchise for over a decade and coming off an MVP season and realizing how close this team is to a Super Bowl, and having to realize that without Rodgers, their Super Bowl chances are zero, I want to know how things got to this point. Gutekunst knows why we are at this point, and if he isn't considering a trade, he must believe that there is a chance to fix this.

What the hell did you do Gutekunst?

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

×
×
  • Create New...