Jump to content

Report: Rodgers Wants Out of Green Bay


Jaire_Island

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, VonKarman said:

He's not gonna trade him now, but when he trades him he won't send him anywhere. He'll probably send him to whichever AFC team wants him and Rodgers wants to go there, and that will decrease his value. The Packers cannot afford to look as a classless team in front of the other players. Besides, Rodgers has given a lot to the team, and he deserves that type of treatment.

Packers have given a lot to Rodgers

The amount of money he has got when you sit back and process is truly staggering. Its an astonishing amount of money, we don't owe him anything and we certainly don't deserve to have Rodgers try and hold us to ransom. 

I'm OK trading to a team of his choosing providing we get what we want compensation wise. If it, drops his value then he no deal, he plays for us or retires. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

Then he retires and the trade doesn't happen. In other words? Rodgers actually holds cards on where he's dealt. This isn't just a Green Bay decision. Sorry @Old Guy

Exactly.

I don't want to intentionally screw Rodgers but its got to work for Packers.  If we want three first round picks  (hypothetically), Denver offer us two, Oakland offer us three and Rodgers wants to play for Denver , he has three choices.  Plays for us, play for Oakland or retire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, R T said:

Basic rule in the art of negotiation, if you don't ask for it, you can't receive it. On the flip side, just because you ask doesn't mean you receive either. Packers fans talk very bold right now, but if it gets to a point of actually trading him and the real offers come in much lower, well reality maybe be very disappointing for those dreaming wildly.       

As mentioned before, low ball offers may come in ... you turn them down and move on.  Bargain basement sales don't work regardless of what/where/when.  Dreaming wildly is the way to proceed and if no bites, so be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Well, we should expect a lot for Rodgers.  And not just draft picks, because with Rodgers under center, you are picking in the back third of the draft every year as long as he is healthy.

So...two firsts?  A second and a third?  Good starting point.  Now throw in one great, young player who has multiple years left on his contract.  Now, throw in someone else who is more or less a good role player and on a friendly contract. Jeudy?  Maybe Chubb, his next contract is an issue.  Maybe Surtain.    

Maybe the other player is  Fant.  Or Dremont Jones.  (is he even good? I don't know.)  Risner.  

Then look at your roster, now and for the future.  Without say, Jeudy and Fant.  How's that look to you as a GM?  Do you have enough young, ascending talent to overcome the loss of picks and one very good young player?  Does Rodgers really make you that much better?  If so, do the trade.  If not, roll with Lock or Teddy.

That's the kind of offer you make for Mahomes. If Rodgers was 35yo, I could agree, but he'll be 38yo this year...who wants to gut their roster for a QB that's on the downside of his career ?

Edited by Cutler06
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, gizmo2012 said:

Lets say Rodgers wants to go to Denver because Shailene lives in Boulder. Trade Rodgers now and next years draft pick is end of the 1st or near the end. Trade him next offseason and the Packers might get a top 15 or no worse than top 20 pick. Seems like a simple answer.

 

Trade him next season, his value continues to decline, less return. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cutler06 said:

Then why wouldn't he just do that to the team he WANTS to screw over ?? 


I meant sit out with Green Bay.  But either way…

Great.  Honestly, i could not care any less about his feelings.  Opt out, sit out, I don’t care, the only way he’s traded is if the packers get adequate compensation. 

Edited by Cpdaly23
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Old Guy said:

Delusion is thinking Rodgers is worth less than the Lions got for Stafford, right now. Now should Rodgers play this year for us and suck, that is a different story.

It's borderline insane to think the Packers won't get more than the Lions got for Stafford.  

What's delusional is you not acknowledging that part of the compensation DET received was due in part to the Goff's over-priced salary.

Edited by Cutler06
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cpdaly23 said:


I meant sit out with Green Bay.  But either way…

Great.  Honestly, i could not care any less about his feelings.  Opt out, sit out, I don’t care, the only way he’s traded is if the packers get adequate compensation. 

But then, GB doesn't get their compensation. Do ya care about that ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Cutler06 said:

Trade him next season, his value continues to decline, less return. 

I doubt it ... there will be more teams interested after they go thru another season with their current crappy QB's.  

Edited by {Family Ghost}
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Cutler06 said:

What's delusional is you not acknowledging that part of the compensation DET received was due in part to the Goff's over-priced salary.

Detroit seems to want to roll with Goff. If not, they would have made a play for a QB in the draft. They had the draft capital and cap space to make something happen. 

Goff's deal is a problem this year on the cap. The Lions can move on from him next year after June 1st without too much issue. 

Now, I might think Goff sucks and you might think Goff sucks, but Detroit seems content to have him under center at least this year. So trying to devalue the trade when Detroit gets a starting QB in return is somewhat silly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

Detroit seems to want to roll with Goff. If not, they would have made a play for a QB in the draft. They had the draft capital and cap space to make something happen. 

Goff's deal is a problem this year on the cap. The Lions can move on from him next year after June 1st without too much issue. 

Now, I might think Goff sucks and you might think Goff sucks, but Detroit seems content to have him under center at least this year. So trying to devalue the trade when Detroit gets a starting QB in return is somewhat silly. 

You DO realize how much money they have tied up in Goff, perhaps they didn't want to pay starting QB money to a guy sitting on the bench. 

And you have NO IDEA what you're talking about, Goff's deadcap money, after Jun 1 is still $29MM, next year it does ease but that's why they were paid the premimum trade capital this year.

Edited by Cutler06
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...