Packers QB Aaron Rodgers disgruntled; "Does not want to return to team"

[sammymvpknight]

1 hour ago, Geezy said:

i think i ride a QB like Rodgers till the wheels fall off, their window is wide open and you have to maximize that. The thing with Love now, unless they decide to trade Rodgers soon, is you arent going to be able to maximize the benefits of his rookie contract because when its his turn hell have what, 2 years on his rookie contract, if that? Im sure seeing TB going all in on Brady, who is 6 years older doesnt help much. 

Statistically...TB signing Brady to a huge contract was a huge mistake. If it was any other player in NFL history...it would have been catastrophic. You can't make decisions based on outliers. 

In 2017, Drew Brees was entering his age 38 season and the Chiefs jumped over the Saints to select Patrick Mahomes. There has been lots of debate over who the Saints would have selected, Mahomes or Lattimore if both were available. It was very well known that Payton was in love with both players. If the Saints would have passed on Mahomes to select Marshon Lattimore (a very good CB), it would have been the most devestating mistake in Saints history. You don't pass up on someone who you think will be an elite franchise QB for the sake of your 38 year old QB. And Brees has been significantly more healthy than Rodgers through age 37.

[Geezy]

3 minutes ago, sammymvpknight said:

Statistically...TB signing Brady to a huge contract was a huge mistake. If it was any other player in NFL history...it would have been catastrophic. You can't make decisions based on outliers. 

In 2017, Drew Brees was entering his age 38 season and the Chiefs jumped over the Saints to select Patrick Mahomes. There has been lots of debate over who the Saints would have selected, Mahomes or Lattimore if both were available. It was very well known that Payton was in love with both players. If the Saints would have passed on Mahomes to select Marshon Lattimore (a very good CB), it would have been the most devestating mistake in Saints history. You don't pass up on someone who you think will be an elite franchise QB for the sake of your 38 year old QB. And Brees has been significantly more healthy than Rodgers through age 37.

id rather my team go all in during a legit SB window like TB did, than to hedge my bet with a prospect, that may or may not pan out. Also, when you choose the later route, you have to figure it will rub your QB the wrong way and have to be prepared to deal with those consequences as well. 

[sammymvpknight]

6 minutes ago, Geezy said:

id rather my team go all in during a legit SB window like TB did, than to hedge my bet with a prospect, that may or may not pan out. Also, when you choose the later route, you have to figure it will rub your QB the wrong way and have to be prepared to deal with those consequences as well. 

But Green Bay played the odds...Rodgers would decline within the next 3 seasons, while bringing in his replacement. They didn't get rid of Rodgers. They did the same thing when they drafted Rodgers while Favre was a part of the team. Would you have preferred that Green Bay not select Rodgers, and go "all in" on an aging Favre (who by the way was the same again as Rodgers when they drafted Jordan Love).

[ET80]

14 minutes ago, sammymvpknight said:

Statistically...TB signing Brady to a huge contract was a huge mistake. If it was any other player in NFL history...it would have been catastrophic. You can't make decisions based on outliers. 

In 2017, Drew Brees was entering his age 38 season and the Chiefs jumped over the Saints to select Patrick Mahomes. There has been lots of debate over who the Saints would have selected, Mahomes or Lattimore if both were available. It was very well known that Payton was in love with both players. If the Saints would have passed on Mahomes to select Marshon Lattimore (a very good CB), it would have been the most devestating mistake in Saints history. You don't pass up on someone who you think will be an elite franchise QB for the sake of your 38 year old QB. And Brees has been significantly more healthy than Rodgers through age 37.

But let's talk about butterfly effect - notably, does Drew Brees retire in such a positive fashion as he did with New Orleans?

For all intents and purposes, New Orleans never really brought in an heir to Brees. They picked up a reclamation project in Jameis Winston, they have a swiss army knife in Taysom Hill, but they never had a guy who is looked at as the next.

Does Brees take any sort of offense if the Saints do that? What sort of impact does that have with the Saints?

[JBURGE]

3 minutes ago, sammymvpknight said:

13 minutes ago, Geezy said:

id rather my team go all in during a legit SB window like TB did, than to hedge my bet with a prospect, that may or may not pan out. Also, when you choose the later route, you have to figure it will rub your QB the wrong way and have to be prepared to deal with those consequences as well. 

But Green Bay played the odds...Rodgers would decline within the next 3 seasons, while bringing in his replacement. They didn't get rid of Rodgers. They did the same thing when they drafted Rodgers while Favre was a part of the team. Would you have preferred that Green Bay not select Rodgers, and go "all in" on an aging Favre (who by the way was the same again as Rodgers when they drafted Jordan Love).

It sucks that both of these are very valid strategies and it just happened to blow up in GB's faces. 

[Geezy]

6 minutes ago, sammymvpknight said:

But Green Bay played the odds...Rodgers would decline within the next 3 seasons, while bringing in his replacement. They didn't get rid of Rodgers. They did the same thing when they drafted Rodgers while Favre was a part of the team. Would you have preferred that Green Bay not select Rodgers, and go "all in" on an aging Favre (who by the way was the same again as Rodgers when they drafted Jordan Love).

i guess it comes down to how much tread you believe Rodgers has. I believe he can play at a high level for at least another 3 years. Also, QBs are playing a lot longer than when Favre was on his way out. 

[Packerraymond]

14 minutes ago, ET80 said:

But let's talk about butterfly effect - notably, does Drew Brees retire in such a positive fashion as he did with New Orleans?

For all intents and purposes, New Orleans never really brought in an heir to Brees. They picked up a reclamation project in Jameis Winston, they have a swiss army knife in Taysom Hill, but they never had a guy who is looked at as the next.

Does Brees take any sort of offense if the Saints do that? What sort of impact does that have with the Saints?

Also let's look at what the Saints are facing this year, it's going to be a multi year rebuild with their cap, and they're talented enough I don't think they'll be anywhere close enough to get a franchise QB. They could be heading for a post Manning situation in Denver. 2-3 years of purging contracts and bad QB play.

Love may suck, but we'll roll right into the next era when Rodgers is gone. Just like we did post Favre. One year of acclimation for Rodgers and our defense (believe that was year 1 of Dom) and we were back in the postseason.

[ET80]

20 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Also let's look at what the Saints are facing this year, it's going to be a multi year rebuild with their cap, and they're talented enough I don't think they'll be anywhere close enough to get a franchise QB.

I'd say the cap situation is less about Brees (or Lattimore) and more about some questionable contracts (Taysom Hill stands out).

The Saints are the example to look at to prove the cap is a malleable measure. Push money into future years, voidable years, etc - Saints always have money to spare. One day that bill will be due, but that's a bit aways now.

I think the Saints are equipped at all levels to win with Jameis, TBH. Their road is much harder - Tampa Tom, a Falcons team that's always going to generate offense and a Panthers team on the rise - but we'll see them in the discussion at the least.

20 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Love may suck, but we'll roll right into the next era when Rodgers is gone. Just like we did post Favre. One year of acclimation for Rodgers and our defense (believe that was year 1 of Dom) and we were back in the postseason.

I admire your optimism. Can't say I agree, but neither of us can really tell the future. 

Good luck on it either way. 😃

[Packerraymond]

1 minute ago, ET80 said:

I'd say the cap situation is less about Brees (or Lattimore) and more about some questionable contracts (Taysom Hill stands out).

The Saints are the example to look at to prove the cap is a fungable measure. Push money into future years, voidable years, etc - Saints always have money to spare. One day that bill will be due, but that's a bit aways now.

I think the Saints are equipped at all levels to win with Jameis, TBH. Their road is much harder - Tampa Tom, a Falcons team that's always going to generate offense and a Panthers team on the rise - but we'll see them in the discussion at the least.

I admire your optimism. Can't say I agree, but neither of us can really tell the future. 

Good luck on it either way. 😃

The Saints are in the cap position they're in because they "went all in" with Brees, which is what the media says we need to do with Rodgers. 

They also ignored the QB position to keep him happy. Cesar Ruiz over Love? Come on.

It bought them 0 Super Bowls and a bleak short term outlook post Brees. Instead of going 100% in, I'd say the Packers are routinely 80% of the way there and hope the last 20 comes from their draft class or natural improvement from player growth within the org. It's gotten them as close or closer than the Saints.

[incognito_man]

oof there's some bad takes in here

• Rodgers is not retiring
• It is very rational for Ray to state that GB is an extremely stable (and long-view focused) front office for the past several decades and that culture and view is continuously promoted via internal promotions. So there is no rational reason to believe that will suddenly (or even eventually) change. Of course the league changes and the teams change with it, but that doesn't result in random, irrational direction change amongst an embedded group of professionals. GB is not subject to the whims of ownership changing hands. There are football people in charge, promoting other football people through every level of the organization. And this has been the case for...ever?
• We GB fans remember Favre's 2007 "recommitment" and it's nearly perfectly identical to Rodgers' 2020 "recommitment". We've seen this before. We recognize it. We know exactly what it means and why it happened.
• Jordan Love was an extremely high value pick that makes immense sense to anyone who can look more than 2 years into a franchise's future. This is footballs future, but there's a lot less FUTURE discussed here now than ever before. Fans can't seem to look beyond a 17 week season these days any more. 
• I immediately dismiss the opinion of anyone who thinks Jordan Love was (in any stretch of the imagination) a "bad" or "wasted" pick. Anyone with that dismissive of an opinion of the circumstances is truly ignorant of 99.99% of WHY it was made.

[GSUeagles14]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

Like a guy who chose his ego over championships. Crazy to me you can sit back and be OK with that.

I think most teams that Rodgers would go to are instant sb contenders.

[AZ_Eaglesfan]

Rarely, if ever, does going "all in" on a short time frame work. Yes, TB pulled it off last year, but who knows what they look like this year. The Eagles went all in on trying to keep the 2017 team alive for three year and that ended up driving the team into the dirt. You have to be able to look towards the future while building for the present in the NFL if you want to sustain success. It's what the Patriots did for 20 years. Yes, having the GOAT at QB makes it a lot easier, but they consistently churned out top tier teams for years, even when they drafted QBs high in the draft(Jimmy G in the second).

 

[JiffyJag]

1 minute ago, AZ_Eaglesfan said:

Rarely, if ever, does going "all in" on a short time frame work. Yes, TB pulled it off last year, but who knows what they look like this year. The Eagles went all in on trying to keep the 2017 team alive for three year and that ended up driving the team into the dirt. You have to be able to look towards the future while building for the present in the NFL if you want to sustain success. It's what the Patriots did for 20 years. Yes, having the GOAT at QB makes it a lot easier, but they consistently churned out top tier teams for years, even when they drafted QBs high in the draft(Jimmy G in the second).

 

The last 2 times HoF QBs changed teams late in their careers and the team that acquired them went "all in", it worked. Other teams trying it is inevitable. 

[Geezy]

30 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Also let's look at what the Saints are facing this year, it's going to be a multi year rebuild with their cap, and they're talented enough I don't think they'll be anywhere close enough to get a franchise QB. They could be heading for a post Manning situation in Denver. 2-3 years of purging contracts and bad QB play.

Love may suck, but we'll roll right into the next era when Rodgers is gone. Just like we did post Favre. One year of acclimation for Rodgers and our defense (believe that was year 1 of Dom) and we were back in the postseason.

would you trade a SB win for a 2-3 year rebuild? Or even 3-5 years? 

[ET80]

1 minute ago, JiffyJag said:

The last 2 times HoF QBs changed teams late in their careers and the team that acquired them went "all in", it worked. Other teams trying it is inevitable. 

Additionally, the teams that lost their HoF QB never replicated their success - even when one had a Trevor Lawrence-esque prospect in Andrew Luck take over.