Jump to content

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


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

Just now, soflbillsfan said:

Rams giving up multiple 1st rd to get stafford is not comparable to the situation that is Rodgers. You have to think that the Rams gave up a 1st to get Stafford and a 1st to get Goff off of their salary cap. So to say Stafford got 2 1st rds is just not the case. Detroit had to take on 40 mil in guaranteed cap, browns got a 2nd for Osweiler's contract so I think you can take that 1st out. So if your looking to move the 37 year old MVP he is going to likely get a 1st and 2nd possibly another 1st but even that is stretching it based on his age.  I do not see how any team can give up 3 1st rd for his services and to me that asking price is just a fan hoping for the best. Detroit had 3 offers on the table too, after last weeks draft would there be that many offers on the table for Rodgers? Denver maybe Vegas and that is likely it.

We can't just assume that.  It's very possible that Detroit viewed him as a legitimate QB, and not as a bad contract.  And given that Detroit passed on Justin Fields and Mac Jones, I don't think that's a legitimate leap of faith either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CWood21 said:

We can't just assume that.  It's very possible that Detroit viewed him as a legitimate QB, and not as a bad contract.  And given that Detroit passed on Justin Fields and Mac Jones, I don't think that's a legitimate leap of faith either.

The GM even said that if Sewell was off the board they would have gone QB. He didnt have to come out and say that in order to show respect to goff but he did so he clearly wasnt in love with Fields or Jones as he was for Sewell and he is clearly not in love with Goff if he was thinking of taking one had Sewell been removed from the board. Whether he is a legitimate qb or not the contract was bad and in order to get Stafford and remove goff from the equation they had to over pay to get the deal done. With Lions GM saying this they do not see Goff as their long term answer 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

Rams have a proven track record though.  We just assume Denver would be good with a better QB, and that's certainly possible if not likely, but we don't really know.  It's entirely possible Fangio just isn't all that good of a head coach, and yes you can point to injuries but it isn't like their defense was some great, amazing unit last year.  Even with Rodgers, I don't think you can just automatically insert them in the playoffs 3 consecutive years, especially with KC in the same division.

I get it if the Broncos make the deal.  I just think it is a big gamble for a 3-yearish window at best.  

The Broncos went 5-11 with a net -4 in close wins.  They were 7.3 pythagorean wins.And that was with bottom 5 QB play.  They probably were a 7ish win team last year.  Add in Rodgers, and you're pretty confident that's a 10+ win team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, soflbillsfan said:

The GM even said that if Sewell was off the board they would have gone QB. He didnt have to come out and say that in order to show respect to goff but he did so he clearly wasnt in love with Fields or Jones as he was for Sewell and he is clearly not in love with Goff if he was thinking of taking one had Sewell been removed from the board. Whether he is a legitimate qb or not the contract was bad and in order to get Stafford and remove goff from the equation they had to over pay to get the deal done. With Lions GM saying this they do not see Goff as their long term answer 

Holmes said they'd have taken a QB if they had one rated as high or higher than Sewell.

They probably take less than market value to move back if Pitts, Chase and Sewell are all taken.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, soflbillsfan said:

The GM even said that if Sewell was off the board they would have gone QB. He didnt have to come out and say that in order to show respect to goff but he did so he clearly wasnt in love with Fields or Jones as he was for Sewell and he is clearly not in love with Goff if he was thinking of taking one had Sewell been removed from the board. Whether he is a legitimate qb or not the contract was bad and in order to get Stafford and remove goff from the equation they had to over pay to get the deal done. With Lions GM saying this they do not see Goff as their long term answer 

I don't really buy into what GMs say post-draft.  They're always going to overstate how much they like their guy.  If they graded Fields or Jones as a franchise QB, and passed on him for a LT then he deserves to be fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

Holmes said they'd have taken a QB if they had one rated as high or higher than Sewell.

They probably take less than market value to move back if Pitts, Chase and Sewell are all taken.

 

Yes and my point was that the Goff trade had to involve a 2nd 1st round pick is because of his massive contract not because Stafford was flat out worth 2 1st rd picks. Stafford would certainly land a 1st and possibly a day 2 or 3 pick out cause that is what teams supposedly offered but taking on goffs deal forced the rams to give up more then they should. My argument is that Rodgers wouldnt come away with more then a 1st and a 2nd or possibly 2 1st rd picks let alone 3 1st rd picks that some people are saying that is what GB should be seeking. If there was a deal in which a Goff like contract had to be swapped then that would definitely be the case of possibly getting more then the 1/2 or 2 1st because of a deal that big has to be absorbed at a price just like Goff stafford deal. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iknowcool said:

Man Aaron Rodgers is a beast but if a team trades 3 FRPs for him AND a quality young player?  I don't know about all that. 

I agree.  It would be craziness to give up that much.  If I were in that much of a gambling mood, I'd call Houston up and offer 2 first rounders for Deshaun Watson.  At least you have a future with that deal.

Edited by Uncle Buck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, soflbillsfan said:

Yes and my point was that the Goff trade had to involve a 2nd 1st round pick is because of his massive contract not because Stafford was flat out worth 2 1st rd picks. Stafford would certainly land a 1st and possibly a day 2 or 3 pick out cause that is what teams supposedly offered but taking on goffs deal forced the rams to give up more then they should. My argument is that Rodgers wouldnt come away with more then a 1st and a 2nd or possibly 2 1st rd picks let alone 3 1st rd picks that some people are saying that is what GB should be seeking. If there was a deal in which a Goff like contract had to be swapped then that would definitely be the case of possibly getting more then the 1/2 or 2 1st because of a deal that big has to be absorbed at a price just like Goff stafford deal. 

Rodgers is so much better than Stafford, though.

Guy just won MVP and will have a point to prove. Motivated Rodgers is one of the deadliest players in league history.

I would not hesitate trading 3 1sts for Rodgers even with the enormous risk that is his age.

IMO, you can't put a value high enough for a guy like that.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sammymvpknight said:

Favre doing the lords work trying to inception Rodgers into going to the Saints. Lol

Favre is just a younger version of Terry Bradshaw. His opinions are about as stupid and poorly thought out (Still love the guy but a football genius he isn't)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Favre is just a younger version of Terry Bradshaw. His opinions are about as stupid and poorly thought out (Still love the guy but a football genius he isn't)

Rodgers goes to Saints...they are Super Bowl favorites. I just don’t think the Saints have the goods to get him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sammymvpknight said:

Rodgers goes to Saints...they are Super Bowl favorites. I just don’t think the Saints have the goods to get him. 

That and I think if the Packers trade they will do there best to keep him out of conference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

LESS RISK??!?!?!

WHAT WORLD AM I LIVING IN WHERE STAFFORD AND GOFF ARE LESS RISK THAN AARON FREAKIN RODGERS

I agree on his point with longevity, but agree with you with risk...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...