Jump to content

Gutey or Rodgers?  

91 members have voted

  1. 1. Which side are you on?



Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Yes, 3 years left on his contract, and he was a big boy when he signed it.  What he wants now is even more money yet and in essence to bury us in a contract we can’t get out of with a 40 something year old QB.  Pass.  The Packers wanted exactly what they should have wanted, a re-structure which would have protected the team, paid ol Rodg more money up front, and put the team in a position to add talent around him.  The front office not only has to warrant value in a contract for today, but for the future.  Gute and the front office owes this ego starved 38 year old soon to be entertainer absolutely nothing more than his contract calls for, which is a huge amount of money.  Now what ol Rodg should be more concerned about is how he left a minimum of 3 TD’s on the field, plays sitting there waiting to be made by the QB, in his last game.  That’s what a team player would be working on.

He’s acting like a punk.  Show up and honor your contract.  Otherwise you will sit out this season and that’s on you.

Edited by 15412
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 15412 said:

Yes, 3 years left on his contract, and he was a big boy when he signed it.  What he wants now is even more money yet and in essence to bury us in a contract we can’t get out of with a 40 something year old QB.  Pass.  The Packers wanted exactly what they should have wanted, a re-structure which would have protected the team, paid ol Rodg more money up front, and put the team in a position to add talent around him.  The front office not only has to warrant value in a contract for today, but for the future.  Gute and the front office owes this ego starved 38 year old soon to be entertainer absolutely nothing more than his contract calls for, which is a huge amount of money.  Now what ol Rodg should be more concerned about is how he left a minimum of 3 TD’s on the field, plays sitting there waiting to be made by the QB, in his last game.  That’s what a team player would be working on.

He’s acting like a punk.  Show up and honor your contract.  Otherwise you will sit out this season and that’s on you.

I think it's fair to assume that the Packers approached him for the re-structure. They were big boys when they signed it.

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

Yes, 3 years left on his contract, and he was a big boy when he signed it.  What he wants now is even more money yet and in essence to bury us in a contract we can’t get out of with a 40 something year old QB.  Pass.  The Packers wanted exactly what they should have wanted, a re-structure which would have protected the team, paid ol Rodg more money up front, and put the team in a position to add talent around him.  The front office not only has to warrant value in a contract for today, but for the future.  Gute and the front office owes this ego starved 38 year old soon to be entertainer absolutely nothing more than his contract calls for, which is a huge amount of money.  Now what ol Rodg should be more concerned about is how he left a minimum of 3 TD’s on the field, plays sitting there waiting to be made by the QB, in his last game.  That’s what a team player would be working on.

He’s acting like a punk.  Show up and honor your contract.  Otherwise you will sit out this season and that’s on you.

And you guys thought I was hardcore.  No sugar coating it.  Right on 15412!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cannondale said:

I think it's fair to assume that the Packers approached him for the re-structure. They were big boys when they signed it.

The difference is twofold.  Number one they’re not whining about it like a schoolgirl.  Secondly, they are more than willing to honor that very contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, R T said:

The Packers are not moving on from Rodgers if he continues to produce like he did this past season. Part of the problem is Rodgers doesn't like having his feet held to the fire to produce and he knows the second he doesn't the Packers will move on from him. As for Rodgers security, he has 3 years left on his contract, that is a lot of security.   

Rodgers has likely played his last snap in GB. 

When a team can comfortably move on from a player without serious cap ramifications there's no security whatsoever, regardless of contract length. Rodgers has exactly one year of security right now. That relative lack of security is precisely why this is happening right now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 15412 said:

The difference is twofold.  Number one they’re not whining about it like a schoolgirl.  Secondly, they are more than willing to honor that very contract.

I'm not gonna speak to the he said she said.  IF the Packers approached Rodgers for the re-structure, how is that flipped to Rodgers not wanting to honor the current deal ?? This has been the thing that doesn't add up from the start. The Packers reach out for a re-structure and things go off the rails. I wonder if they further tipped their hand in moving on, and that pissed Rodgers off. Then Gute, MM, and MLF make multiple trips out there ? Seems like damage control to me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Les Punting said:

Rodgers has likely played his last snap in GB. 

When a team can comfortably move on from a player without serious cap ramifications there's no security whatsoever, regardless of contract length. Rodgers has exactly one year of security right now. That relative lack of security is precisely why this is happening right now. 

It's okay to disagree on this because only a very few truly know Rodgers thoughts, but I don't think contract security has much to do with this at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I'm not gonna speak to the he said she said.  IF the Packers approached Rodgers for the re-structure, how is that flipped to Rodgers not wanting to honor the current deal ?? This has been the thing that doesn't add up from the start. The Packers reach out for a re-structure and things go off the rails. I wonder if they further tipped their hand in moving on, and that pissed Rodgers off. Then Gute, MM, and MLF make multiple trips out there ? Seems like damage control to me. 

A restructure actually makes it MORE difficult to move on from Rodgers in 2022 and 2023 (his cap hit grows).

Also, the packers don’t need Rodgers permission to do this- they can convert roster bonuses to signing bonuses at any time, regardless if the player wants it to happen or not.  Approaching Rodgers about it was done as a courtesy to him.

Edited by Cpdaly23
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I won't be surprised if they just trade him after June 1 if he indeed insists on never playing here again.  If my understanding is correct, and my understanding of the cap is elementary at best so please correct me if I'm wrong, but the dead cap next year will be the same as if they trade him after next season and this year's dead money will be less than half of his current cap hit, so if he's not going to play here anyway they might as well get something for him now when he's at his most valuable and give themselves some room to extend other guys or sign free agents if they want to.  It's curious that Denver didn't take a QB with Fields and Jones on the board at pick 9 when all they have on the roster are Bridgewater and Lock.

Unfortunately, all good things must come to an end at some point.  No sense in holding on to something that's no longer there (if all of this stuff is true).

Edited by MaximusGluteus
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Brady restructured contracts many times over the years, and his security was confidence in his own play.  That continues.

If it is true Rodg is only concerned about security then he must be insecure in his own confidence concerning future level of play.  Dog chasing tail, tail chasing dog.

This isn’t a 28 year old QB we’re talking about.  I know it’s never been easier to play QB in the NFL, that’s why they can now play so long.  The team would be foolish to bury themselves with this guy well into his 40’s with no way to get out.  We have him signed for 3 more years.  Brady restructured many times in his career, partly to help the team.  
 

He needs to honor his signature.  If not, let him sit and maybe we’ll trade him next year.  Maybe.

Edited by 15412
Fat finger
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cpdaly23 said:

A restructure actually makes it MORE difficult to move on from Rodgers in 2022 and 2023 (his cap hit grows).

Also, the packers don’t need Rodgers permission to do this- they can convert roster bonuses to signing bonuses at any time, regardless if the player wants it to happen or not.  Approaching Rodgers about it was done out of courtesy to him.

As I've said, I'm not an expert but maybe there were other things proposed other than simply moving money. Something went wrong. And if they were completely satisfied that they were free, clear and justified, why the need to send out every Tom **** and Harry to talk with him ???

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

Yes, 3 years left on his contract, and he was a big boy when he signed it.  What he wants now is even more money yet and in essence to bury us in a contract we can’t get out of with a 40 something year old QB.  Pass.   Now what ol Rodg should be more concerned about is how he left a minimum of 3 TD’s on the field, plays sitting there waiting to be made by the QB, in his last game.  That’s what a team player would be working on.

I get it.  Your feelings are hurt.  Duly noted.  Most of your points are emotional and not logical, but we’re fans - so it goes.

On a rational level I disagree with most of your points.  Obviously Rodgers played like a champ last year.  He might not have won a Super Bowl, and he might not have played a perfect NFCCG but he did play a superior to game to the eventual SB QB champ, so, that’s not too bad.  You’re angry that he wants a contract that reflects the Packers commitment to him for the next few years.  I think it’s understandable considering the Packers drafted another QB in the first round.

You think because he signed a contract that should close the books on future negotiations, but we’re both adults and we both know the Packers could trade or fire Rodgers any time they want regardless of what’s in the contract.  He has a few years left in his career.  He wants to play.

It ain’t complicated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cannondale said:

As I've said, I'm not an expert but maybe there were other things proposed other than simply moving money. Something went wrong. And if they were completely satisfied that they were free, clear and justified, why the need to send out every Tom **** and Harry to talk with him ???

Because he is a baby that needs to be babied.

not the first time front office brass makes a call, and that goes for every team in the NFL. A courtesy that should have been appreciated.   The brass needs to stand by their decision and not let a player dictate policy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, StinkySauce said:

I get it.  Your feelings are hurt.  Duly noted.  Most of your points are emotional and not logical, but we’re fans - so it goes.

On a rational level I disagree with most of your points.  Obviously Rodgers played like a champ last year.  He might not have won a Super Bowl, and he might not have played a perfect NFCCG but he did play a superior to game to the eventual SB QB champ, so, that’s not too bad.  You’re angry that he wants a contract that reflects the Packers commitment to him for the next few years.  I think it’s understandable considering the Packers drafted another QB in the first round.

You think because he signed a contract that should close the books on future negotiations, but we’re both adults and we both know the Packers could trade or fire Rodgers any time they want regardless of what’s in the contract.  He has a few years left in his career.  He wants to play.

It ain’t complicated.

What you’re saying is a combination of inaccurate on every count and senseless.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...