A-Rod's New team (if traded), what can Packers get in trade?

[CriminalMind]

14 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

If he gets shipped out it's going to be the Broncos and Raiders fighting it out for his services.

If the decision is made to move Rodgers ... its because the situation is irreparable, not because of teams fighting it out.

Regardless of the skill difference, the Wentz situation is comparable. Philly states they not interested. The relationship completely soureds. Philly decides ok i guess we must trade him now.  3-4 teams expressed interest with varying packages. Wentz camp let's all teams involved know that he is basically only going to start in Indy and other teams would be getting a malcontent QB. The other teams say "ok i won't an offer". Indy offer is the only one left on the table for Philly to take. 

This is the QB Power to influence where they end up, should they want to use it that way

[coachbuns]

7 minutes ago, CriminalMind said:

Someone gets it here. 

There is no legit bidding war if GB decides to trade Rodgers. Its 1-2 teams only, and then Rodgers letting 1 of the 2 teams know he prefers not to play for them. Then yuh have one team with a 1st, 2nd and future 2nd offer on the table with a deadline date. 

The situation is no where comparable to Stafford. 

Situation may not be comparable but neither are the 2 players.  Stafford vs Rodgers .. not even close.  Between any AFC team that wants him there will be a bidding war and that just takes 2 teams.  You don't think there are 2 teams that wouldn't want Rodgers?  I beg to differ.

[CriminalMind]

1 minute ago, coachbuns said:

Situation may not be comparable but neither are the 2 players.  Stafford vs Rodgers .. not even close.  Between any AFC team that wants him there will be a bidding war and that just takes 2 teams.  You don't think there are 2 teams that wouldn't want Rodgers?  I beg to differ.

A reasonable person would think that a team will not trade for a face of the franchise QB without having Rodgers fully on board with their team and situation.... no one takes on a vetern drama queen at starting QB, especially one that has proven to flex muscles to push his way out of a situation and make it a bad media circus.  So it's less about the actual bid packages and more about where Rodgers 'allows' himself to be traded. This is the new NFL.

This was very likely similar to the Watson situation (before all the stuff happened/was revealed) when he had 1/2 teams only on trade list. The difference is the timing. I think HOU would have moved him before the draft if the (after stuff) was not revealed.

[15412]

There will be more than two teams interested in trading for Rodg, although Denver would hate the idea of the Raiders getting him and flipped.  Broncs and Raiders would indeed be major players.  In no way do we ever trade Rodg without getting a haul.  Otherwise, let him retire if he so wishes.  To sit out would cost him dearly, if we do that we need to immediately claim the 23 million he owes us and of course he doesn't get his roster bonus either.  He's apparently talked about retiring, never let a player threaten you.  If he wants to retire so be it.  Don't talk about it, do it.  And then pay us back a mountain of money.  The Packers have all the leverage here UNLESS they cede it to the player which would be a monumental mistake short and long term.  

Best case scenario is they do indeed get him back without missing any time.  They reportedly have offered him a new contract to do that, and that means a pay increase.  That is understandable, unless it buries us for a very long term in this aging player.  Again, he is not going to be 28, he's going to be 38.  That is a major consideration here.  People keep talking about "doing this" to a Hall of Fame QB.  First of all we have a 3 year contract with his signature on it.  We're not doing anything to him, he's already paid gobs of millions.  When you work a contract with a guy like this he may be a Hall of Fame QB now, but will he be half way through the contract??   That's the multi-million dollar question.

Gute needs to do what is right for the team and what is right for the franchise.  That means not burying us in a bad contract.  That might mean moving him now and getting a pile of treasure back.  I say again, I would never trade him in a fire sale.  He would have to play or retire in that event.

[CWood21]

12 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

If the decision is made to move Rodgers ... its because the situation is irreparable, not because of teams fighting it out.

Regardless of the skill difference, the Wentz situation is comparable. Philly states they not interested. The relationship completely soureds. Philly decides ok i guess we must trade him now.  3-4 teams expressed interest with varying packages. Wentz camp let's all teams involved know that he is basically only going to start in Indy and other teams would be getting a malcontent QB. The other teams say "ok i won't an offer". Indy offer is the only one left on the table for Philly to take. 

This is the QB Power to influence where they end up, should they want to use it that way

I'm not sure what's worse.  The thought process that you tried to use to compare to Rodgers (the best QB in 2021) to Wentz (the worst QB in 2021).  Or you think Rodgers is so desperate to get out of Green Bay, but he's going to be selective to where he'll go.

[CriminalMind]

38 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I'm not sure what's worse.  The thought process that you tried to use to compare to Rodgers (the best QB in 2021) to Wentz (the worst QB in 2021).  Or you think Rodgers is so desperate to get out of Green Bay, but he's going to be selective to where he'll go.

If GB of their own will decides "we really should trade Rodgers now unfortunately", 100% Rodgers will be highly selective on his end destination. And thinking Rodgers would not be a part of that end conversation is also unfortunate.

[mikemike778]

20 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

Someone gets it here. 

There is no legit bidding war if GB decides to trade Rodgers. Its 1-2 teams only, and then Rodgers letting 1 of the 2 teams know he prefers not to play for them. Then yuh have one team with a 1st, 2nd and future 2nd offer on the table with a deadline date. 

The situation is no where comparable to Stafford. 

Honestly I don't care in the slightest whether there is a bidding war. It really doesn't matter.

Any team who trades for Rodgers is doing so to play for the title. If we trade him we have the ludicrous situation of us destroying our salary cup to pay the league MVP an astonishing amount of  money (37m) to try and win the super bowl for someone else. This cannot happen unless we get a monster haul of picks north of three 1st round picks.  Imagine if he goes to  Denver and wins them the super bowl whilst we are looking at salary cap hell with Blake Bortles at QB.

For me, its very simple.  You name your price and it must be north of three 1st rounders. Don't even bother to answer the phone to anything less.

If there is one team that Rodgers wants to play for and they wont  pay that then the trade simply isn't going to happen.

If Rodgers thinks he can take home 4 years worth of salary bonus, play for one year and run off with the rest on the grounds he is so unhappy with the Packers front office but will only move on the condition that it is too one team then I would just laugh at him and tell him to write us the cheque for what he owes us. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Norm]

4 minutes ago, mikemike778 said:

Honestly I don't care in the slightest whether there is a bidding war. It really doesn't matter.

Any team who trades for Rodgers is doing so to play for the title. If we trade him we have the ludicrous situation of us destroying our salary cup to pay the league MVP an astonishing amount of  money (37m) to try and win the super bowl for someone else. This cannot happen unless we get a monster haul of picks north of three 1st round picks.  Imagine if he goes to  Denver and wins them the super bowl whilst we are looking at salary cap hell with Blake Bortles at QB.

For me, its very simple.  You name your price and it must be north of three 1st rounders. Don't even bother to answer the phone to anything less.

If there is one team that Rodgers wants to play for and they wont  pay that then the trade simply isn't going to happen.

If Rodgers thinks he can take home 4 years worth of salary bonus, play for one year and run off with the rest on the grounds he is so unhappy with the Packers front office but will only move on the condition that it is too one team then I would just laugh at him and tell him to write us the cheque for what he owes us. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah I still think the idea you just bring him back if you don't get this crazy *** mega haul is overstated. You don't get to bang some other broad, get caught and tell your wife you're leaving her for this other one, then when she doesn't want you, just crawl back and have everything be fine.

[coachbuns]

3 hours ago, Norm said:

Yeah I still think the idea you just bring him back if you don't get this crazy *** mega haul is overstated. You don't get to bang some other broad, get caught and tell your wife you're leaving her for this other one, then when she doesn't want you, just crawl back and have everything be fine.

The only thing that's crazy in your theory is you are still alive after you tell your wife what you did.  

[Norm]

1 hour ago, coachbuns said:

The only thing that's crazy in your theory is you are still alive after you tell your wife what you did.  

So since we drafted Love and shopped Aaron, we're the ones lucky he hasn't killed us? I think we're on the same page then

[deathstar]

4 hours ago, Norm said:

Yeah I still think the idea you just bring him back if you don't get this crazy *** mega haul is overstated. You don't get to bang some other broad, get caught and tell your wife you're leaving her for this other one, then when she doesn't want you, just crawl back and have everything be fine.

What’s funny is that I think you’re referring to Love but this could also be talking about Rodgers wanting to go to another team.

[CriminalMind]

15 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

Honestly I don't care in the slightest whether there is a bidding war. It really doesn't matter.

Any team who trades for Rodgers is doing so to play for the title. If we trade him we have the ludicrous situation of us destroying our salary cup to pay the league MVP an astonishing amount of  money (37m) to try and win the super bowl for someone else. This cannot happen unless we get a monster haul of picks north of three 1st round picks.  Imagine if he goes to  Denver and wins them the super bowl whilst we are looking at salary cap hell with Blake Bortles at QB.

For me, its very simple.  You name your price and it must be north of three 1st rounders. Don't even bother to answer the phone to anything less.

If there is one team that Rodgers wants to play for and they wont  pay that then the trade simply isn't going to happen.

If Rodgers thinks he can take home 4 years worth of salary bonus, play for one year and run off with the rest on the grounds he is so unhappy with the Packers front office but will only move on the condition that it is too one team then I would just laugh at him and tell him to write us the cheque for what he owes us. 

 

Bonus money likely means very little in this situation (as a hold up). Rodgers "gives" back remaining pro-rated bonus money to GB (above earned salary), then Rodgers proceeds to get "new" bonus money from his new team via his new contract. So it's basically a wash, but might actually be a net benefit in Rodgers favor. 

[CWood21]

23 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

If GB of their own will decides "we really should trade Rodgers now unfortunately", 100% Rodgers will be highly selective on his end destination. And thinking Rodgers would not be a part of that end conversation is also unfortunate.

So...let me get this straight.  Rodgers is HELL BENT on getting out of Green Bay, but he's going to be super selective who he is going to "accept" a trade to?

EDIT: Remember how hell bent Favre was to go to the Vikings, and he accepted a trade to the Jets.

[CriminalMind]

43 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So...let me get this straight.  Rodgers is HELL BENT on getting out of Green Bay, but he's going to be super selective who he is going to "accept" a trade to?

EDIT: Remember how hell bent Favre was to go to the Vikings, and he accepted a trade to the Jets.

Rodgers is not "hell bent" to get out of GB. He very likely wants to stay in GB but under his terms (some kind of untradeable contract or a NTC).

If this is simply untenable to GB, and Rodgers won't play under current terms, GB may be the party "hell bent" on getting Rodgers out.

[CWood21]

4 minutes ago, CriminalMind said:

Rodgers is not "hell bent" to get out of GB. He very likely wants to stay in GB but under his terms (some kind of untradeable contract or a NTC).

If this is simply untenable to GB, and Rodgers won't play under current terms, GB may be the party "hell bent" on getting Rodgers out.

Except Green Bay clearly wants Rodgers to be the starting QB in 2021.  LaFleur has already said so.  Gute has already said so.  I think the only one who hasn't publicly said so was Murphy (and I might be wrong on that).  The problem is Rodgers clearly wants to leave Green Bay on his terms.  And I think most would agree that's an admirable stance to take.  But the problem is Rodgers clearly views himself as bigger then the franchise.