Rodgers is back.

[Old Guy]

3 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

If I am taking Rodgers at his word, no contract offered to him gave him security past this current season.

We've thought all along that it wasn't necessarily about the money, more it was about the structure of the money.  He pretty much confirmed that.

Guess I'd put the odds at him coming back past this season at around 5-10% right now.  Certainly didn't sound like someone who now wants to be here long term, though he did say the last two weeks has been better, communication wise.

My dog in this fight is the organization.  No doubt that he organization is solid.  Includes Murphy, Gute, Ball, MLF.  I think Rodgers just wants the organization to take it to another level and be even better. 

Rogers talked about the cap and how difficult it was to navigate the COVID year financially.  Said many times he is not the victim and that the organization has paid him a lot of money over 16 years and that it was TT who ultimately took a chance on him and did not give up on him.  So he's not shutting a door or totally giving up on the Packers just yet. 

My crazy ash spitballing here.....  Gute, take some control over the finance guy and listen to Rodgers.  Use his insight and his influence.  Not in negotiating deals, but in how those deals are ended or possibly re-done.  And listen to Rodgers when he tells them about high character vets, free agents and rookies as he knows a lot about the work habits of all of them.

It is certainly fixable, and if "fixed", it could lead to an even better run organization.  Clock is ticking.

People keep saying to listen to Rodgers about these veteran guys, but which one(s) was the organization wrong about? 

I'll give you one Micah Hyde but we didn't use him correctly in the defensive scheme we were employing at the time. 

[deltarich87]

Interesting. So is 2023 NOT a void year? Gute saying he has 3 years left on his deal

 

[pgwingman]

10 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

My crazy ash spitballing here.....  Gute, take some control over the finance guy and listen to Rodgers.  Use his insight and his influence.  Not in negotiating deals, but in how those deals are ended or possibly re-done.  And listen to Rodgers when he tells them about high character vets, free agents and rookies as he knows a lot about the work habits of all of them.

It is certainly fixable, and if "fixed", it could lead to an even better run organization.  Clock is ticking.

Just curious, how do you view the Cobb deal? That's obviously the deal that has the most Rodgers influence over it. I'd argue we still overpaid, but I'm will to listen to others.

[Old Guy]

12 minutes ago, deltarich87 said:

Interesting. So is 2023 NOT a void year? Gute saying he has 3 years left on his deal

 

It could be that they haven't voided 2023 yet. Might be as simple as turning in the details to the league. 

[Leader]

The range of comments...........

Matt Schneidman -   So basically, Brian Gutekunst is saying Aaron Rodgers has always had an input on personnel and they've always valued his voice, just that the Packers need to better incorporate it or better explain to him why they make certain decisions.

Peter Bukowski -  Clearly Rodgers hasn't felt valued. That's on the team. Gutey suggested this is the first offseason Rodgers has truly expressed interest in being more than he's been. Wonder if QB1 agrees.

Zach Kruse -   Yeah, it seems like it's more... A personnel move is made affecting him, and Aaron doesn't understand it in hindsight? And he'd like to know beforehand?  Does anyone else get the sense that both Aaron Rodgers and Brian Gutekunst will be just fine with ending this "professional" relationship in a year?

Albert Breer -  Packers GM Brian Gutekunst on Aaron Rodgers' role in the Randall Cobb trade: "I think that's a big part of it. Without Aaron, we probably wouldn't be pursuing it. Randall's still a good player. ... This is what Aaron wanted, that's why we did it."

• Andrew Brandt -  Translation: “All I had to do was give up a 6th and I get Aaron back? Deal.”

///

It's well past time we start thinking about actual football and not the psychology of it.

[Refugee]

37 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Aaron being lonely and not being able to make friends with 26 year olds is now impacting our roster building decisions. 

Lovely

Ol’ Brett talked about that in the twilight of his time in GB.  He kept getting older and the players around him stayed the same age. Such is life in the NFL and life in general if you are around youth in your profession. I understand wanting to get it done with the boys but that’s not how this business works. Being a leader is easier if it’s with all of the guys you came of age with, if you are one of the best, you’ll stay around long enough to have to bring in and hopefully bring up the next generation. 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Refugee

[Mr Bad Example]

3 minutes ago, Refugee said:

Ol’ Brett talked about that in the twilight of his time in GB.  He kept getting older and the players around him stayed the same age. Such is life in the NFL and life in general if you are around youth in your profession. I understand wanting to get it done with the boys but that’s not how this business works. Being a leader is easier if it’s with all of the guys you came of age with, if you are one of the best, you’ll stay around long enough to have to bring in and hopefully bring up the next generation. 

It goes back the old "How many Packer fans does it take to change it lightbulb?" joke* in that it may not only be Rodgers but fans who wish we still had Jordy, Driver, and Cobb at WR, Kuhn at FB, and Matt Flynn backing Rodgers up. There's no reason GB couldn't do that, aside from the fact that Rodgers season stats would be 36/75 for 200 yds with 195 sacks because none of the WRs are able to get open.  

 

 

* 5 - one to screw in the bulb and 4 to sit around and talk about how great the old bulb was

[Mr Bad Example]

33 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

People keep saying to listen to Rodgers about these veteran guys, but which one(s) was the organization wrong about? 

I'll give you one Micah Hyde but we didn't use him correctly in the defensive scheme we were employing at the time. 

I don't recall many people being upset when Hyde left, either. I liked him more than most, but I thought he covered 3-4 roster spots (both S positions, CB, and PR) and was decent at all of them, so it would take volume to replace him. 

[Cpdaly23]

It will be interesting, when  Rodgers gets dealt to Denver next year, to see how he does with his receiving core of Cobb, Kumerow, and Mercedes Lewis.

[Rodjahs12]

The next two seasons are going to be more entertaining than the last 9 good or bad for me. If this situation blows up in our face I'm just going to embrace it. Constantly expecting this team to win it all is just exhausting at this point with it not actually happening so all of the uncertainty here is a breath of fresh air in a weird way.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Rodjahs12

[R T]

39 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

My crazy ash spitballing here.....  Gute, take some control over the finance guy and listen to Rodgers.  Use his insight and his influence.  Not in negotiating deals, but in how those deals are ended or possibly re-done.  And listen to Rodgers when he tells them about high character vets, free agents and rookies as he knows a lot about the work habits of all of them.

It is certainly fixable, and if "fixed", it could lead to an even better run organization.  Clock is ticking.

Do you believe that the Packers management isn't aware of who the high character vets are in the locker room or the work habits of younger players? The position coaches know their players as well or better than Rodgers does and with a better understanding of the big picture. 

I watched Rodgers presser again last night and can appreciate his passion, but when he talked about personnel moves the only thing that kept coming to mind was 'Bless his heart'. Not sure how after watching that how anyone comes to the conclusion that Rodgers should be having much of a say in making roster decisions.  

[vegas492]

1 hour ago, Old Guy said:

People keep saying to listen to Rodgers about these veteran guys, but which one(s) was the organization wrong about? 

I'll give you one Micah Hyde but we didn't use him correctly in the defensive scheme we were employing at the time. 

Peppers, Woodson, Nelson.  Top of my head.

If we take Aaron at his word, Peppers and Woodson wanted to retire as a Packer.  JP at what, $3M/year?  Seems like a nice salary for him, even if it was for EDGE #3.  Woodson, I don't think he put a number on it, but he said he would take less to stay in GB.  70% of Woodson is much better than 100% of MD Jennings.  

Then yah got Jordy.  Again, I'm not sure that Rodgers put a number on it, but I thought it was floated that he'd play for $1M.  Hard to argue against Jordy at that number.  

Sitton and Lang were mentioned.  Yah, can't argue against those moves at all.  Sitton sealed his own fate.  Lang was just flat out done.

Hyde, Heyward....  We've rehashed this a thousand times.  We thought we were good without them.  We were wrong.  Oh well.

Rodgers point in all of that, to me, was that GB didn't even talk about reduced deals.  They were just gone.  And despite those being perceived as "correct" business decisions, those guys brought a lot to the locker room.  

His other point was that you can't point at production somewhere else, versus what they would have done in GB.  On the field and in the locker room.  Changing teams is tough, is what he said.  

I'm not saying Rodgers is "right" or "wrong" here.  It's probably somewhere in the middle.  

[Green19]

2 hours ago, Dubz41 said:

He has had input.  All of his points were when he voiced his opinion, but they went the otherway anyhow.  Kumerow seems to stick in his craw because he had just expressed his OPINION on how much he liked THE #2 WR but they went with a younger WR to hopefully develop over a journeyman.

People see problems with the structure?  It's not perfect but it has resulted in a regular season record of 26-6 over the last two years.  I don't know that you can throw much shade at it right now.

Our Diva's input is kind of like praying.....sometimes the answer is NO.

Fixed that for you... don’t miss represent Assistant GM Rodgers evaluation.

[gopackgo972]

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CR5Dh4kjlxJ/?utm_medium=copy_link
 

why isn’t Riddick a GM yet. 

[vegas492]

39 minutes ago, R T said:

Do you believe that the Packers management isn't aware of who the high character vets are in the locker room or the work habits of younger players? The position coaches know their players as well or better than Rodgers does and with a better understanding of the big picture. 

I watched Rodgers presser again last night and can appreciate his passion, but when he talked about personnel moves the only thing that kept coming to mind was 'Bless his heart'. Not sure how after watching that how anyone comes to the conclusion that Rodgers should be having much of a say in making roster decisions.  

Yes.  I believe that Rodgers has some insight to the locker room, practice habits and workout habits concerning players.  Especially in the off-season.  He even mentioned rookies, as his represented agency works with a lot of players.

I think the sticking point is exactly how much weight his voice should have.  He feels that he has talked about things like this and basically been ignored.  Like he had to initiate the conversations instead of being part of an evaluation process.  

I get what he is saying.  I'm not saying that he is "right" or "wrong" concerning the players he mentioned.  I do agree that he should be part of the process.  A small part.

I equate it to my job.  My owner comes to me often with names of people he is interviewing.  I've been in my field, at a relatively high level, for 20 years. (Patting myself on the back here.)  I know a lot of things about job candidates that don't come through on a resume or interview.  For example, we were looking at someone who I know has changed jobs often, and moves often.  And that's not a big deal, but it tells me that this person isn't happy long term anywhere.  If looking for a career employee, this may not be the right fit.  If looking for someone for 2-4 years?  Different story.

We had another candidate come through who moves like every 2 years.  But I know this person well, and I know exactly why each move has happened.  This is totally a long term career candidate, though the moving history doesn't exactly line up with that.  And I know that because I know the back story.

Rodgers knows a few backstories.