Jump to content

Trade Deadline - Nov. 2


packfanfb

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, VonKarman said:

Do you guys seriously think that Rodgers is going to be playing here next season?

Whats he willing to do financially to stay?  I think instead of the norm of the Packers meeting Rodgers number to stay, he's going to have to meet the Packers number to stay.  We'll see, there's a lot of moving parts to this.  

Edited by NFLGURU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

I'll go with Gute's account of what happened through Albert Breer.  It wasn't a possibility to call Rodgers a week, a day before, the morning of???  

 

Gutekunst told me. “We didn’t go into that draft thinking, Hey, we’re gonna target this and do it. If that was the case, we probably would’ve done that. That wasn’t reality. Would that have changed anything? I don’t know if Aaron, with the issues he has, if that’s really part of it. But a player like Aaron, in a situation like that, you would’ve loved to give him a heads up. It’s just that the way this thing transpired, that wasn’t a possibility.”

Lol

You don't really think Gute is dumb enough to actually believe he would have told Rodgers ahead of time if they "could" have. 

There's just so much wrong with believing that how you want to interpret it I don't even know where to start.

But no, your interpretation that Love magically landed in GB and the front office was surprised by it and if they HAD thought about drafting him at any point before literally minutes prior to us taking him, Gute would have told Rodgers is just completely detached from reality.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, 15412 said:

You pay it, you cap it.  All they would be doing is kicking the can down the road.  Imploding our cap when the aged QB is done or should be.  The Packers philosophy for a very long time has been to remain competitive at the highest of levels.  That isn't going to change.

I mean that's one theory. Another is not prematurely dumping a 38-year old QB who has proven the last 2 years that he probably has another 5 years of good QB play. Remember, this whole thing started with the idea that 12 was declining in 2018-19. That idea has been debunked so the rules of the game have changed. 

If 12 was out there looking like Big Ben, I think we'd be on the same page. He clearly isn't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

I'll go with Gute's account of what happened through Albert Breer.  It wasn't a possibility to call Rodgers a week, a day before, the morning of???  

You can’t be serious. And what if he were to call and Rodgers gets mad and throws a tantrum?  Do you expect Gute to cower before his QB and do what 12 wants instead?  There’s nothing wrong with receiving input from your star player but Rodgers’ job is to play QB.  Let Gute do his job. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I mean that's one theory. Another is not prematurely dumping a 38-year old QB who has proven the last 2 years that he probably has another 5 years of good QB play. Remember, this whole thing started with the idea that 12 was declining in 2018-19. That idea has been debunked so the rules of the game have changed. 

If 12 was out there looking like Big Ben, I think we'd be on the same page. He clearly isn't. 

No, this whole thing started with he wanting a long term extension that the Packers were hesitant in giving him based on what his production would be in his 40's and our cap situation.  We already had him on the books for 3 more years at that point.  Now that it's only 1 more year the team certainly should be hesitant to kick the 50 gallon barrel down the road with a 5 year deal.  It is time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I mean that's one theory. Another is not prematurely dumping a 38-year old QB who has proven the last 2 years that he probably has another 5 years of good QB play. Remember, this whole thing started with the idea that 12 was declining in 2018-19. That idea has been debunked so the rules of the game have changed. 

If 12 was out there looking like Big Ben, I think we'd be on the same page. He clearly isn't. 

LOL, nothing has proven that, nor it is probable. If you wanna take previous years performances is easier to defend that last year was an aberration. If you discount Brady (who is an exception himself) QBs typically play like **** in their 40s. This year he's not playing like an MVP anymore (though we still have a lot of games left to change that). He's still a Top 10 QB (Brady, Murray, Jackson, Prescott, Mahomes and Herbert have been playing better than him), but he's gonna keep declining as years go by. Makes no sense to extend him. Oh, and he's had quite a few injuries and concussions. You are just using the bits of data that suit you best. He still has a chance to be great for a few years, but it's unlikely, not probable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, 15412 said:

You pay it, you cap it.  All they would be doing is kicking the can down the road.  Imploding our cap when the aged QB is done or should be.  The Packers philosophy for a very long time has been to remain competitive at the highest of levels.  That isn't going to change.

Competitive is  fine which we have been for years. Winning Super Bowls is better and that hasnt happened for over a decade. 2nd or 3rd place doesnt mean squat. I also like to see us in almost every if not all games .. time to get over the top!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NFLGURU said:

I'll go with Gute's account of what happened through Albert Breer.  It wasn't a possibility to call Rodgers a week, a day before, the morning of???  

 

Gutekunst told me. “We didn’t go into that draft thinking, Hey, we’re gonna target this and do it. If that was the case, we probably would’ve done that. That wasn’t reality. Would that have changed anything? I don’t know if Aaron, with the issues he has, if that’s really part of it. But a player like Aaron, in a situation like that, you would’ve loved to give him a heads up. It’s just that the way this thing transpired, that wasn’t a possibility.”

No.  First off, I'm not sure the Packers went into the draft expecting to take Jordan Love.  And secondly, Rodgers would torpedo that by any number of ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, packfanfb said:

I mean, there certainly is some chicken v. egg there, which one do you do first...

If you extend Rodgers, Love's trade value goes down the moment the ink is dry. 

If you trade Love first, yea, Rodgers could still leave, but that's highly doubtful. If the Packers trade Love, I think it's 100%, not 99%, that Rodgers signs an extension. He wants to be in Green Bay, always has. The Packers moving Love would give Rodgers the ultimate assurance that he won the standoff.

No, there really is no chicken or egg thing.  Not at the QB position in the NFL.

Put your NFL GM hat on, not a fans hat.

Do you trade Love without knowing that Rodgers is going to be back next season?  And when I say "knowing", I mean 100% knowing that he is back.  No wanting a trade, no retirement, he's back plain and simple. The only way it makes any sense whatsoever to move Love is if Rodgers signs a new deal and is committed for years to come.

To heck with whatever trade value Love may have.  He isn't worth a first, probably not a second, so it does not really matter if his value goes down.  If Rodgers inks a deal, you move Love if you want to prove to Rodgers that he is "The Man" for as long as he wants.

Outside of that, you are potentially out your replacement, then Rodgers turns around and leaves or retires as well.

Then the GM is immediately fired.  And no other team would ever touch him again.  The QB position is not something you gamble with like that.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Lol

You don't really think Gute is dumb enough to actually believe he would have told Rodgers ahead of time if they "could" have. 

There's just so much wrong with believing that how you want to interpret it I don't even know where to start.

But no, your interpretation that Love magically landed in GB and the front office was surprised by it and if they HAD thought about drafting him at any point before literally minutes prior to us taking him, Gute would have told Rodgers is just completely detached from reality.

Who said anything about Love magically showing up anywhere.  Obviously they had to scout him, see him play,  watch his film.  Gute has owned the pick, there's no reason for Gute to lie about how it happened.  

If Gute was as enthralled by Love as you think, he would have traded up further  and paid much more than a 4th to get him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Competitive is  fine which we have been for years. Winning Super Bowls is better and that hasnt happened for over a decade. 2nd or 3rd place doesnt mean squat. I also like to see us in almost every if not all games .. time to get over the top!

How many teams have won more Super Bowls than the Packers in the last 20 years?

dozen years more to the point

 

 

Edited by 15412
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

Who said anything about Love magically showing up anywhere.  Obviously they had to scout him, see him play,  watch his film.  Gute has owned the pick, there's no reason for Gute to lie about how it happened.  

If Gute was as enthralled by Love as you think, he would have traded up further  and paid much more than a 4th to get him.

I don't know what to tell you, man. What you're trying to tell us is so completely nonsensical on many levels. You're trying to sell us all that Gute is some buffoon that stumbled into Love and then was like "oh ya mr reporter we definitely would have wanted to tell Aaron first if we thought we would draft Love but we had no plans of that at all and it all just happened because we can't plan for schit"

C'mon man lol

How could you possibly believe that the leader of a multi-billion dollar organization tells some hack reporter to get him to shut up would be actually transparent. 

Link to comment
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...