Rodgers reportedly coming back

[SpeightTheVillain]

39 minutes ago, Sandy said:

 

This is an almost unfathomably dumb argument.

There is no control element that can confirm why we won't win a SB with this team. It is a sport, played by humans, with elements of randomness that are impossible to quantity.

All you can do is get the best players, and the best coaches, and try to win.

Any argument built on the premise of "well it hasn't happened before so it can't possibly happen" is textbook strawman.

Imagine if the Broncos didn't trade for Peyton because he only won the super bowl once? Hindsight is 20/20, but they decided to go for it with the HOF QB and were rewarded. It doesn't always work, but put me in the camp of trying for it when you have that shot.

This is quite the response. You don't even seem to realize what you are arguing here. I'll lay it out for you.

Your first argument is that there is no way to possibly know whether keeping Rodgers will or will not result in a SB. Okay, fair - got it. Then the rest of your post is invalid because nobody can know whether keeping Rodgers will result in a Superbowl. Including you. So nobody can have an opinion on this and we should all stop posting about Rodgers.

Yet somehow, you contradict your first argument a mere sentence later - stating "all you can do is get the best players, and the best coaches, and try to win." OK - I agree with that. However, where we differ is - I define "the best players" as someone who can help his team to reach and win the Superbowl. Ergo, Rodgers is not "the best players" based on the evidence at hand.

It is exceedingly cute of you to call it a "strawman" argument. Is your entire argument not that Rodgers gives us the best chance to win a Superbowl? How is attacking that premise with ten years of evidence a straw man? Just because you disagree with my conclusions does not make my logic false.

 

 

 

Edited March 15, 2022 by SpeightTheVillain

[Packer_ESP]

3 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

This is quite the response. You don't even seem to realize what you are arguing here. I'll lay it out for you.

Your first argument is that there is no way to possibly know whether keeping Rodgers will or will not result in a SB. Okay, fair - got it. Then the rest of your post is invalid because nobody can know whether keeping Rodgers will result in a Superbowl. Including you. So nobody can have an opinion on this and we should all stop posting about Rodgers.

Yet somehow, you contradict your first argument a mere sentence later - stating "all you can do is get the best players, and the best coaches, and try to win." OK - I agree with that. However, where we differ is - I define "the best players" as someone who can help his team to reach and win the Superbowl. Ergo, Rodgers is not "the best players" based on the evidence at hand.

It is exceedingly cute of you to call it a "strawman" argument. Is your entire argument not that Rodgers gives us the best chance to win a Superbowl? How is attacking that premise with ten years of evidence a straw man? Just because you disagree with my conclusions does not make my logic false.

Forgot to add that his example included the corpse of Peyton Manning and his 67 passer rating in 2015 somehow having something to do with their ring.

[British]

I was quite looking forward to a boat load of picks and a rebuild with Love.  Sometimes a change is as good as a break.

But I have to admit, I bloody love this deal for the Packers. 

Cap hits over the next three years are amazing:

2022: 28m
2023: 31m
2024: 40m

(Kirk Cousins is on 31 in 2022 and 35 in 2023 😂)

Those cap numbers will allow the Packers to build a really solid team around Rodgers for the next three years.

Then after 2024 he will be the only player to have played 20 years with the same team and likely retires. (Or we trade him/extend him - in terms of the cap a cut or trade is the same as a retirement).

Assuming he retires, in 2025 we have a 45m dead cap it. That seems more than fine to me. One year to tank for 3 more shots at a SB.  Most teams in the NFL would kill for that. 

By 2025 the cap will likely be close to 300m anyway and we'll either have a QB on a rookie deal or be doing a tear down, get a high draft pick and grab our QB of the future in 2025.

Amazing work from the Packers. Three legit shots at a ring, then a rebuilding year, and off we go again.

If you believe Rodgers is just bad in the playoffs and is now some kind of choke artist then you probably hate this. But I take the view it's pretty much luck in the post season and you just need to get hot for a couple of games.  Getting to the playoffs should be easy enough and Rodgers and MLF give us a punchers chance to win another ring. 

[Brit Pack]

2 minutes ago, British said:

I was quite looking forward to a boat load of picks and a rebuild with Love.  Sometimes a change is as good as a break.

But I have to admit, I bloody love this deal for the Packers. 

Cap hits over the next three years are amazing:

2022: 28m
2023: 31m
2024: 40m

(Kirk Cousins is on 31 in 2022 and 35 in 2023 😂)

Those cap numbers will allow the Packers to build a really solid team around Rodgers for the next three years.

Then after 2024 he will be the only player to have played 20 years with the same team and likely retires. (Or we trade him/extend him - in terms of the cap a cut or trade is the same as a retirement).

Assuming he retires, in 2025 we have a 45m dead cap it. That seems more than fine to me. One year to tank for 3 more shots at a SB.  Most teams in the NFL would kill for that. 

By 2025 the cap will likely be close to 300m anyway and we'll either have a QB on a rookie deal or be doing a tear down, get a high draft pick and grab our QB of the future in 2025.

Amazing work from the Packers. Three legit shots at a ring, then a rebuilding year, and off we go again.

If you believe Rodgers is just bad in the playoffs and is now some kind of choke artist then you probably hate this. But I take the view it's pretty much luck in the post season and you just need to get hot for a couple of games.  Getting to the playoffs should be easy enough and Rodgers and MLF give us a punchers chance to win another ring. 

From one Brit to another, well said Sir!

[15412]

I'm going to laugh my bloody arse off when Ol Rodg gets beat soundly by Brady in the playoffs...if he can get us beyond round 1 that is.  

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, 15412 said:

I'm going to laugh my bloody arse off when Ol Rodg gets beat soundly by Brady in the playoffs...if he can get us beyond round 1 that is.  

You should see a proctologist. 

[hitnhope]

Rodgers played the Packers front office for fools.  We can only hope the punishment for pissing him off by drafting Love is now over.

Gute put a plan together that we can argue over whether it was the right or wrong thing to do.   He doubled down on the plan last year by dropping a year off of AR's contract.     Now that it was time to finalize the plan and move on, he lacked the courage to follow it through.   Rodgers held him hostage over the plan.

Quite frankly the front office played scared trying to save their jobs.  They deserve to lose their jobs if we dont win a SB in the next 2 years.   They are paying him close to double what they would have had to pay.

[Arthur Penske]

7 minutes ago, 15412 said:

I'm going to laugh my bloody arse off when Ol Rodg gets beat soundly by Brady in the playoffs...if he can get us beyond round 1 that is.  

Good one. Packers don't go to the NFC championship 3/3 years and Rodgers gets a reputation among troll homers for losing in first round of the playoffs.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Arthur Penske

[Sandy]

16 minutes ago, SpeightTheVillain said:

This is quite the response. You don't even seem to realize what you are arguing here. I'll lay it out for you.

Your first argument is that there is no way to possibly know whether keeping Rodgers will or will not result in a SB. Okay, fair - got it. Then the rest of your post is invalid because nobody can know whether keeping Rodgers will result in a Superbowl. Including you. So nobody can have an opinion on this and we should all stop posting about Rodgers.

Yet somehow, you contradict your first argument a mere sentence later - stating "all you can do is get the best players, and the best coaches, and try to win." OK - I agree with that. However, where we differ is - I define "the best players" as someone who can help his team to reach and win the Superbowl. Ergo, Rodgers is not "the best players" based on the evidence at hand.

It is exceedingly cute of you to call it a "strawman" argument. Is your entire argument not that Rodgers gives us the best chance to win a Superbowl? How is attacking that premise with ten years of evidence a straw man? Just because you disagree with my conclusions does not make my logic false.

 

 

 

Your desire to see things your way has somehow clouded your reading comprehension. Or you're being intentionally dense to fit your argument.

My thesis is that randomness is a factor in who wins games. Our game against SF this year is a prime example. How many games will we lose our best rusher, have multiple timely miscues on offense, have a blocked punt for a TD, etc...that's the randomness I'm talking about.

Getting the best possible players and coaches gives you the best chance to win by diminishing the chance of randomness effecting the outcome of the game. Even so, randomness took over against SF this year. Disagreeing with this does not make you look smart.

The argument that we cant win a super bowl because we have Aaron Rodgers is the strawman. There is no proof that this is even remotely true.

10 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

Forgot to add that his example included the corpse of Peyton Manning and his 67 passer rating in 2015 somehow having something to do with their ring.

Not sure what timeframe or game you're referring to...but the Broncos odds of going to the playoffs or getting a bye week are heavily diminished without adding Manning. His presence made more players want to join the team. No Peyton and odds are they would have continued their 7 to 9 win dance they had going for years

[Striker]

1 minute ago, Sandy said:

My thesis is that randomness is a factor in who wins games. Our game against SF this year is a prime example. How many games will we lose our best rusher, have multiple timely miscues on offense, have a blocked punt for a TD, etc...that's the randomness I'm talking about.

Let me again share:

The Packers are either due for some all-time run good, or they're just going to find another hilariously absurd way to lose in the playoffs.

Edited March 15, 2022 by Striker

[Maverick]

23 minutes ago, 15412 said:

I'm going to laugh my bloody arse off when Ol Rodg gets beat soundly by Brady in the playoffs...if he can get us beyond round 1 that is.  

Thankfully NFL teams consist of more than just the QB. 

[15412]

9 minutes ago, Striker said:

Let me again share:

The Packers are either due for some all-time run good, or they're just going to find another hilariously absurd way to lose in the playoffs.

This..., is a thing of great beauty.  It's the factual honesty that personifies it.

[Striker]

25 minutes ago, British said:

I was quite looking forward to a boat load of picks and a rebuild with Love.  Sometimes a change is as good as a break.

But I have to admit, I bloody love this deal for the Packers. 

Cap hits over the next three years are amazing:

2022: 28m
2023: 31m
2024: 40m

(Kirk Cousins is on 31 in 2022 and 35 in 2023 😂)

Those cap numbers will allow the Packers to build a really solid team around Rodgers for the next three years.

Then after 2024 he will be the only player to have played 20 years with the same team and likely retires. (Or we trade him/extend him - in terms of the cap a cut or trade is the same as a retirement).

Assuming he retires, in 2025 we have a 45m dead cap it. That seems more than fine to me. One year to tank for 3 more shots at a SB.  Most teams in the NFL would kill for that. 

By 2025 the cap will likely be close to 300m anyway and we'll either have a QB on a rookie deal or be doing a tear down, get a high draft pick and grab our QB of the future in 2025.

Amazing work from the Packers. Three legit shots at a ring, then a rebuilding year, and off we go again.

If you believe Rodgers is just bad in the playoffs and is now some kind of choke artist then you probably hate this. But I take the view it's pretty much luck in the post season and you just need to get hot for a couple of games.  Getting to the playoffs should be easy enough and Rodgers and MLF give us a punchers chance to win another ring. 

This year they are still 7M over the cap so they either need to work **** out with Davante or get Jaire extended or cut Crosby/Cobb or work on a few of the smaller cap hits that can be adjusted (Lowry, Amos).

Next year they at least have about $70M though that isn't counting new contracts for Adams/Alexander/Gary/Jenkins (who I would see as the locks to get extended) plus Savage and Amos.

When you're paying WR1 money, CB1 money, NT1 money, QB1 money, and eventually EDGE1 money...you eventually run out of flexibility for free agents.

So we better hope Gute knocks it out of the park with draft picks.

[15412]

20 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Good one. Packers don't go to the NFC championship 3/3 years and Rodgers gets a reputation among troll homers for losing in first round of the playoffs.

And I'm actually most interested in the last 12 years of not making it to the big game, not so much just the playoff wins.  As a starter, ol Rodg has more playoff losses than wins.

[PackFan13]

I love that arm chair GM's think Rodgers is the biggest reason we haven't won the Superbowl since 2010. The narrative of him playing awful is also hilarious. Brady throws 3 int's against us in 2020 and Rodgers sucks because he didn't run the ball in at the end. 

HOF qbs like the Mannings say how normal say in what's going on is with superstars and you all act like he's asking for the world and controls all that they do. Some of you need to realize your 30k posts on a ancient website doesn't mean you know what you're talking about. Let's run it back instead of being stuck in mediocrity. 

I've never seen so many grown men take something way too seriously 😂