QB Talk Once Again.... sigh

[NYJets4716]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

NOTHING about this Rodgers' situation isn't complicated.  Hell, he's a complicated guy himself.  And you're also taking him at face value.  This was the same guy that said he was immunized rather than saying he was vaccinated.  He chooses his words purposefully.  And it's usually to mislead.  He's talked over and over again about legacy, and that he clearly values it highly.  Retiring with one team was something Favre wasn't able to do.  That mattered to him.  But it also mattered that the Packers were "shopping" him when he went into the retreat.

The Packers want value.  The Jets want protection.  That's about as close to meeting in the middle as we're going to get.

The Packers want to move on, take what you can get. There is no scenario where Rodgers returns as the Packers QB, so you literally have no leverage other than dragging this on and making it ugly for Rodgers.

[CWood21]

Just now, NYJets4716 said:

The Packers want to move on, take what you can get. There is no scenario where Rodgers returns as the Packers QB, so you literally have no leverage other than dragging this on and making it ugly for Rodgers.

There's a very small (<1%) chance that the Packers decide the return is so mediocre that they tell him to collect his paycheck and sit at home.  Like Andrew Brandt (former Packers' FO personnel) said, it won't get to that.  But the Jets' "deadline" is before Green Bay's.

[NYJets4716]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

By that logic, every time a player asks to be traded they should forget their priorities and trade him for a bag of peanuts?  If Quinnen Wiliams called up Joe Douglas and said he wanted to be traded, would you be happy if they traded him for a conditional Day 3 pick?  Hell no.

That is different and you know that. Rodgers might play 1 year. If Rodgers would give us 4-5 years, sure I'd give up multiple firsts for him. 

Quinnen Williams is a in his prime franchise player,  not even close to the same thing. This situation is the Packers want and have to move on from Rodgers, they need to start Love next season to see if they should do a 5th year option.  The Packers made it clear they want to be rid of Rodgers, so this is from them.

You lose trade value when you make it clear you want to get rid of a player. 

Luckily, I don't think the Packers will drag this out and make it ugly. I think they end up taking what they can get. 

[CWood21]

Just now, NYJets4716 said:

That is different and you know that. Rodgers might play 1 year. If Rodgers would give us 4-5 years, sure I'd give up multiple firsts for him. 

Quinnen Williams is a in his prime franchise player,  not even close to the same thing. This situation is the Packers want and have to move on from Rodgers, they need to start Love next season to see if they should do a 5th year option.  The Packers made it clear they want to be rid of Rodgers, so this is from them.

You lose trade value when you make it clear you want to get rid of a player. 

Luckily, I don't think the Packers will drag this out and make it ugly. I think they end up taking what they can get. 

This is amusing.  The Packers should "do right" by Rodgers and trade him for peanuts, but the Jets shouldn't do the same for Quinnen Williams.  For all that we know, Quinnen Williams might retire after this year.

Team X has player Team Y wants.  That creates leverage in itself.

[NYJets4716]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

There's a very small (<1%) chance that the Packers decide the return is so mediocre that they tell him to collect his paycheck and sit at home.  Like Andrew Brandt (former Packers' FO personnel) said, it won't get to that.  But the Jets' "deadline" is before Green Bay's.

Rodgers has stated himself, that there is no chance the Packers say "the Jets offer isn't enough so you are returning". They aren't going to drag this on and make it ugly, they will take what they can get. 

 

The Jets and Packers had a understanding of what it would take before they allowed us to talk to him, if the Jets knew their demands were 1s, they would have signed Carr.  

And GB has a deadline, draft is next month, you want no 2023 pick? 

[CWood21]

Just now, NYJets4716 said:

The Jets and Packers had a understanding of what it would take before they allowed us to talk to him, if the Jets knew their demands were 1s, they would have signed Carr.  

And GB has a deadline, draft is next month, you want no 2023 pick? 

I'd prefer 2023 picks.  But if the package isn't good, I'm willing to wait until after the draft and hope that the package improves.

[NYJets4716]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

This is amusing.  The Packers should "do right" by Rodgers and trade him for peanuts, but the Jets shouldn't do the same for Quinnen Williams.  For all that we know, Quinnen Williams might retire after this year.

Team X has player Team Y wants.  That creates leverage in itself.

Trading him for say a 2023 3rd, and a 2024 conditional draft pick that can be a 1 if we make the SB is not peanuts. You need conditions in order to get a 1, like Rodgers gets us a division title, SB, or something that showed it was worth it. Trading a 13th overall pick for a guy who might get injured or only be here 1 year is insane. I highly doubt any team would do that. 

You are also getting rid of Rodgers contract, able to move on to Love like they want to do. 

Was Favre traded for peanuts? Cause that is the most realistic trade comparison. 

[xrade]

33 minutes ago, doumeyer said:

The only reason why we don't have money is because Rodgers & the Packers has our money tied up in the Rodgers deal. Just last year Douglas picked up five free agents alone, JR Reed, Conklin, TOMLISON, Whiehead,  Zuerlilen. If our money wasn't' tied up i am sure Douglas would have gotten us a FA or two.

.

So what.  Teams that spend big in FA are usually the more talent deficient teams that need to.  We spent big in FA many, many times and that got us where exactly?  That's right nowhere.  Also, we signed Lazard, Williams, Huff, Zuerlein, Schweitzer, Parks and traded for Clark.  By my math that is 6 FA's and 1 trade for peanuts.

Now tell me, who was we missed out on that you wanted so badly?

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, NYJets4716 said:

Trading him for say a 2023 3rd, and a 2024 conditional draft pick that can be a 1 if we make the SB is not peanuts. You need conditions in order to get a 1, like Rodgers gets us a division title, SB, or something that showed it was worth it. Trading a 13th overall pick for a guy who might get injured or only be here 1 year is insane. I highly doubt any team would do that. 

You are also getting rid of Rodgers contract, able to move on to Love like they want to do. 

Was Favre traded for peanuts? Cause that is the most realistic trade comparison. 

That's a FAR cry from some of the offers that have been discussed here and in NFL General.  I don't think there's a SINGLE Packer fan expecting multiple guaranteed FRPs for Rodgers.  At least not one that posts with regularity in the Packers' subforum.

Trade values are largely dictated by market (in the sense of who is trying to acquire him) and previous trades.  Matt Ryan was traded last offseason for a single 3rd round pick (#82).  The Jets' 3rd round pick (#74) is close enough that you would likely call it a wash.  So what you're telling me is that you think that the difference between Matt Ryan (in his final season with Atlanta) and Aaron Rodgers (in his final year with Green Bay) is a conditional future pick.  Presumably one in which that the risk of a big return for Green Bay is highly unlikely unless everything breaks the Jets' way.

[GangGreen420]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

That's a FAR cry from some of the offers that have been discussed here and in NFL General.  I don't think there's a SINGLE Packer fan expecting multiple guaranteed FRPs for Rodgers.  At least not one that posts with regularity in the Packers' subforum.

Trade values are largely dictated by market (in the sense of who is trying to acquire him) and previous trades.  Matt Ryan was traded last offseason for a single 3rd round pick (#82).  The Jets' 3rd round pick (#74) is close enough that you would likely call it a wash.  So what you're telling me is that you think that the difference between Matt Ryan (in his final season with Atlanta) and Aaron Rodgers (in his final year with Green Bay) is a conditional future pick.  Presumably one in which that the risk of a big return for Green Bay is highly unlikely unless everything breaks the Jets' way.

And that’s why unless another team jumps in, they are going to take what the Jets offer.

[NYJets4716]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

That's a FAR cry from some of the offers that have been discussed here and in NFL General.  I don't think there's a SINGLE Packer fan expecting multiple guaranteed FRPs for Rodgers.  At least not one that posts with regularity in the Packers' subforum.

Trade values are largely dictated by market (in the sense of who is trying to acquire him) and previous trades.  Matt Ryan was traded last offseason for a single 3rd round pick (#82).  The Jets' 3rd round pick (#74) is close enough that you would likely call it a wash.  So what you're telling me is that you think that the difference between Matt Ryan (in his final season with Atlanta) and Aaron Rodgers (in his final year with Green Bay) is a conditional future pick.  Presumably one in which that the risk of a big return for Green Bay is highly unlikely unless everything breaks the Jets' way.

Rodgers was 90% retired, only gonna give us maybe 1 year. So, his "trade value" goes down.  Especially when there is no scenario where the Packers keep him, they made it very clear they want him off the team. So, all the Jets have to do is wait, let the Packers destroy their relationship with Rodgers, or have Rodgers show up at their facilities and push Love to the side. 

[CWood21]

Just now, GangGreen420 said:

And that’s why unless another team jumps in, they are going to take what the Jets offer.

So...the Packers should simply roll over at the first (mediocre) offer the Jets make simply because the Jets think they're the only team that is going to trade for him?

[CWood21]

Just now, NYJets4716 said:

Rodgers was 90% retired, only gonna give us maybe 1 year. So, his "trade value" goes down.  Especially when there is no scenario where the Packers keep him, they made it very clear they want him off the team. So, all the Jets have to do is wait, let the Packers destroy their relationship with Rodgers, or have Rodgers show up at their facilities and push Love to the side. 

You got to stop believing every word he says.  This is the same guy that intentionally used the word "immunized" instead of "vaccinated".  And if you listen to his entire interview, it was essentially throwing the FO under the bus. He's making it look like the Packers' FO was the one who drove him out of Green Bay.  LIS from the beginning, neither Rodgers nor the Packers' FO wanted to be the ones to appear to be forcing Rodgers out of Green Bay.

And do the Jets not want Rodgers in there for training camp and OTAs?  You act like Rodgers showing up the day before Week 1 and the offense is going to run as smooth as can be.

[GangGreen420]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

So...the Packers should simply roll over at the first (mediocre) offer the Jets make simply because the Jets think they're the only team that is going to trade for him?

No, or else it would be done by now. Maybe the Jets up their offer a little by your FO dragging their feet, but eventually they will have to take it.

[xrade]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So...the Packers should simply roll over at the first (mediocre) offer the Jets make simply because the Jets think they're the only team that is going to trade for him?

Not at all.  They should just roll over because Saleh and LaFleur are great buddies.  It is the nice thing to do amongst friends.