jetfuel34 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 Well looks like the crew is back in New Jersey with no new report. Woody, Saleh, JD and Hackett are all coming back right now as we speak. Maybe they will report a trade when they land. If we don't hear anything by today I think the Jets will look else where. Oh God here comes Jimmy G. GROSS!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYJets4716 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 I mean, it is not a common thing for a team to allow another team to come talk to a player on their team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 52 minutes ago, jetfuel34 said: I agree 100% GB is not getting much for him and will have to eat some of the cap. No one wants him except the Jets. And the alternatives for the Jets are what exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 27 minutes ago, CWood21 said: And the alternatives for the Jets are what exactly? 2 sides... what's the alternative for you guys? Teams aren't exactly lining up for Rodgers. In fact there's just us. So you have 1 alternative it seems and that Jordan Love who no one knows how good he is. What's our options? Kick the tires on a deal for Jackson, sign Jimmy G, draft a QB. etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 hour ago, Rockice_8 said: The problem GB has is everything is going to be contingent because I doubt Rodgers is going "yeah I'm in for at least 2-3 years." He's not like that which means that he has the leverage, the Jets seem like the only suitor for him, and JD never overpays especially for a guy who may be only committing one year at a time. I really think GB is going to be disappointed in this package when no 1st are going back their way. Acting like the Jets aren't limited in their leverage is foolish. What's the Jets' alternative if they're not able to land Aaron Rodgers? They're either stuck overpaying Jimmy G, or they're rolling with some mediocre backup QB as their starting QB. It's not going to be a fortune that the Packers would love to get, but it's not going to going to be for what the Jets view as "extra". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFLGURU Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 (edited) 7 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Acting like the Jets aren't limited in their leverage is foolish. What's the Jets' alternative if they're not able to land Aaron Rodgers? They're either stuck overpaying Jimmy G, or they're rolling with some mediocre backup QB as their starting QB. It's not going to be a fortune that the Packers would love to get, but it's not going to going to be for what the Jets view as "extra". With all the Rodgers frenzy going on in NY, Mr Johnson is going to step up to the podium and say we couldnt come up with a trade agreement?? Good luck with the PR on that Mr Johnson. Edited March 8, 2023 by NFLGURU Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 6 minutes ago, Bobby816 said: 2 sides... what's the alternative for you guys? Teams aren't exactly lining up for Rodgers. In fact there's just us. So you have 1 alternative it seems and that Jordan Love who no one knows how good he is. What's our options? Kick the tires on a deal for Jackson, sign Jimmy G, draft a QB. etc. Jordan Love. I think it's pretty safe to say at this point that the Packers' FO wants Jordan Love to be their starting QB in 2023. At this point, multiple reports have already said as much. But I also do think the Packers' FO is leery about the optics of "forcing out" Rodgers as well. I think the last thing they want is a repeat of the Favre saga, which is why I think it's been rather quiet in regards to Rodgers and the Jets. As for the Jets, if they were in on Lamar Jackson wouldn't they have done so already? And I'd put a LOT of money that the Jets aren't drafting a QB this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Acting like the Jets aren't limited in their leverage is foolish. What's the Jets' alternative if they're not able to land Aaron Rodgers? They're either stuck overpaying Jimmy G, or they're rolling with some mediocre backup QB as their starting QB. It's not going to be a fortune that the Packers would love to get, but it's not going to going to be for what the Jets view as "extra". Obviously the option of Rodgers is the best for us. But there are options for us after that. Jimmy G, even Lamar we could look into. Tannehill, etc. Yes there's a clear downgrade in talent from Rodgers to those other FAs. And Jackson seems unrealistic. But there's options. But GB has no leverage. The alternative if he's done in GB and they wont trade him for a Jet friendly package... is him retiring and you guys paying a guy who's on the beach a ton of money. So yes there's WAY more leverage with us. If there were more suitors than just us. That'd be different. From the get go this situation was always the teams trading for Rodgers held the leverage. Now that it appears to be just us in. Who are we bidding against? What is GB saying no thank you to and we'll take this instead to? Paying a guy to retire? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 Just now, NFLGURU said: With all the Rodgers frenzy going on in NY, Mr Johnson is going to step up to the podium and say we couldnt come up with an agreement?? Good luck with the PR on that Mr Johnson. At this point, I think it's going to be hard for either side to come back from this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Jordan Love. I think it's pretty safe to say at this point that the Packers' FO wants Jordan Love to be their starting QB in 2023. At this point, multiple reports have already said as much. But I also do think the Packers' FO is leery about the optics of "forcing out" Rodgers as well. I think the last thing they want is a repeat of the Favre saga, which is why I think it's been rather quiet in regards to Rodgers and the Jets. As for the Jets, if they were in on Lamar Jackson wouldn't they have done so already? And I'd put a LOT of money that the Jets aren't drafting a QB this year. Interested to think given us as the only suitor. What you think you will get for compensation for Rodgers? Not what you hope. What you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 3 minutes ago, Bobby816 said: Obviously the option of Rodgers is the best for us. But there are options for us after that. Jimmy G, even Lamar we could look into. Tannehill, etc. Yes there's a clear downgrade in talent from Rodgers to those other FAs. And Jackson seems unrealistic. But there's options. Except outside of Lamar Jackson, none of those QBs are Super Bowl winning caliber QBs. We've seen what Jimmy G can do, and he's getting older and he's got injury concerns himself. Ryan Tannehill is the definition of QB purgatory. The Jets' options at QB aren't as fruitful as I think you're making them out to be. They have options, but only 2 of those options have any real upside. If your goal is just to make the playoffs and hope that you get a bunch of luck bouncing your way, go sign Jimmy G. 5 minutes ago, Bobby816 said: But GB has no leverage. The alternative if he's done in GB and they wont trade him for a Jet friendly package... is him retiring and you guys paying a guy who's on the beach a ton of money. So yes there's WAY more leverage with us. Except that's not the case. As I've mentioned, I don't think the Packers' FO wants the optics that they "forced out" Rodgers. I think it'll be eerily similar to the way the Packers handled Favre in that Rodger is going to have to "earn" that starting QB spot against Jordan Love. And that's also assuming that Rodgers wants to continue playing. If my choices are to trade Aaron Rodgers to the Jets for a mediocre return while eating more of his contract or have him retire, I'd take the latter in a heartbeat. Acting like either team has more leverage than the other is foolish. 8 minutes ago, Bobby816 said: If there were more suitors than just us. That'd be different. From the get go this situation was always the teams trading for Rodgers held the leverage. Now that it appears to be just us in. Who are we bidding against? What is GB saying no thank you to and we'll take this instead to? Paying a guy to retire? Except it only takes 1 team to create a market. More than one creates competition, but the market is generated by what a team is willing to give up a player, and what a team needs to get in order to give up a player. Right now, your argument is that the Packers NEED to get rid of Rodgers, and I think based on the comments from Gute (and the rest of the regime) is that that isn't the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby816 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: Except outside of Lamar Jackson, none of those QBs are Super Bowl winning caliber QBs. We've seen what Jimmy G can do, and he's getting older and he's got injury concerns himself. Ryan Tannehill is the definition of QB purgatory. The Jets' options at QB aren't as fruitful as I think you're making them out to be. They have options, but only 2 of those options have any real upside. If your goal is just to make the playoffs and hope that you get a bunch of luck bouncing your way, go sign Jimmy G. Except that's not the case. As I've mentioned, I don't think the Packers' FO wants the optics that they "forced out" Rodgers. I think it'll be eerily similar to the way the Packers handled Favre in that Rodger is going to have to "earn" that starting QB spot against Jordan Love. And that's also assuming that Rodgers wants to continue playing. If my choices are to trade Aaron Rodgers to the Jets for a mediocre return while eating more of his contract or have him retire, I'd take the latter in a heartbeat. Acting like either team has more leverage than the other is foolish. Except it only takes 1 team to create a market. More than one creates competition, but the market is generated by what a team is willing to give up a player, and what a team needs to get in order to give up a player. Right now, your argument is that the Packers NEED to get rid of Rodgers, and I think based on the comments from Gute (and the rest of the regime) is that that isn't the case. For me that bridge is burnt as an outsider looking in. Rodgers options right now are a trade to a team (Jets being the only team known) or retirement. I see no way at all he goes back to GB and "battles" a QB. He'd retire before he'd do that. That's a slap in his face. Give him his 60-70mill or whatever it is to be at home is what he'd say to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 12 minutes ago, Bobby816 said: Interested to think given us as the only suitor. What you think you will get for compensation for Rodgers? Not what you hope. What you think. Honestly, I think there are too many variables involved to be able to give you an accurate opinion. The pick swap plus 2 conditional picks that I mentioned a few months ago sounded fair. I think you're starting with a FRP pick swap and going from there. I don't think the Packers are going to be able to get #13 for Rodgers. But I'm also a believer that picks in the future are inherently less valuable than picks in the present. So arguing that the '24 FRP = #13 is inherently flawed. As I mentioned before, I think the Packers want to get a late FRP worth of value from Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 19 minutes ago, Bobby816 said: For me that bridge is burnt as an outsider looking in. Rodgers options right now are a trade to a team (Jets being the only team known) or retirement. I see no way at all he goes back to GB and "battles" a QB. He'd retire before he'd do that. That's a slap in his face. Give him his 60-70mill or whatever it is to be at home is what he'd say to that. Burnt bridges? No. Point of no return? Probably. And there's a very distinct difference between my opinion and yours. You think there's no way the Packers would bring back Rodgers. I think there Packers' FO has been very non-committal with regards to Jordan Love that they don't want to appear to have "forced out" Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockice_8 Posted March 8, 2023 Share Posted March 8, 2023 47 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Acting like the Jets aren't limited in their leverage is foolish. What's the Jets' alternative if they're not able to land Aaron Rodgers? They're either stuck overpaying Jimmy G, or they're rolling with some mediocre backup QB as their starting QB. It's not going to be a fortune that the Packers would love to get, but it's not going to going to be for what the Jets view as "extra". Not sure what "extra" means but will be shocked if a 1st is going back your way at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.