Rodgers to the Jets Trade Discussion

[RaidersAreOne]

[NFLGURU]

Im taking McGinns article with a grain of salt.  Do the Packers want to move on from Rodgers?  I could see that, but being disgusted with him doesn't fit what they are doing.

They are going to want a good relationship with him going down the road.  Someday #12 is going to be up there with the other retired numbers, and someday his name will be on the facade.  Bad blood between them doesn't sound like a direction the Packers want to take.  They very well might want to move on, but I don't believe they are "disgusted" with Rodgers.  JMO.

[MacReady]

47 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

You probably don't believe in any conspiracy theories 

Only real ones that are real.

[CWood21]

9 hours ago, packfanfb said:

1. I'd push back on this. The Raiders, even with Rodgers, have zero chance of even winning their division. Mahomes isn't going anywhere and the Raiders would be maybe even with Denver and LAC. The Jets are a better argument, but the NFC North doesn't have a team as good as the Bills. The NFC North will be wide open next year, with arguably the Lions maybe being the best team going into the preseason. That leaves the AFC v. NFC in general. As it currently stands, the AFC dominates in terms of top QBs and overall better teams. It's really not even close. 

It's the Kansas City Chiefs and then everyone else.  Justin Herbert is 25-24 in his career, and 19-15 under Brandon Staley.  We've been waiting for the Chargers to take off, and they just don't seem to be able to.  As for Denver, they were dead last in PPG this past season and that doesn't all lie at the feet of Hackett.  And it's not like Denver was exactly dominant last year as they ranked middle of the pack defensively in terms of PPG.  Maybe Denver puts it all together under Sean Payton, but until I see Russell Wilson play well I'm not going to rush to crown them after their huge flop last year.  The AFC East is just the AFC West just without the upside.  The Bills and Chiefs are comparable.  Both are likely going to be the heavy favorites to win the division.  Miami has a young QB who they're high on, but they're just not a complete team similar to the Chargers.  I don't think New England has the upside that Denver has, but both have outstanding HCs.

As for the NFC North, outside of Chicago I think this is a relatively competitive division.  Minnesota grossly overachieved both in terms of close wins/losses and pythagorean wins/losses.  But they're still a solid team regardless.  Detroit looked the most competent it's looked in probably close to a decade.

9 hours ago, packfanfb said:

2. The Power argument is closer than your "Winning" argument as I agree Rodgers will get some say/power no matter where he goes, but the point here is that LaFleur has basically let Rodgers do whatever he wants. Heck, that's been the complaint I keep hearing non-stop in support of MLF..."well I can't wait to see him actually run his offense once 12 is gone." Can't have it both ways. I think 12 gets away with more here than he would elsewhere. 

Every franchise gives their QB the ability to check plays at the LOS.  At least those that have earned it like Rodgers.  And you really think that if Joe Burrow decides not to show up to OTAs that the Bengals are going to fine him?  That's the life of having a superstar QB.  They pretty much can dictate what they want or don't want to do.  If you don't like it, there's someone else willing to do so.

9 hours ago, packfanfb said:

3. Pressure. Again, I'd push back here. Rodgers has the allegiance of the masses in GB regardless of whether he reaches another SB or not. That can't be said about the 31 other teams who would expect him to bring a championship if signed (especially at that $$) and won't stand behind him when he fails. I don't even think this one is debatable. 

He's gonna have the fans backing as long as he's productive.  It doesn't matter if he's a Packer, a Jet, or an Argonaut (whatever that is).  You think Green Bay fans don't expect Super Bowl wins?  If you would have told me that in 3 decades between Favre and Rodgers that we only have 2 Super Bowl wins, I would have told you were crazy.

[CWood21]

8 hours ago, NFLGURU said:

My hope is he ends up with the Raiders.  If there are conditional picks involved, I don't want him going to the Jets and quiting after a year because they suck and Hackett is the only guy he knows.  He goes to Vegas and they suck,Adams might talk him into another year in 2024.

This all would depend on conditional picks of course. I'm sure teams will want 2 year from Rodgers though.  We'll see.

If Rodgers is traded, does anyone actually expect him to retire after one year?

[Packer_ESP]

13 hours ago, incognito_man said:

 

Nagler is totally indifferent in regards to McGinn.

There. Now all of our bases are covered.

“The internet contains 100% of the truth”

The Incognito Theorem

[Mr Anonymous]

14 hours ago, incognito_man said:

McGinn clearly doesn't have the level of access that @Mr Anonymous has tho

McGinn said Rodgers was gone last year too.

Mr Anonymous 1

Bob McGinn 0

Soon to be 2-0

[Mr Anonymous]

11 hours ago, Brat&Beer said:

Edit: Apparently, elsewhere in he podcast McGinn did say Rodgers would be the backup if the returns to Green Bay. I don't see that happening. 

Imagine whole-throatedly ingesting the notion that Rodgers would stick around as a backup.

Lol at those who jumped on the McGinn piece like Trumpsters ingesting bleach to cure Covid. Not your best day @incognito_man

Edited February 18, 2023 by Mr Anonymous

[HokieHigh]

12 hours ago, mikemike778 said:

You miss the point. By a significant distance.

Not comparing Marino to Rodgers from a playing perspective. Just saying you don't need titles to be memorable (and Rodgers has one anyway). 

There is one thing that Rodgers' career will not be and that's forgettable. Whether you love him or hate him or are annoyed with him or whatever people will remember him in some capacity. I swear that in 50 years AG Green will still be dragging up evidence that Rodgers wasn't as good as he was made out to be.

 

Marino is memorable because he was the most prolific passer in history by an enormous margin, and this was the case well after he retired until Manning came along.

 

At this point, Rodgers does need titles unless you have a think QBR is an important metric. 

[coachbuns]

44 minutes ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Imagine whole-throatedly ingesting the notion that Rodgers would stick around as a backup.

Lol at those who jumped on the McGinn piece like Trumpsters ingesting bleach to cure Covid. Not your best day @incognito_man

Your  1st thought was correct .. Rodgers will never be a back up.  Your 2nd thought was idiotic;  not your best day Mr A.

 

 

[Mr Anonymous]

47 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Your  1st thought was correct .. Rodgers will never be a back up.  Your 2nd thought was idiotic;  not your best day Mr A.

 

 

Oh I know incog wasn't buying into the Rodgers as a backup part of the story. I'll give him much more credit than that. Just having fun tagging him since he's so compelled to tag me every time a story comes out saying the opposite of what I am. It's funny, no one ever tags me on the stories that match what I am saying.

[Mazrimiv]

8 hours ago, NFLGURU said:

Im taking McGinns article with a grain of salt.  Do the Packers want to move on from Rodgers?  I could see that, but being disgusted with him doesn't fit what they are doing.

More like a pillar of salt.  When McGinn gets going on Rodgers, his comments could easily be mistaken for an AG20 post in this forum.

That being said, it's going to be a long off season, so mine as well post every piece of Packers news that helps stir the Rodgers narrative pot. 

A couple interesting quotes from the article... delicious.

Quote

"They don’t see Rodgers as a guy who’s really working hard anymore. They see a guy who — when he reported this year — his body wasn’t so-called ‘tight’ and strong as it was. They see a guy who blew off the off season last year."

"On the other hand, they love Jordan Love. They think he’s the second coming now. They’ve seen enough in practice for three years, that they believe he is like Rodgers 2.0. That’s where this organization is coming from right now."

 

[Scoremore]

2 hours ago, Mr Anonymous said:

McGinn said Rodgers was gone last year too.

Mr Anonymous 1

Bob McGinn 0

Soon to be 2-0

Not so sure this time.  50/50 deal this year maybe less.  Article is complete trash however.  Packers may opt to get there cap situation in order and rebuild at this stage.  Seems unlikely even if Rodgers is back that this is a team able to compete for a championship.  If Rodgers does an Aaron Jones accepts a pay cut and restructure he could be back.  If this happens I'll welcome him back with open arms. 

[Old Guy]

2 hours ago, Mr Anonymous said:

Imagine whole-throatedly ingesting the notion that Rodgers would stick around as a backup.

Lol at those who jumped on the McGinn piece like Trumpsters ingesting bleach to cure Covid. Not your best day @incognito_man

You are a special kind of propagandist. 

[NFLGURU]

10 hours ago, CWood21 said:

 

 

10 hours ago, CWood21 said:

If Rodgers is traded, does anyone actually expect him to retire after one year?

I think it depends on the season they have and Rodgers relationships with his new team.  If Rodgers doesn't commit to 2 years, it going to be tough to get much for him IMO.   If there are conditional picks involved we'll be right back here next year with "is he playing" drama again to get our draft pick(s).  

Edited February 18, 2023 by NFLGURU