Jump to content

Rodgers to the Jets Trade Discussion


pgwingman

2023 Rodgers  

100 members have voted

  1. 1. Which team gives Rodgers the best shot in 2023?

    • Packers
      21
    • Somewhere else
      80


Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, packerstk7 said:

I think you’re right. However his rolling eyes at and cursing at guys he sees as making mistakes gets real old. Seems very passive aggressive.

You think he's right? There's 3 options there lol, WHICH one is right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I am torn on this.  Part of me would rather have future compensation linked to some combination of Rodgers performance and team success just because I assume the Jets would almost certainly agree to a higher ceiling on compensation using that model, and I think the Jets ceiling is pretty high with a motivated Rodgers at QB.

I want to apply the bird in hand concept: give me a #1 this year and make 2024 conditional on whatever. Actually dont care.

Give me a #1 for the player that could put you in the SB. Period. Without him - you wont win your Division..again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Chili said:

Indianapolis is one heck of a wild card that might be worth holding off the trade until draft day. We might come out of it better with a #4 FRP instead of #13.

Does Aaron Rodgers have trade veto written into his contract?

His trade veto is telling the other team that he won't play for them, and it is 100% effective.  I don't know why so many fans want to ignore that reality.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

His trade veto is telling the other team that he won't play for them, and it is 100% effective.  I don't know why so many fans want to ignore that reality.

Push comes to shove Rodgers will play.  I don't believe that for a second.  Not only the cash but his competitive desire.  He's playing next year no matter who he's traded too. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

Question for the masses:

Do you think Rodgers personality and off field activities had anything to do with the Packers decision to move him?

No, not at all. It was Love, Rodgers declined play and contract.

Maybe, a little bit,  his exhausting ways didn't help

Yes, dude is getting weird

Your thoughts?  Add your own category if you choose.

None of these is completely right. All of them played a part. 

Rodgers is like a fat, lazy ex-husband who gets pissed because he knows the divorce was his fault, but goes on a diet for a year to trap some other chick he can get fat and lazy with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

I am torn on this.  Part of me would rather have future compensation linked to some combination of Rodgers performance and team success just because I assume the Jets would almost certainly agree to a higher ceiling on compensation using that model, and I think the Jets ceiling is pretty high with a motivated Rodgers at QB.

I can see that.  My issue is if Hackett sucks as a playcaller or injuries hit, or other teams in the AFC rise up, none of those are a direct issue of the asset being traded. The compensation should be for the asset being traded, not solely on how the collective team does.

I'm not sure NYJ are far and away the best team in the division.  In the mix for sure, but Buffalo, Miami are right there.

Buffalo,  Miami, Cincinnati,  Baltimore,  Pittsburgh,  Cleveland,  Jacksonville, KC, LAC..... that's 9 teams 

Let's hypothetically lock in KC, Cincy and Jacksonville as the other division winners.  Leaves Buffalo,  Miami,  Baltimore,  Pittsburgh,  Cleveland,   LAC and NYJ fighting for 4 spots.  AFC East might be toughest division with NE as their 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, squire12 said:

I can see that.  My issue is if Hackett sucks as a playcaller or injuries hit, or other teams in the AFC rise up, none of those are a direct issue of the asset being traded. The compensation should be for the asset being traded, not solely on how the collective team does.

This ^

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scoremore said:

Push comes to shove Rodgers will play.  I don't believe that for a second.  Not only the cash but his competitive desire.  He's playing next year no matter who he's traded too. 

Rodgers may say he will play but just 2023.  That does reduce his trade value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

Question for the masses:

Do you think Rodgers personality and off field activities had anything to do with the Packers decision to move him?

Nope nothing to do with this.  Rodgers has been an excellent face of the franchise.  

No, not at all. It was Love, Rodgers declined play and contract.

This is probably the main reason.   Love has improved.  Rodgers didn't have a great year but he was playing hurt.  The contract was written in such a way that it was logical they were going to trade him this year.  Also Packers don't have the horses or cap space to run it back again and try to win a SB.  

Maybe, a little bit,  his exhausting ways didn't help

Yes, dude is getting weird

Rodgers is not getting weird.  Often misunderstood by those who don't follow him and just read press clippings.  Dude is a smart cat.  

Your thoughts?  Add your own category if you choose.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Rodgers may say he will play but just 2023.  That does reduce his trade value.

Do you really believe that?  Rodgers will play until he can't do it at a high level.  He has said that repeatedly.  Personally I think he can play another 2-3 years at a high level.  The uncertainty does reduce it somewhat that's why 2024 pick needs to be conditional.  I'm not sweating that as I strongly believe he'll be back in 2024.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scoremore said:

Do you really believe that?  Rodgers will play until he can't do it at a high level.  He has said that repeatedly.  Personally I think he can play another 2-3 years at a high level.  The uncertainty does reduce it somewhat that's why 2024 pick needs to be conditional.  I'm not sweating that as I strongly believe he'll be back in 2024.

If he was 90% on retiring this season, I think it's sooner vs later.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, squire12 said:

If he was 90% on retiring this season, I think it's sooner vs later.

He was 90% retiring going back to Green Bay.  The Jets are a different story and a different motivation for him.  Yes. he very well could play 1 year and bail, or go on and play in 2024.

Edited by NFLGURU
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...