Rodgers to the Jets Trade Discussion

[squire12]

4 minutes ago, BlaZeN37 said:

And I’m telling you, not trading Rodgers for lesser compensation than desired just out of spite would be a historically bad business move and would almost assuredly cost Gutey his job. 

Gutey can “cave” and it won’t lead to his firing. His job security is directly tied to the future success of Jordan Love. He has no reason to even risk the worst case scenario coming true over getting a little less compensation than he wants. 

I think the key piece is "what does GB desire as trade value for Rodgers"?

I personally don't think it's 2 firsts as some are suggesting..... but it's also probably not a day 3 pick as some Jets fans are suggesting.

[coachbuns]

1 hour ago, packfanfb said:

This is what I keep coming back to. What are we doing here?

Jets: We want the 4-time MVP because it's him or bust in trying to get us to the SB.

GB: Okay, well we want your 1st round pick. Jets: No that's too much.

GB: Well then we want Johnson or Moore on their rookie deal. Jets: No, we're not interested in that. 

GB: okay, no problem, here's Rodgers for your 3rd rounder. Lmao.

Fire Gute tomorrow if that happens.

No doubt but that just isn't going to happen .. if it does, the entire state of Wisconsin and Packer fans throughout the nation would revolt.  

[coachbuns]

26 minutes ago, BlaZeN37 said:

To be fair, I find Jet fans saying “we can just pivot back to Zach Wilson” to be just as disingenuous as Packer fans saying they can hold onto Rodgers this year. However, the long-term ramifications of GB keeping Rodgers this year is far worse than the Jets having to acquire & start a veteran QB like Ryan Tannehill or Teddy Bridgewater. Because of this, the Jets are the only team with any kind of leverage (and it’s not much). 

My belief is both teams are probably much closer to a deal then us fans are to agreeing on fair value. I think Rodgers is worth a late 1st round pick (at least in total value of compensation), but firmly believe he’s not worth the 13th overall pick. Something near a 2nd/3rd this year and a conditional 2nd/3rd in ‘24 that can escalate to a 1st rounder with realistic conditions based on Rodgers play (not team success), IE. Packers get a 1st if Rodgers throws for 4,000 yards and 30 TDs. Could also see the Jets sending the Packers a mid-round pick (4th?) in ‘25 if Rodgers plays in 2024.

There should absolutely be no contingencies how well Rodgers plays.  Everybody is worried he'll only play one year .. if he plays in year two that's what counts.  I don't give a crap how many yards or tds he throws that 2nd year.  If he shows up on game day 1 the 2nd year the Jets owe compensation and it had better be a 1 or a 2. 

[fattlipp]

Sad it got this ugly

1(13)

2024 3rd that becomes a 2nd if Jets make the playoffs, becomes a 1st if Jet make the Super Bowl.

2025 3rd if he plays in 2024.

If they did this every Packer fan would have became a Jets fan…

NOW… we want them to crash and burn like a cheesehead in a steel drum.

 

 

Edited March 20, 2023 by fattlipp

[Scoremore]

1 hour ago, BlaZeN37 said:

I find this stance to be incredibly disingenuous, and I keep seeing it mentioned on here and Twitter. Can the Packers keep Rodgers in a literal sense? Sure, but would they ever? Absolutely not. It would be significantly more beneficial for them to trade Rodgers for a future 7th round pick than it would be to not trade him before the season. Which is why I can’t help but shake my head when someone acts like the Packers can or would just hold onto Aaron if they don’t get what they are asking for. 

Keep telling yourself that.  You think the Jets are the only team that's interested in Rodgers.  So now it's we would be lucky to deal him for a 7th.  GTFO...Packers sure as hell can keep him.  The longer this drags on the more risk there is to the Jets.  But keep screwing around and find out.  Then you can cry to your GM for blowing the deal.  Good luck with Wilson next season.  

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, BlaZeN37 said:

My belief is both teams are probably much closer to a deal then us fans are to agreeing on fair value. I think Rodgers is worth a late 1st round pick (at least in total value of compensation), but firmly believe he’s not worth the 13th overall pick. Something near a 2nd/3rd this year and a conditional 2nd/3rd in ‘24 that can escalate to a 1st rounder with realistic conditions based on Rodgers play (not team success), IE. Packers get a 1st if Rodgers throws for 4,000 yards and 30 TDs. Could also see the Jets sending the Packers a mid-round pick (4th?) in ‘25 if Rodgers plays in 2024.

Probably so.  But I think you're doing a disservice by discrediting the difference between the Jets' SRP and their 3rd round pick.  Plus, if you're trading less now you have to be willing to trade more in the future.  If I'm accepting a 3rd round pick instead of a SRP, the conditions on that pick better be substantially more achievable than it would be if they were giving us a SRP this year.

[packerstk7]

I think the leverage that the Jets would have over the Packers is more cap based, whereas the leverage that the Packers have over the Jets is more PR based. You’re telling me the Jets are just going to go from having a guy who won back to back MVPs less than 2 years ago to Zach Wilson and not get massive backlash from their fans and media? Or even if they went to someone like Tanehill?

So basically you’re looking at which team wants to face their respective consequences less. I think the Jets consequences will be much more immediate (ie we are going into camp with Wilson) than the Packers.

Edited March 20, 2023 by packerstk7

[Packerraymond]

I'm still betting on this getting done this week. There's just too many ways to skin the cat on this one. The Jets have picks and multiple young players that wouldn't be starters they could dangle. 

Everyone wants to argue about leverage but at the end of the day, I don't think either GM wants this to carry on. I'm sure they want to hit some of the big pro days coming up and dig into their top 30 visits without this looming over their heads. Plus the ****-show the pre-draft and draft day media availability would turn out for both if Rodgers is still on our roster.

[DWhitehurst]

22 hours ago, BlaZeN37 said:

And I’m telling you, not trading Rodgers for lesser compensation than desired just out of spite would be a historically bad business move and would almost assuredly cost Gutey his job. 

Gutey can “cave” and it won’t lead to his firing. His job security is directly tied to the future success of Jordan Love. He has no reason to even risk the worst case scenario coming true over getting a little less compensation than he wants. 

Bad business move? Yes, water is wet. If we are talking objective math, a 3rd round pick for Rodgers is certainly worth more than no pick at all. Can't argue with that. But as others have pointed out, as far as the value of PR & Brand Image moves go? Hashtag #FireGute will have gotten alot more subscribers.

"Remember when we gave up our 4time MVP QB to the Jets for a 3rd round pick? Yeah, what a great business move that was!" 

...Says no fan ever.  Ridiculous take.

No matter what cap hell figures you throw out, it still doesn't infallibly answer from both a business and a PR standpoint the questions of "Why absolutely now rather than after June 1st?" and "Why absolutely must it be with the Jets?"  Oh, but that is "scorched earth mentality" to pose such questions!  Heck, I myself was never expecting two 1st round picks as trade comp (and no one knows if the Packers were ever asking that much). But I also wasn't expecting "Just a 3rd round pick is fair because you Packers are in cap hell and have no other options but us Jets." If saying GFY to that is "scorched earth mentality", then we need more of it. 

Edited March 20, 2023 by DWhitehurst

[fistfullofbeer]

2 hours ago, BlaZeN37 said:

And I’m telling you, not trading Rodgers for lesser compensation than desired just out of spite would be a historically bad business move and would almost assuredly cost Gutey his job. 

Gutey can “cave” and it won’t lead to his firing. His job security is directly tied to the future success of Jordan Love. He has no reason to even risk the worst case scenario coming true over getting a little less compensation than he wants. 

One thing I have learnt from watching enough hockey trades is that GM's will generally not try to "screw" other GM's over. Fans can talk all about "fair value" or "position of strength" and while that may have an element of truth , at the end of the day GM's want to built a reputation as that of a reasonable GM if they plan to continue dealing with other GM's.

Like many others have said, I don't think the hold up is about the draft pick round(s) but more about the draft year(s). I am fairly certain GB would have just come out and said that there is no deal yet as there specs have not ironed out before the media got hold of the narrative that GB to Jets was "done".

Also, your statement about worst case scenario talks about getting a little less compensation. The worst case scenario here would not be about "little less" compensation. We would be talking about going from, lets say, a 2nd round pick to 5th round pick. That is a massive difference.

But again, I would be pretty surprised if the holding pattern is about the round of the pick(s).

 

[TransientTexan]

2 hours ago, BlaZeN37 said:

And I’m telling you, not trading Rodgers for lesser compensation than desired just out of spite would be a historically bad business move and would almost assuredly cost Gutey his job. 

Gutey can “cave” and it won’t lead to his firing. His job security is directly tied to the future success of Jordan Love. He has no reason to even risk the worst case scenario coming true over getting a little less compensation than he wants. 

You will never win negotiations if you aren’t willing to walk away from the table at a certain point.

You are bouncing around all over the place. “getting a *little* less compensation than he wants”. a second ago, you were talking about a conditional 7th rounder. Nobody is arguing that GB can’t budge *at all*. That’s a strawman. 

[Norm]

Reading the last few pages on this in the NYJ forum was annoying af lol

[DWhitehurst]

15 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

You will never win negotiations if you aren’t willing to walk away from the table at a certain point.

You are bouncing around all over the place. “getting a *little* less compensation than he wants”. a second ago, you were talking about a conditional 7th rounder. Nobody is arguing that GB can’t budge *at all*. That’s a strawman. 

I would contend that if, hypothetically, the Jets with an arrogant snicker were offering just a 3rd round pick now for Rodgers, then walking away from the table from them now, waiting till after June 1st and ending up taking a 5th round pick from, say, the Texans, is a better PR/Brand Image move, provided you explain to the fans you didn't feel it best to hastily take the first lowball offer that came around. That's just my opinion. And given this is an entertainment industry, maintaining a self-respecting brand image is also a business decision.

[BlaZeN37]

1 hour ago, fistfullofbeer said:

Also, your statement about worst case scenario talks about getting a little less compensation. The worst case scenario here would not be about "little less" compensation. We would be talking about going from, lets say, a 2nd round pick to 5th round pick. That is a massive difference.

But again, I would be pretty surprised if the holding pattern is about the round of the pick(s).

 

I was referred to Gutey taking a little less now to avoid the chance of the worst case scenario (IE. not holding out for #13). I’ve seen some GB fans suggest that Gutey would be on the hot seat if he accepted anything less than #13. I just don’t think that’s the case, nor do I believe he will get the 13th pick.

I agree though. This should all be over soon and we can move on with our lives. 

43 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

You will never win negotiations if you aren’t willing to walk away from the table at a certain point.

You are bouncing around all over the place. “getting a *little* less compensation than he wants”. a second ago, you were talking about a conditional 7th rounder. Nobody is arguing that GB can’t budge *at all*. That’s a strawman. 

See above. Also, couple of you have misinterpreted my “conditional 7th” remark. That’s not what I think he is worth or what the Packers will get. My point was the Packers would benefit more for trading him for almost nothing then to keep him.

 

[oldmansmell]

3 hours ago, packerstk7 said:

I think the leverage that the Jets would have over the Packers is more cap based

The deal is upwards of...15 million for them, what? Again I expect the Packers aren't even considering the dead hit, and therefore expect premium compensation.

Like in what world do the Jets live in? Stafford, and again I'm saying Stafford, got traded for two firsts plus a #1 overall pick. Regardless of the contract, that is facts, and he was 34. Every contract besides Watson and Wilson are year to year contracts, that's the going rate of compensation - pay it. We are giving you a player two years removed from winning the mvp at 15 million, give us 13.