Rodgers to the Jets Trade Discussion

[hitnhope]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

NOBODY is trading a reigning MVP.  That's a GREAT way for Gute to lose job quickly.  If Rodgers continues to play at an MVP level, and your hand-picked replacement flames out then Gute's out of a job.  It's a LOT easier to justify  moving on from Aaron this offseason because he's "regressed".  But imagine shipping out an MVP and his replacement is a bust.  You're not going to be able to see the fruits of your trade.  And despite your opinion, people aren't blaming Rodgers for everything.  But Rodgers absolutely deserves a fair share of blame.

If you weren't willing to trade Rodgers than you shouldn't have drafted Love in the first place.  The two moves go together.

If the negative played out than he deserved to lose his job.  That would mean his entire plan blew up in his face. 

Scared people don't make strong leaders.

[CWood21]

7 minutes ago, hitnhope said:

If you weren't willing to trade Rodgers than you shouldn't have drafted Love in the first place.  The two moves go together.

If the negative played out than he deserved to lose his job.  That would mean his entire plan blew up in his face. 

Scared people don't make strong leaders.

You're either intentionally missing the significant event that changed the ENTIRE dynamic or you're being intentionally obtuse.  Aaron Rodgers was 36 years old and coming off one of his worst seasons as a pro.  If you could have polled the GMs, one (maybe 2) GM might have said he had another MVP season in him, but I very much doubt anyone predicted he was going to go on to win back-to-back MVPs.  The Packers hedged their bets that Aaron was in decline by taking Jordan Love.  And then the situation changed when Rodgers went on to win back-to-back MVPs.  LIS, it's easy to say in hindsight that they should have traded Rodgers last year.  But no GM in their right mind is trading their reigning MVP.

You call it "being scared", I call it doing the normal thing.

[hitnhope]

There was nothing in 2020 that suggested Rodgers talents had diminished.  He stated at the time he wanted to play at least 5 more years.

You're intentionally missing the personality that Rodgers has shown clearly through his time in GB.  If you thought you could draft Love and not have it lead to issues you were deluding yourself and not understanding the petty that is/was AR.  If you deem it still the right move to bring in that drama you better be ready to carry out the plan completely.  AR has not and will never forgive the Packers for drafting his replacement.  It has been a series of punishments, and passive aggressive communications between the parties since.

So even giving you that it would be tough to trade a 2 time MVP, then how do you excuse the contract extension and all that comes with it given last year?  

I said that they needed to trade him last year, but I was wrong in this forum's eyes then.  Yes, sometimes doing the normal thing is a big mistake.  It should have been apparent to Packer leadership last year that the normal thing would hurt the organization in the long run.   The Packers leaders did the wrong thing out of concern for their jobs.   Scared leaders aren't the best leaders.

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, hitnhope said:

There was nothing in 2020 that suggested Rodgers talents had diminished.  He stated at the time he wanted to play at least 5 more years.

At what point during that 2020 season did you think Rodgers was going to win one, let alone 2 MVPs?

[hitnhope]

I thought it was possible all along.  I would not have predicted it in advance.  Is that what you are looking for?

[Norm]

3 hours ago, TransientTexan said:

Which teams in the NFL drafted better during this stretch? I’m curious to see your ranking.

This isn't the trap you think it is. They have a completely warped view of what a draft is because they can look back years later at all the guys we "whiffed" on, as if they wanted all those guys. They also put that same standard on about every GM. Reality of the draft isn't a thing. They posted their name once so they wanted them SOOOOO bad and they're a genius and 31 stupid GMs passed on what guy(s) they just knew would be great.

Just more average IQ mother ****ers trying to convince themselves they're really smart. 

[Norm]

2 hours ago, incognito_man said:

Ugh, I thought we were done responding to those two

I was getting bored with half the pages being ignored posts though.

[beekay414]

2 minutes ago, Norm said:

Just more average IQ mother ****ers trying to convince themselves they're really smart. 

[15412]

Who gives a flying frack about MVP's?   His refusal to throw to the whole field, ignoring open receivers early, keeping picks low to pad his stats at times very likely hurting the chance for big plays etc etc gave him a pretty regular season personal award but how did that help the team in the post season?   He most definitely should have been traded last year when he was sitting in Kalifornia pouting and pissing on the team.  And what did it bring us to keep him?   A bloated contract gauging our cap and the opportunity cost of the loss of multiple high picks.  A Russ Wilson kind of return minus the little we'll get for him now with the cap ramifications.  Hell yeah he should have been traded, and that idea could have easily been sold to the Board then.

[Norm]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

You're either intentionally missing the significant event that changed the ENTIRE dynamic or you're being intentionally obtuse.  Aaron Rodgers was 36 years old and coming off one of his worst seasons as a pro.  If you could have polled the GMs, one (maybe 2) GM might have said he had another MVP season in him, but I very much doubt anyone predicted he was going to go on to win back-to-back MVPs.  The Packers hedged their bets that Aaron was in decline by taking Jordan Love.  And then the situation changed when Rodgers went on to win back-to-back MVPs.  LIS, it's easy to say in hindsight that they should have traded Rodgers last year.  But no GM in their right mind is trading their reigning MVP.

You call it "being scared", I call it doing the normal thing.

Let's still be honest, GMs absolutely at times do things to try and "survive " over what they might truly thing is best long term if they know they couldn't get canned and got to see it all play out. I'm not saying that's Gute, but it's certainly possible. But yeah that's just beyond ballsy to do, even though I wanted to.

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, 15412 said:

Who gives a flying frack about MVP's

Clowns who don't have arguments against anything else you said after that.

[TransientTexan]

7 minutes ago, Norm said:

This isn't the trap you think it is. They have a completely warped view of what a draft is because they can look back years later at all the guys we "whiffed" on, as if they wanted all those guys. They also put that same standard on about every GM. Reality of the draft isn't a thing. They posted their name once so they wanted them SOOOOO bad and they're a genius and 31 stupid GMs passed on what guy(s) they just knew would be great.

Just more average IQ mother ****ers trying to convince themselves they're really smart. 

The point isn’t about able to predict who is going to hit. The point more for these types to notice how many whiffs most other teams have mixed in with the hits. They almost never realize this, esp w/ Day 3 picks. 

[Norm]

4 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

The point isn’t about able to predict who is going to hit. The point more for these types to notice how many whiffs most other teams have mixed in with the hits. They almost never realize this, esp w/ Day 3 picks. 

For sure. But you aren't going to get this from them. 

They'll either 

A: Ignore you

B: Show you a short period where a GM was on fire that's a bit outlierish

C: Pretend all GMs suck.

Also he built in this "extra" qualifier. Gute actually has to be BETTER than everyone else because he supposedly is so bad at FA, has no money, and paid AR too much.

There's no winning. It's a rigged game against a biased *** dimwit. 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Norm

[TransientTexan]

8 minutes ago, 15412 said:

Who gives a flying frack about MVP's?   His refusal to throw to the whole field, ignoring open receivers early, keeping picks low to pad his stats at times very likely hurting the chance for big plays etc etc gave him a pretty regular season personal award but how did that help the team in the post season?   He most definitely should have been traded last year when he was sitting in Kalifornia pouting and pissing on the team.  And what did it bring us to keep him?   A bloated contract gauging our cap and the opportunity cost of the loss of multiple high picks.  A Russ Wilson kind of return minus the little we'll get for him now with the cap ramifications.  Hell yeah he should have been traded, and that idea could have easily been sold to the Board then.

I can’t speak for others, but I was on-board with the idea of trading him for a haul back then. Regardless of the MVP’s.  We had reached our limit in the playoffs. 

sure, the talking heads, sensationalists, and knuckle-draggers would have then tried to spin narratives about how GB doesn’t treat their stars right, but they are still trying to spin that narrative now, regardless, so look where that got us. Even after GB bent over backwards to bring him back with kabillions of money & organizational control, in order to allow the possibility of letting him retire as a Packer. 

 

[Rainmaker90]

4 hours ago, CWood21 said:

NOBODY is trading a reigning MVP.  That's a GREAT way for Gute to lose job quickly.  If Rodgers continues to play at an MVP level, and you’re hand-picked replacement flames out then Gute's out of a job.  It's a LOT easier to justify  moving on from Aaron this offseason because he's "regressed".  But imagine shipping out an MVP and his replacement is a bust.  You're not going to be able to see the fruits of your trade.  And despite your opinion, people aren't blaming Rodgers for everything.  But Rodgers absolutely deserves a fair share of blame.

It’s a pointless exercise to try to explain it. They cannot comprehend the Significant risk and malpractice it would have been because last year did not turn out in our favor and where we’re at now.