OneTwoSixFive Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 1 minute ago, 15412 said: "All this talk of Rodgers being on the team next year "if he wants to be" and (especially from @15412 ) how he HAS TO take a team friendly extension. First off he doesn't have to do anything of the sort. Secondly it is very possible that leaving the team isn't really up to him, being far more to do with the cap situation and management." You are contradicting yourself. It is BECAUSE of the cap situation and management that he WOULD have to take a team friendly deal, or be traded. If he wanted to play that is, and all indications are he does. It is going to be one of the two. The cap and management do have the most to do with that, along with the number 39. If he were a 29 year old to be QB it would be a completely different animal. No contradiction. Rodgers is highly unlikely to take an especially team-friendly contract - nothing in the past suggests he will this time. The Packers have to pay something pretty close to his market value or he is gone. It is because he doesn't have to take a team friendly contract that he IS very likely gone. Either he will be too expensive to afford (for the Packers) or he is traded for cap relief and extra picks for the future - in either case he is gone, by his choice or by the will of management. If your stance was slightly different, something like "The Packers will have to pay something close to market value or lose Rodgers", I wouldn't be disagreeing with you. You make it sound like Rodgers opinion is the only one that matters, and will decide the outcome. This is not necessarily the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15412 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 "It is because he doesn't have to take a team friendly contract" He does indeed have to take a (to a degree) team friendly contract. I thought it was obvious I was talking about in order to stay with the Packers. If he won't do that, and knowing he won't have all his "friends", then he would be traded. Yes, to a team who fits his contract demands better and has the cap room to do it along with adding FA's to support him. To spell it out again, Rodg will accept a team friendly contract to stay a Packer. He must. If not, then he is traded, traded to a team that will give him the extension he seeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Again, your emphasis is that it's all up to Rodgers, not up to how much the Packers are willing to offer (or more to the point how much they can afford to pay), not up to the Packers to decide whether to trade him. Rodgers will have a say, but there are more moving parts than his desires. I was moved to comment because you saw everything from a Rodgers perspective, when managements perspective is at least equally important. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minnypackerfan Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 1 hour ago, 15412 said: "It is because he doesn't have to take a team friendly contract" He does indeed have to take a (to a degree) team friendly contract. I thought it was obvious I was talking about in order to stay with the Packers. If he won't do that, and knowing he won't have all his "friends", then he would be traded. Yes, to a team who fits his contract demands better and has the cap room to do it along with adding FA's to support him. To spell it out again, Rodg will accept a team friendly contract to stay a Packer. He must. If not, then he is traded, traded to a team that will give him the extension he seeks. Maybe they could meet somewhere in the middle. On the open market, Rodgers would probably get a new contract that has a $40-$50 million per annum average pay over a period of 4-5 years. Structure would be the key thing if he wants to stay with GB. GB would need lower cap hits in year 1 & 2 than they have now, but higher in years 3, 4 and 5 when the cap is schedule to go higher. The league is finalizing the new TV deals and GB should now by this offseason what the new contract's implications annually for the salary cap are for future years. So this information may help with how to structure the annual cap hits. I'm not an expert on the salary cap....but my initial thought is to have a contract with a signing bonus of say $50 million with a low salary, followed by a series of annual roster bonus's in the future, but with him having an opt out clause after year 2. I think you could still get the overall value of the contract to be in the $40 to $50 million range on average, but with it starting with a cap hit in year 1 of about $25 million as we still have that signing bonus from his previous deal on the books for 2022 and 2023. We'd still need to restructure a whole bunch of other deals to make this work...but they can if they want to. This type of contract might work for both parties if both are willing to make concessions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 1 hour ago, OneTwoSixFive said: No contradiction. Rodgers is highly unlikely to take an especially team-friendly contract - nothing in the past suggests he will this time. The Packers have to pay something pretty close to his market value or he is gone. It is because he doesn't have to take a team friendly contract that he IS very likely gone. Either he will be too expensive to afford (for the Packers) or he is traded for cap relief and extra picks for the future - in either case he is gone, by his choice or by the will of management. If your stance was slightly different, something like "The Packers will have to pay something close to market value or lose Rodgers", I wouldn't be disagreeing with you. You make it sound like Rodgers opinion is the only one that matters, and will decide the outcome. This is not necessarily the case. The Packers offered him a record contract extension, higher than Mahomes, this offseason and he declined. I get the sense it's no longer about money with Aaron. He's at the point where the final pages of his legacy are going to be written, they won't be as impressive if he's paid what he's worth. Tae is the one that worries me more, I don't think he takes $1 off his demands, with or without Aaron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15412 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 20 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: Again, your emphasis is that it's all up to Rodgers, not up to how much the Packers are willing to offer (or more to the point how much they can afford to pay), not up to the Packers to decide whether to trade him. Rodgers will have a say, but there are more moving parts than his desires. I was moved to comment because you saw everything from a Rodgers perspective, when managements perspective is at least equally important. My view is not from Rodgers perspective, it is from a neutral perspective. The cap, the math, the management tells us the contract to stay with GB must be somewhat team friendly. Dollar wise and out wise for the teams favor. Rodgers can say no to that, forcing a trade. Rodgers can retire. Rodgers can say no I want to go to another team for no reason at all. The team can also say we are trading you, period. Or, offer an extension that would be doable. Those are the options. Rodgers will sign an extension with GB that is favorable to the team or he will be traded. I don't believe he will retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15412 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: The Packers offered him a record contract extension, higher than Mahomes, this offseason and he declined. I get the sense it's no longer about money with Aaron. He's at the point where the final pages of his legacy are going to be written, they won't be as impressive if he's paid what he's worth. Tae is the one that worries me more, I don't think he takes $1 off his demands, with or without Aaron. I hope that's the case. In that event he signs a very favorable extension with GB. He has to do that knowing he won't have all his friends at his side. Adams is a great player and a great person. He deserves the money. That doesn't mean we can pay it, but someone will. I don't think the cap will allow us to tag him. I hope I'm wrong, but I believe he's gone. If you're going to bury yourself in a deep long term contract with a guy he's the one. His position isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFLGURU Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 54 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: The Packers offered him a record contract extension, higher than Mahomes, this offseason and he declined. I get the sense it's no longer about money with Aaron. He's at the point where the final pages of his legacy are going to be written, they won't be as impressive if he's paid what he's worth. Tae is the one that worries me more, I don't think he takes $1 off his demands, with or without Aaron. Adams should go for the big payday. I dont think thats going to be in Green Bay though. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NFLGURU Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Let's face it, we are approaching the end of the Rodgers era. For me I'd much rather trade him for a decent haul and set us up for the future than watch him surrounded by a bunch of practice squad level players and early playoff exit if we make it next year. We got 16 years out of Rodgers and father time is undefeated. He might have 2-3 good years left but what can we afford to put around him?? Nothing I'd like to see more than to build a solid foundation around Love and continue sweeping the Bears. How folded would they be if Love turned out to be decent. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15412 Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 Browns game being moved to Monday, hope that doesn't bump our game with them on Christmas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 17, 2021 Author Share Posted December 17, 2021 10 minutes ago, 15412 said: Browns game being moved to Monday, hope that doesn't bump our game with them on Christmas. It shouldnt. The time span would actually be a day longer than a Thursday game following a Sunday game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted December 17, 2021 Share Posted December 17, 2021 2 hours ago, NFLGURU said: Adams should go for the big payday. I dont think thats going to be in Green Bay though. Kudos to Baker Mayfield for calling the NFL out on this. Glad the NFL came to their senses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted December 18, 2021 Share Posted December 18, 2021 Unless I missed it, Packers didn't put Turner on IR today so that means they think he'll come back within the next 3 weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 18, 2021 Author Share Posted December 18, 2021 31 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Unless I missed it, Packers didn't put Turner on IR today so that means they think he'll come back within the next 3 weeks. Makes sense since he was running / jogging on the sidelines yesterday (or earlier in the week). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Vince Posted December 18, 2021 Share Posted December 18, 2021 On 12/17/2021 at 1:41 PM, Packerraymond said: The Packers offered him a record contract extension, higher than Mahomes, this offseason and he declined. I get the sense it's no longer about money with Aaron. He's at the point where the final pages of his legacy are going to be written, they won't be as impressive if he's paid what he's worth. Tae is the one that worries me more, I don't think he takes $1 off his demands, with or without Aaron. He's good but he can kick rocks if he wants to be the highest paid at 30 on this roster. I pray Gute doesn't give in. Good FA receivers become available all the time, plus it's been proven we can win without him. The Packers are undefeated when he doesn't play. 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.