Random Packer News & Notes

[Leader]

30 minutes ago, 15412 said:

You really are out there in smurf land if you think these two situations are the same!consider all alternatives...

Smurf land? You'll have to tell me how to get there cause I've never been. My comment was a simple response to your declaration that the GB FO would be told by AR of his decision prior to any public comment. I dont see how you would know that and I cited an example of an instance where it wasnt done that way. I think it would be the best way to go - i.e. - telling the FO - but I've nothing to tell me how AR will handle it.

[15412]

29 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

If Green Bay has no plans on trading him, why would they tell him what is being offered in trades and by who? That would only stoke the flames of Rodgers wanting to leave. Why piss the guy off if the intention is to keep him? 

Rodgers himself would want to know, obviously.  He can not know what his options are unless the conversation is opened up to other teams.  I'm sure the teams talked regardless, but if Rodgers asked the team to give Denver permission to speak to him don't you think they'd give that permission?   If they didn't, now THAT would piss Rodg off.  It didn't come to that though, teams reached out to GB with offers (as reported and as common sense tells us) and I have no doubt those possibilities were shared with the Rodg camp.  He wouldn't need to know the compensation, but the destination. By his request or before he could request out of a "courtesy" Rodg was so demonstrative about.  

[Striker]

2 hours ago, Siman08/OH said:

We both know that’s not what I meant,

What I really am trying to convey is how if we keep Rodgers, and win the division and make the playoffs everyone here who’s being a big tough guy about it will be back pedaling like they did this year (until we lost in the playoffs).

Save me the drama. At least I’ll get to enjoy the playoff run without being a tool this year.

I see this take a lot, yet it doesn't really make sense. I'd say that those who have been critical about the team not trading Rodgers while he has higher value/not sacrificing the future in an attempt to run it back (especially as it gets harder to do so) have been pretty consistent in those views. 

 

[Dubz41]

1 hour ago, hitnhope said:

If you think the rest of the league envies our last 3 years I would suggest you have the wrong goal in mind.  We have won a total of ZERO Super bowls in that time frame.

How many posts have we read with people complaining about Rodgers and salary cap issues?    The Rodgers saga was manufactured by Gute.   The salary cap problems are managed by Gute.

We do overall have a very good roster.  that doesn't mean that we haven't messed up in some very key areas.  Such as managing the relationship with the best player on the team who has been key in making that regular season record happen.

He still has done such a poor job with 1/3 of the game (ST) reulting  in the solid roster not yielding any dividends.

I gave the alternate path 3 years ago.  Was ridiculed on this board for saying that the drafting of Love was going to cause a ton of problems.

As I have heard repetitively about Rodgers supporters on this board -  When are you going to escape Gute's jockstrap and see the forest for the tree's?  The guy made the problems of the last couple years, and now is showing signs of fright in carrying out his plan.   After his moves the past couple years with this roster, signing Rodgers to anything like a $50 Million deal should be grounds for having a very short leash.

MLF should be receiving scrutiny as well for his decision in the last 2 NFC championship games to shuffle the OL completely around with very poor results.   Instead it is easier for many to simply blame it all on Rodgers.   While Rodgers could have played better, that line of thinking ignores many fatal decisions along the way. 

 

7 paragraphs of whining.  You claim you gave an alternate path 3 years ago?  What was it?  Or....was it your complaining about drafting Love?  You know....after the fact?  I'll make a guess that you don't have preferred plan, I think you're a backseat driver. 

I think Gute has done a pretty good job.  I think the Packers had a pretty good plan in place.  Then, to everyone's surprise, Rodgers does some self-scouting and turns his career arc around and has two MVP seasons. But, let me guess, YOU knew that was going to happen and Gute is an idiot.

So please, put your hindsight glasses down and let us know what SHOULD happen now?

[AlexGreen#20]

1 hour ago, Sandy said:

Always with the extremes. Not everyone sees the world in absolutes. 

Being able to win with Rodgers is different from anyone saying he'll become a "post season killer". It's really pathetic that you have to put words in everyone's mouth to defend your paper-thin argument. 

Rodgers played fine in the playoffs this year. Not elite, but enough for us to win if everyone else on offense and ST didn't fall apart. 

Yeah bro, you need a QB who is going to make FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS per year to be elite.

And no, the rest of the offense didn't fall apart. 

[AlexGreen#20]

40 minutes ago, Siman08/OH said:

I don’t care if we have a decade of losing seasons, this team is not going to win the Super Bowl minus Rodgers/Adams. We can’t compete. But with them, we have a chance. It’s easy to say 2-3 over the last 3 years but we were also Kevin King away from beating the Bucs 2 years ago. That’s not on Rodgers or the offense. 

RUN IT BACK! And enjoy it before it’s gone.

The goal isn't to compete this year if you trade Rodgers. The goal is to kickstart the rebuild and be competitive for the next decade.

[Mox]

2 hours ago, Siman08/OH said:

We both know that’s not what I meant,

What I really am trying to convey is how if we keep Rodgers, and win the division and make the playoffs everyone here who’s being a big tough guy about it will be back pedaling like they did this year (until we lost in the playoffs).

Save me the drama. At least I’ll get to enjoy the playoff run without being a tool this year.

While this is true if Rodgers price point is $50 million its best to move on and rebuild. He has to take a pay cut for us to compete for a Super Bowl.

[Sandy]

41 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Yeah bro, you need a QB who is going to make FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS per year to be elite.

And no, the rest of the offense didn't fall apart. 

We don't NEED that QB to be making that money...but you can win with him if he and the rest of the team is good enough. The salary cap is a joke, we can easily bring everyone back and go for it again even if he does get paid that imaginary number that fake reporters dandied about. 

And if you don't think the rest of the offense fell apart then you can't have been watching the same game. That's an awful take you you know it. The shoddy o-line play, the injury to Dillon, the fumble by Lewis, the penalties at critical times. You've been blinded by hatred for Rodgers if you truly believe that everyone else played well besides him.

(And before you go to extremes again, I do not literally think the players on the field were falling to pieces as the game went on.)

[AlexGreen#20]

21 minutes ago, Sandy said:

We don't NEED that QB to be making that money...but you can win with him if he and the rest of the team is good enough. The salary cap is a joke, we can easily bring everyone back and go for it again even if he does get paid that imaginary number that fake reporters dandied about. 

And if you don't think the rest of the offense fell apart then you can't have been watching the same game. That's an awful take you you know it. The shoddy o-line play, the injury to Dillon, the fumble by Lewis, the penalties at critical times. You've been blinded by hatred for Rodgers if you truly believe that everyone else played well besides him.

(And before you go to extremes again, I do not literally think the players on the field were falling to pieces as the game went on.)

We're going to have to cut our best pass rusher because of the salary cap, what the hell are you talking about?

If the o-line played shoddy, than so did Rodgers. He was responsible for 2 of the sacks. 

We lost 25 yards on 5 penalties, 15 fewer than the 49ers. Of our 5 penalties for 25 yards: 

• 1 was an intentional delay of game to give Bojo more room,
• 1 was a false start on a punt.
• 1 was an illegal man downfield because Rodgers didn't throw the ******* ball on an RPO.

That means there were TWO penalties. Are you seriously blaming TWO penalties???

Aaron Jones can still be trusted to run the football if Dillon is hurt. We paid him a giant contract to do that.

 

[Sandy]

3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We're going to have to cut our best pass rusher because of the salary cap, what the hell are you talking about?

If the o-line played shoddy, than so did Rodgers. He was responsible for 2 of the sacks. 

We lost 25 yards on 5 penalties, 15 fewer than the 49ers. Of our 5 penalties for 25 yards: 

• 1 was an intentional delay of game to give Bojo more room,
• 1 was a false start on a punt.
• 1 was an illegal man downfield because Rodgers didn't throw the ******* ball on an RPO.

That means there were TWO penalties. Are you seriously blaming TWO penalties???

Aaron Jones can still be trusted to run the football if Dillon is hurt. We paid him a giant contract to do that.

 

We don't have to cut any of our pass rushers. We have collectively assumed we'll cut either Smith, but both could be extended. We actually have a ton of cap space for the next two seasons. There's nothing stopping it unless they don't feel like paying three guys starter money at Edge going forward when they could use that money to help elsewhere.

The o-line was awful in that game. We were without our two best linemen and it showed. The 9ers have a ferocious pass rush so maybe we could have gotten by against a lesser team, but our B squad had their lunch eaten. Can't hate on the backups playing like backups, but let's not re-write history here.

The two penalties you mention were killers. It's not about the number of penalties or the total yards, it's where and when. 3rd and 2 and 2nd and Goal are not the times for false starts. Penalties happen and I don't want to cast too much blame, but the timing of each greatly impacted the game and that cannot be denied.

Don't try to sweep the loss of a key player under the rug either. Dillon has been a huge part of our offense all year, and suddenly he's gone from the gameplan. Against a top defense with 40% of the starting o-line already out. It's impactful.

Rodgers was far from perfect in that game, but it took a team effort of mistakes and injury absences in order to lose - specifically the offense and special teams. To want to blow it all up because of that then it shows you don't want the team to be good, you just want to kick Rodgers out of town. Which is fine, but stop pretending you have a valid argument, because it's holier than Swiss cheese.

 

[Old Guy]

16 minutes ago, Sandy said:

We don't have to cut any of our pass rushers. We have collectively assumed we'll cut either Smith, but both could be extended. We actually have a ton of cap space for the next two seasons. There's nothing stopping it unless they don't feel like paying three guys starter money at Edge going forward when they could use that money to help elsewhere.

The o-line was awful in that game. We were without our two best linemen and it showed. The 9ers have a ferocious pass rush so maybe we could have gotten by against a lesser team, but our B squad had their lunch eaten. Can't hate on the backups playing like backups, but let's not re-write history here.

The two penalties you mention were killers. It's not about the number of penalties or the total yards, it's where and when. 3rd and 2 and 2nd and Goal are not the times for false starts. Penalties happen and I don't want to cast too much blame, but the timing of each greatly impacted the game and that cannot be denied.

Don't try to sweep the loss of a key player under the rug either. Dillon has been a huge part of our offense all year, and suddenly he's gone from the gameplan. Against a top defense with 40% of the starting o-line already out. It's impactful.

Rodgers was far from perfect in that game, but it took a team effort of mistakes and injury absences in order to lose - specifically the offense and special teams. To want to blow it all up because of that then it shows you don't want the team to be good, you just want to kick Rodgers out of town. Which is fine, but stop pretending you have a valid argument, because it's holier than Swiss cheese.

 

It appears math is really, really hard for you. 

[Brit Pack]

4 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

2-3 in his last five playoff games. With two years of not making the playoffs the years before that. With him playing anywhere between awful and middling in those 3 losses. 

Where is this confidence that Rodgers is somehow going to turn into a post season killer coming from?

Yeah I mean the Rams were so dumb to trade for Stafford. His history was that he only got his team to the postseason in three seasons out of thirteen and to top if off he never won a playoff game. Such a stupid front office move for Rams to trade for a guy that is the epitome of post season flopper....

[AlexGreen#20]

7 minutes ago, Sandy said:

We don't have to cut any of our pass rushers. We have collectively assumed we'll cut either Smith, but both could be extended. We actually have a ton of cap space for the next two seasons. There's nothing stopping it unless they don't feel like paying three guys starter money at Edge going forward when they could use that money to help elsewhere.

The o-line was awful in that game. We were without our two best linemen and it showed. The 9ers have a ferocious pass rush so maybe we could have gotten by against a lesser team, but our B squad had their lunch eaten. Can't hate on the backups playing like backups, but let's not re-write history here.

The two penalties you mention were killers. It's not about the number of penalties or the total yards, it's where and when. 3rd and 2 and 2nd and Goal are not the times for false starts. Penalties happen and I don't want to cast too much blame, but the timing of each greatly impacted the game and that cannot be denied.

Don't try to sweep the loss of a key player under the rug either. Dillon has been a huge part of our offense all year, and suddenly he's gone from the gameplan. Against a top defense with 40% of the starting o-line already out. It's impactful.

Rodgers was far from perfect in that game, but it took a team effort of mistakes and injury absences in order to lose - specifically the offense and special teams. To want to blow it all up because of that then it shows you don't want the team to be good, you just want to kick Rodgers out of town. Which is fine, but stop pretending you have a valid argument, because it's holier than Swiss cheese.

 

How do you not cut one of the Smiths?

We're 30 million over the cap. 

If Rodgers demands 2/100. It's going to be at minimum 60 million in the signing bonus. Let's be generous and say you split the base salary at 10/30. Then immediately restructure the 10 in the first year. That leaves you with a first year cap hit of 1 million in base salary + 13.8 in new bonus money +26.9 in old bonus money. So you're looking at 40.7 as a cap hit. 

That gets you down to 26 million over the cap.

Let's assume you can post 6/1 cut Cobb, that gets you down to 18 million over the cap.

Let's say Jaire gets 4/80 with 30 guaranteed and one void year, then you immediately get him down to 1 million, you end up with a year one cap hit of 9ish. That gets you down to 14 million over the cap.

Let's be generous and say you can get 3 million for restructuring Turner and Lowry, you're down to 11.

An Amos extension maybe gets you another 3 million. You're down to 8.

You could probably get down to the 4ish million under that you need for draft picks and RFAs

+++

"But AG20, you most poignant of Packer observers", you say, "You didn't do anything about Davante Adams, and we know Rodgers isn't going to sign on without him."

Hence the issue. It also doesn't talk about Campbell or any of the other players. 

 

[AlexGreen#20]

6 minutes ago, Brit Pack said:

Yeah I mean the Rams were so dumb to trade for Stafford. His history was that he only got his team to the postseason in three seasons out of thirteen and to top if off he never won a playoff game. Such a stupid front office move for Rams to trade for a guy that is the epitome of post season flopper....

Matt Stafford always had a **** team around him. Rodgers has not. 

Next objection. 

[coachbuns]

12 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

It appears math is really, really hard for you. 

Math is hard however the NFL has mastered how to manipulate those numbers .. voided years, unattainable bonus, redoing contracts, etc.  IF Rodgers does want $50 million .. that's on him if nobody else can get signed and shouldn't ***** one iota.  That being said, where there's a will there's a way with the salary cap if GM's want or don't want players.  That's what the Packer brass has to decide .. period.