Green19 Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, hitnhope said: This speaks directly to how bad Gute and thee Packers leadership has messed up this entire situation. Turning a back o back league MVP into a non-asset this quickly is near impossible to do, but the Packers managed it. Did the packers do that… or did Rodgers? You know given age, his last year, and all the baggage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 9, 2023 Author Share Posted March 9, 2023 Unless we use a #1 to draft his replacement, I'd prefer GB to keep BAK and ride out his contract / career. Last year was enough proof for me his replacement wasnt on the roster - and when healthy/playing, BAK more than held his own. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 29 minutes ago, Leader said: Unless we use a #1 to draft his replacement, I'd prefer GB to keep BAK and ride out his contract / career. Last year was enough proof for me his replacement wasnt on the roster - and when healthy/playing, BAK more than held his own. Option 4, please. Bakh is still elite. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilltray Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 Just now, incognito_man said: Option 4, please. Bakh is still elite. If they've stuck through this much of it I agree. I have to expect there is a solid chance the situation will continue to improve. Don't push out void years or anything but tweak it around the edges and he's the best option at LT. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitnhope Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 45 minutes ago, Green19 said: Did the packers do that… or did Rodgers? You know given age, his last year, and all the baggage? Is it not the Packers who gave him that contract instead of moving on last year? They still had franchise tags in their back pocket. They could have stayed with the old contract and used tags as the insurance policy. Instead they gave him $150 million. If your Boss offered you $50 million, would you turn it down? Instead of employment being on the organizations terms they are giving you a large say in how things take place down the road. You saying no? Why would AR or anyone? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bad Example Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 29 minutes ago, incognito_man said: Option 4, please. Bakh is still elite. If not elite, at least "very hard to replace" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 11 minutes ago, hitnhope said: Is it not the Packers who gave him that contract instead of moving on last year? They still had franchise tags in their back pocket. They could have stayed with the old contract and used tags as the insurance policy. Instead they gave him $150 million. If your Boss offered you $50 million, would you turn it down? Instead of employment being on the organizations terms they are giving you a large say in how things take place down the road. You saying no? Why would AR or anyone? And Rodgers would of gladly been a good little employee and played on the tag… come on. They did that because of Love’s development. They have had Love 3 years… in those years the message was heavily “Rodgers is our QB”, “we aren’t trading Rodgers”….. now going into the 4th year, what’s the message? It’s about Love’s development and basically hey we are just waiting on Rodgers to make up his mind if he is playing or not. When they did the deal Rodgers had the power. So it heavily favors Rodgers. Had the front office seen what they do now with Love…. Rodgers never gets that deal. They didn’t trust the development until they saw results. Which to your point, who in that position would? You’d have to be very bold, and most people aren’t. The fact is what has killed Rodgers trade value is: last years play; his constant talk of retirement; the brutal fact about his age; his clear inability to deal with change; his off the field media; his very limited market; the fact that like Brady, he will need 1 or 2 of “his guys” on the team…. The list goes on. GB did what they did because they weren’t moving off Rodgers until they had a viable option… until last year they clearly didn’t think they did. It’s why they did the deal. I don’t blame GB for not getting off Rodgers. They made that deal in a specific time with specific information available to them. Do they do that deal today? Clearly No. But now they know they have something with Love and at the very worse, Love can not lead GB to the playoffs like Rodgers just did… so they aren’t missing out on much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bad Example Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 1 hour ago, Green19 said: Did the packers do that… or did Rodgers? You know given age, his last year, and all the baggage? What a ludicrous statement, clearly Rodgers wouldn't possibly have any fault 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 46 minutes ago, incognito_man said: Option 4, please. Bakh is still elite. I think Option 4 is the most likely option. If Rodgers is in fact a Jet soon, I could see a trade scenario with Bakh. Tough, but doable. My preference, though, is to not touch that deal this year, unless we really, really have to. Keep him a Packer, pay as we go. Do not kick money into the future on him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 2 minutes ago, Leader said: Unless we use a #1 to draft his replacement, I'd prefer GB to keep BAK and ride out his contract / career. Last year was enough proof for me his replacement wasnt on the roster - and when healthy/playing, BAK more than held his own. I hope we ride him out AND draft his replacement in round 1 this year. So long as it's PJJ or Jones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 4 minutes ago, vegas492 said: I think Option 4 is the most likely option. If Rodgers is in fact a Jet soon, I could see a trade scenario with Bakh. Tough, but doable. My preference, though, is to not touch that deal this year, unless we really, really have to. Keep him a Packer, pay as we go. Do not kick money into the future on him. Agreed. I was assuming we'd want some extra space for the $9mil hit we'll absorb from Rodgers trade. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas492 Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 6 minutes ago, incognito_man said: Agreed. I was assuming we'd want some extra space for the $9mil hit we'll absorb from Rodgers trade. Yeah, there is that. And Bakh's deal can be re-worked kindda easily. I just don't want to do it. I want to pay him this year, whether it is Love here or Rodgers, then move on next year and get our space. But if it needs to be done, it simply needs to be done. I just hate kicking more money down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted March 9, 2023 Author Share Posted March 9, 2023 (edited) Edited March 9, 2023 by Leader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green19 Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 1 minute ago, vegas492 said: Yeah, there is that. And Bakh's deal can be re-worked kindda easily. I just don't want to do it. I want to pay him this year, whether it is Love here or Rodgers, then move on next year and get our space. But if it needs to be done, it simply needs to be done. I just hate kicking more money down the road. More so on a guy that hasn’t been the model of health the last few years… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted March 9, 2023 Share Posted March 9, 2023 2 minutes ago, Leader said: Yeah, I'll be rooting for him in NY if they aren't in contention for a top 10 pick (if we get future firsts) 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.