jontat83 Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Talk of Matt Ryan possibly signing a new contract next week (well the Falcons are aiming for that) I assume the wait is for that contract to be signed before Rodgers does his. I don't know if this is true but on some of the Falcons boards they say Rodgers and Ryan have the same agent which is interesting if true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSG Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 11 hours ago, fattlipp said: Wouldn't u guys do Arod for the 1,4,33 and Myles Garrett? No, I'm not putting the near future of this franchise in the hands of a rookie who's got less than a coin flip chance at having success in the NFL. I'd prefer to have AR12 for 6 or 7 more years and bring a guy up in his wings. Even then, the chances of that rookie working out is substantially less than him busting. The idea of needing an average college QB like Sam Darnold to play substantially better in the NFL than he was able to do in college would give me nightmares. Mike McCarthy has shown that he's not a capable NFL head coach without an elite level QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 34 minutes ago, SSG said: No, I'm not putting the near future of this franchise in the hands of a rookie who's got less than a coin flip chance at having success in the NFL. I'd prefer to have AR12 for 6 or 7 more years and bring a guy up in his wings. Even then, the chances of that rookie working out is substantially less than him busting. The idea of needing an average college QB like Sam Darnold to play substantially better in the NFL than he was able to do in college would give me nightmares. Mike McCarthy has shown that he's not a capable NFL head coach without an elite level QB. Agree that's not enough. You would have to take 3 QB's up high and maybe hit on one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkySauce Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 7 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: More teams have won a Super Bowl without Rodgers than with him over the last decade, so I don't know why the next decade would be any different. I assume there's a sarcasm font that my Mac can't interpret here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kepler Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 1 minute ago, StinkySauce said: I assume there's a sarcasm font that my Mac can't interpret here. Well..... I mean...... he isn't wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkySauce Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Kepler said: Well..... I mean...... he isn't wrong. That's true. Also true: the Packers haven't won a Super Bowl without Rodgers for over 20 years! But, I thought we were trying to make reasonable arguments here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fattlipp Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 5 hours ago, Scoremore said: Agree that's not enough. You would have to take 3 QB's up high and maybe hit on one. I would probably take Barkley, Ward and Ridley in 1 and roll with Kizer 1(1) Barkley 1(4) Ward 1(14) Ridley 2(1) Oliver 2(14) Key 3(14) Chark 4(14) Griffin .............. etc... sign Boston 3/15m , Suh 2/30m, Bowman 2/5m, Mewhort 3/10m play some 5-2 Garrett-Daniels-Clark-Suh-Wilk(or Perry) Clay/Blake QB: Kizer/Hundley/Callahan RB: Barkley/Jones/Williams FB: Ripkowski WR: Adams/Ridley/Cobb/Monty/Chark/Clark TE Graham/Kendricks/Rodgers T Bakhtiari/Bulaga/Spriggs/Murphy G Taylor/Evans/Mewhort C Linsley/McCray K Crosby DE: Daniels/Wilkerson/Lowry DT Clark/Suh/Adams OLB Garrett/Perry/Matthews/Key/Biegel ILB Martinez/Ryan/Bowman/Griffin CB Ward/King/Oliver/Pipkins/Waters/Hawkins S HaHa/Boston/Jones/Brice P Vogel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fussnputz Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, fattlipp said: I would probably take Barkley, Ward and Ridley in 1 and roll with Kizer 1(1) Barkley 1(4) Ward 1(14) Ridley 2(1) Oliver 2(14) Key 3(14) Chark 4(14) Griffin .............. etc... sign Boston 3/15m , Suh 2/30m, Bowman 2/5m, Mewhort 3/10m play some 5-2 Perry-Daniels-Clark-Suh-Wilk Clay/Blake QB: Kizer/Hundley/Callahan RB: Barkley/Jones/Williams FB: Ripkowski WR: Adams/Ridley/Cobb/Monty/Chark/Clark TE Graham/Kendricks/Rodgers T Bakhtiari/Bulaga/Spriggs/Murphy G Taylor/Evans/Mewhort C Linsley/McCray K Crosby DE: Daniels/Wilkerson/Lowry DT Clark/Suh/Adams OLB Perry/Matthews/Key/Fackrell/Biegel ILB Martinez/Ryan/Bowman/Griffin CB Ward/King/Oliver/Pipkins/Waters/Hawkins S HaHa/Boston/Jones/Brice P Vogel So you want to be Cleveland 2.0? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fattlipp Posted March 20, 2018 Share Posted March 20, 2018 Cleveland with Barkley is Jags or Cowboys I mean the Packers where thinking about Kizer instead of King, that means they love him.... Rodgers would have been awful at 21 w the Browns as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 On 3/20/2018 at 5:55 AM, HorizontoZenith said: More teams have won a Super Bowl without Rodgers than with him over the last decade, so I don't know why the next decade would be any different. If we do what you have been suggesting for a while now we will have to assemble an historically great defense to win a SB without a good QB like the 85 Bears, the 2000 Ravens and the 2016 Broncos. It isn't easy to keep elite defenses together. And even if we trade AR for a bunch of picks there is no guarantee those players we select will turn our defense into a world beater. Right now, even with our issues in our secondary, most of the "experts" feel we'll give MN a run for the division or we'll make the playoffs as a WC. If Pettine can coach this bunch into just an average defense I like our chances because we have #12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Just now, Pugger said: If we do what you have been suggesting for a while now we will have to assemble an historically great defense to win a SB without a good QB like the 85 Bears, the 2000 Ravens and the 2016 Broncos. How historically great were the Eagles this past year? Tom Brady is what blinds people on this issue. Tom Brady didn't get to the Super Bowl 8 times because he's a franchise QB. Brady got to the Super Bowl 8 times because his defense has AVERAGED 20 points allowed BRADY'S ENTIRE CAREER in playoff games. If the Packers got the 1st overall, 4th overall and 2019 first round draft pick from the Browns for Rodgers, all the Packers would need would be one top 10 pass rusher (Chubb), one top 12 QB (take your pick of QB at 4), the best DB available at 14 and you have the makings of a dynasty. The only reason the Packers aren't doing it is the risk factor. One or both of 1st and 4th overall could bust. Then you're screwed. Scenario: 34-year-old Rodgers versus Guaranteed top 10 pass rusher. Guaranteed top 12 QB. Extra first round pick in 2019. Don't think there's a GM in the league that wouldn't take that deal. Especially considering both of Aaron's collarbones aren't all that great. Packer fans have a habit of putting their quarterbacks on a pedestal. Consider the ridicule a fan would have gotten for suggesting the Packers trade Favre after his really bad 1999 season. "WE'RE NEVER WINNING A SUPER BOWL AGAIN!" Fast forward 20 years and it would have looked like an absolutely genius move. In spite of Favre's interceptions, he was still a top 5 QB for the majority of his career. The NFL was different in his time and those interception numbers really weren't horrific except for maybe 5 of his years. Aaron Rodgers will never win a Super Bowl without a top 12 scoring defense. Ever. A top 5 scoring defense could absolutely win a Super Bowl without Rodgers. It's happened 40+ times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 6 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said: How historically great were the Eagles this past year? Tom Brady is what blinds people on this issue. Tom Brady didn't get to the Super Bowl 8 times because he's a franchise QB. Brady got to the Super Bowl 8 times because his defense has AVERAGED 20 points allowed BRADY'S ENTIRE CAREER in playoff games. If the Packers got the 1st overall, 4th overall and 2019 first round draft pick from the Browns for Rodgers, all the Packers would need would be one top 10 pass rusher (Chubb), one top 12 QB (take your pick of QB at 4), the best DB available at 14 and you have the makings of a dynasty. The only reason the Packers aren't doing it is the risk factor. One or both of 1st and 4th overall could bust. Then you're screwed. Scenario: 34-year-old Rodgers versus Guaranteed top 10 pass rusher. Guaranteed top 12 QB. Extra first round pick in 2019. Don't think there's a GM in the league that wouldn't take that deal. Especially considering both of Aaron's collarbones aren't all that great. Packer fans have a habit of putting their quarterbacks on a pedestal. Consider the ridicule a fan would have gotten for suggesting the Packers trade Favre after his really bad 1999 season. "WE'RE NEVER WINNING A SUPER BOWL AGAIN!" Fast forward 20 years and it would have looked like an absolutely genius move. In spite of Favre's interceptions, he was still a top 5 QB for the majority of his career. The NFL was different in his time and those interception numbers really weren't horrific except for maybe 5 of his years. Aaron Rodgers will never win a Super Bowl without a top 12 scoring defense. Ever. A top 5 scoring defense could absolutely win a Super Bowl without Rodgers. It's happened 40+ times. Tom Brady got to the SB because he's a franchise QB. Still the most important position on the field, despite your delusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pugger Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 3 minutes ago, HorizontoZenith said: How historically great were the Eagles this past year? Tom Brady is what blinds people on this issue. Tom Brady didn't get to the Super Bowl 8 times because he's a franchise QB. Brady got to the Super Bowl 8 times because his defense has AVERAGED 20 points allowed BRADY'S ENTIRE CAREER in playoff games. If the Packers got the 1st overall, 4th overall and 2019 first round draft pick from the Browns for Rodgers, all the Packers would need would be one top 10 pass rusher (Chubb), one top 12 QB (take your pick of QB at 4), the best DB available at 14 and you have the makings of a dynasty. The only reason the Packers aren't doing it is the risk factor. One or both of 1st and 4th overall could bust. Then you're screwed. Scenario: 34-year-old Rodgers versus Guaranteed top 10 pass rusher. Guaranteed top 12 QB. Extra first round pick in 2019. Don't think there's a GM in the league that wouldn't take that deal. Especially considering both of Aaron's collarbones aren't all that great. Packer fans have a habit of putting their quarterbacks on a pedestal. Consider the ridicule a fan would have gotten for suggesting the Packers trade Favre after his really bad 1999 season. "WE'RE NEVER WINNING A SUPER BOWL AGAIN!" Fast forward 20 years and it would have looked like an absolutely genius move. In spite of Favre's interceptions, he was still a top 5 QB for the majority of his career. The NFL was different in his time and those interception numbers really weren't horrific except for maybe 5 of his years. Aaron Rodgers will never win a Super Bowl without a top 12 scoring defense. Ever. A top 5 scoring defense could absolutely win a Super Bowl without Rodgers. It's happened 40+ times. Where are you getting a guaranteed top 12 QB? I hate to break it to you but if we told the league we were open to trading Rodgers right now there would be at least 25 GMs jamming the phone lines at 1265. Having a great defense is wonderful but this is a QB driven league. If just having a great defense was the ticket to the SB why are all of these GMs/Owners paying the Staffords, Ryans and Cousins of this league these ridiculously huge salaries instead of spending their caps on their defenses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 4 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: Tom Brady got to the SB because he's a franchise QB. Still the most important position on the field, despite your delusions. Brady doesn't get to 5 Super Bowls if he doesn't take significantly less than he's worth. Despite your delusions. If a QB was more important than defense, Manning would have won 5 Super Bowls. Bree's would have won 4. Rodgers would have won three by now. All the evidence in the history of the Super Bowl agrees with me, and yet some of you continue to insist that a QB is the most important aspect to a Super Bowl winning team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted March 21, 2018 Share Posted March 21, 2018 Put on the tape of the Dallas game last year. Still want to trade Rodgers? The guy single handedly tilts the field. It would take a lot to trade him away. Kizer? Are you kidding me? Understand the logic but it is flawed. It's really hard to find a franchise QB let alone one of the best in the league. Have nothing behind Aaron so trading him is not an option right now. We should begin the process of looking for his eventual replacement. It will take awhile. Next years QB's are looking pretty good. Ideally we draft the next guy and groom him for 2-3 years. However even then there are no guarantees until he hits the field. Most likely we'll go through a couple of QB's until we hit on one next time around. Earliest we could even consider trading Aaron is not for a couple of years yet and only if we have something behind him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.