Is it time?

[longtimefan]

I also don’t disagree but I think it was more “I would like to discuss that depending on future plans”….I could see a fifth year tag buying Jordan’s patience possibly.

Research my posts..I've said all along he gets 5th year

 

[tynimiller]

Research my posts..I've said all along he gets 5th year

Oh I know you have - you and I 100% agree there for sure. That tag is coming IMO.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

FTR folks the players I brought forth were solely ones that would provide depth and such on rookie contracts. You are not getting no doubt starters back for Rodgers at all IMO AND also getting loads of high picks.

I would be extremely disappointed if the Packers would only receive future draft picks and backups in return for Rodgers.

Why do I exactly? I was not comparing. Merely commenting on your statistic.

It doesn't make sense to solely look at Rodgers' stats without comparing it to other QBs though.

that is true. But I don't care. I'll take the future.

It would be a terrible approach for a general manager to not care about things like that.

I agree, it's time to look forward. The most we'll get out of AR is 2-3 years max (remember he said he isn't going to play as long as TB), IDK about y'all, but I'll definitely be a GBP til I die. I plan on living past 2-3 years. Some come off as AR fans first, GBP fans a close 2nd. Don't get me wrong, I'm NOT saying they don't love the GBP, but I do think that they've been blinded by his early success' to the point they think that should be the new normal. We were lucky enough for 30 years of HOF QB play, but that's definitely not normal, almost every single NFL franchise gets one great QB to none.

I'm a Packers fan first and foremost as well. That's why I would like them to hold on to Rodgers as long as possible as he gives them the best chance of winning as long as he's capable of performing at an elite level. It's anybody's guess when the team will feature another HOF quarterback after they move on from him.

With that being said I understand there's an argument to be made it would be best for the team to move on from him this season as well though.

I think you have proven you solely skim read comments...never said Ruckert never played at all last year. He missed some time not all, if memory serves five or six games and saw snaps immediately when back - you can research that.

Actually Ruckert played a total of only 48 snaps on offense all season, finishing with one catch for eight yards. As far as I can tell he didn't miss any games because of an injury either. I don't consider that to be promising at all.

If it’s how do we afford to get a RT? Trade Jordan Love for a veteran starter. Love is a good option to start for a team and he’s like $3.3m against the cap. It’s an easy Day 2 trade equivalent. That’s enough trade equity and should get us 1 good Billy Turner type player in trade to fix our OL.

The other option is trade Love for a 2-3rd option at veteran WR. Possibly one also similarly on a Rookie deal, so it’s essentially an even swap against the Cap.

I don't believe other teams would be interested in giving up significant compensation to acquire Love.

From an acquiring teams' perspective - Rodgers is now cheaper on their cap, they didn't have to give up draft equity and for a window is now team those things would entice you to send Gute perhaps even more of a haul now in the 2024 and 2025 draft than you would have if you had to give up a lot before the 2023 draft and have a bigger cap hit.

A team acquiring Rodgers after June 2nd would take the exact same cap hit as doing it before that deadline.

I also don’t disagree but I think it was more “I would like to discuss that depending on future plans”….I could see a fifth year tag buying Jordan’s patience possibly.

As mentioned before I get the feeling that the Packers will only think about bringing Rodgers back if he commits to play at least another two years. In that case I definitely expect Love to ask for a trade.

 

[tynimiller]

So I will say Gute's interview, the full length, 100% does leave me with the belief at a minimum that for whatever reason (we could speculate all kinds of things but doesn't matter) that Gute sees the situation as a retiring Rodgers or a trading Rodgers. His body cues and manuerisms spoke a lot and the exact words which he stated when asked "Do you want Aaron back." were not at all like all of his answers in the past two off seasons.

 

[tynimiller]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

His discussion with Aubrey Marcus after darkness retreat...

 

[longtimefan]

So I will say Gute's interview, the full length, 100% does leave me with the belief at a minimum that for whatever reason (we could speculate all kinds of things but doesn't matter) that Gute sees the situation as a retiring Rodgers or a trading Rodgers. His body cues and manuerisms spoke a lot and the exact words which he stated when asked "Do you want Aaron back." were not at all like all of his answers have been in the past two off seasons.

I made a thread on that exact point

 

[tynimiller]

I made a thread on that exact point

To me I saw this as an equal chance type thing for the most part - GB, Retire or Trade...I'm firmly thinking it is like 45% Retire, 45% Trade and 10% back to GB at best now...

 

[longtimefan]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

His discussion with Aubrey Marcus after darkness retreat...

I gave up...shoeless and sockless talking about ghost "poops"..

 

[longtimefan]

So I will say Gute's interview, the full length, 100% does leave me with the belief at a minimum that for whatever reason (we could speculate all kinds of things but doesn't matter) that Gute sees the situation as a retiring Rodgers or a trading Rodgers. His body cues and manuerisms spoke a lot and the exact words which he stated when asked "Do you want Aaron back." were not at all like all of his answers have been in the past two off seasons.

And his comments on Love.

Maybe laying it on thick for a potential trade

But this pc was way different than in past

 

[tynimiller]

I gave up...shoeless and sockless talking about ghost "poops"..

I have it playing while working...once I hear football talk I'll listen intently.

 

[PackerDNA]

I don't see him retiring. In his own words he has generational wealth he'll never need money again as long as he lives. I also don't see a competitor of his nature wanting last season to be the way his career ends.
The difference with Gute this year as he sounds like it's more about the Packers than Rodgers, and they won't be bending over backwards for him again. To me most likely in order are trade r or back to Green Bay

 

[Mondio]

So I will say Gute's interview, the full length, 100% does leave me with the belief at a minimum that for whatever reason (we could speculate all kinds of things but doesn't matter) that Gute sees the situation as a retiring Rodgers or a trading Rodgers. His body cues and manuerisms spoke a lot and the exact words which he stated when asked "Do you want Aaron back." were not at all like all of his answers have been in the past two off seasons.

I think he showed kind of what Aaron was talking about, it's complicated. First, does an almost 40 year old QB want to come back, the next season is not a given at this point.

But GB is in a tough tough spot. Unless they feel really strongly Rodgers is back at least 2 years, how can you keep him for just this year knowing next year is going to slap the financial straps on so tight any of your young guys you hope to sign to 2nd contracts are now in jeopardy.

Or if they feel they can get an Olineman and a big time play maker and hope for just 1 more shot this year and then blow it up.

If it's just a 1 year commitment and pretty much status quo, I don't see how GB can keep him. I wouldn't. and if they do want him and he does want to play, then there's the issue of reworking the contract and how that plays out.

I saw Gute alluding that this is complicated. They like Aaron, they think he can play, but there's more to it than that. and he wasn't giving the canned response this time.

I'm still of Packers or retire in my position. A trade would be great, if we can get a 1st or 2nd or even a couple high 2nds how can you not. But I'm not sure Rodgers will really want to go start somewhere new without it being an almost Brady/Bucs situation and I don't see a team just a QB short with the capital to give up to make it worthwhile for us. Everyone says Jets, but I don't quite see it that way.

 

[longtimefan]

I have it playing while working...once I hear football talk I'll listen intently.

Aaron Rodgers Still Weighing Options After Darkness Retreat

www.ozarksfirst.com

Article on it all

 

[Magooch]

Yeah, I think the dilemma for GB is that they are definitely going to want a 2-year commitment out of Rodgers to bring him back at this point...if they think he will only be back for one year and then done I don't know that it makes much sense or is really that feasible.

Then of course the trouble is that a two year commitment from Rodgers probably means needing to move Love as I don't see us carrying the financial hit of both of them over two years. So then we would want to get some kind of trade return for Love. Maybe Gute's statements about him being ready to play are the truth and designed to insinuate that we're ready to move on from Rodgers, or maybe they're trying to pump Love's trade value...

Of course the trouble is that IMO these two things are kind of opposed to each other. Statements that would drive up Love's trade value would seem to drive down Rodgers' for us (i.e. if we go on and on about how good Love is and how we're convinced he can be our starting QB then that decreases Rodgers' value for us as he's no longer as essential to our team). And conversely I'd think statements that would drive up Rodgers' trade value - talking about how much we want to hang on to him, how valuable he is to us, etc...would perhaps hurt Love's potential trade value as they would (intentionally or otherwise) signal that we are not ready to move on and/or are not confident enough to have Love take over yet.

Further complicating matters is that while we are going to want a two year commitment from Rodgers that's probably what any team trading for him would want as well. Not exactly for the same reasons as us, but most teams are going to be hesitant to give up many assets for a one-year rental player. So I would suspect we would probably need to agree to some sort of deal with conditional bits provided he plays in 24/25 (for instance a 2023 1st and a 2024 2-3 that can become a 1-2 if he plays in '24 or something like that, with extra bits here and there)

 

[tynimiller]

I'm still of Packers or retire in my position. A trade would be great, if we can get a 1st or 2nd or even a couple high 2nds how can you not. But I'm not sure Rodgers will really want to go start somewhere new without it being an almost Brady/Bucs situation and I don't see a team just a QB short with the capital to give up to make it worthwhile for us. Everyone says Jets, but I don't quite see it that way.

Can you unpack why you don't feel the Jets are that similar scenario to Brady/Bucs?

To me they are the most surefire AFC candidate (maybe TN if Tannehill were released) since they have some incredible young weapons, Could easily even tell Aaron we can bring Lazard in (releasing Corey Davis saves them 10+ Million) so he'd have Hackett and he would have a familiar trusted face. Their defense is incredible...if their offense had just had Brock Purdy level QB play they'd have won 10/11 games...their offense most games just needed to break 20 to win.

The best scenario from a surefire division set up would be for someone in the NFC South to make it happen...division is just bad overall and playoffs would nearly be guaranteed barring an injury if someone puts together a run with Aaron.

 

[Mondio]

Can you unpack why you don't feel the Jets are that similar scenario to Brady/Bucs?

To me they are the most surefire AFC candidate (maybe TN if Tannehill were released) since they have some incredible young weapons, Could easily even tell Aaron we can bring Lazard in (releasing Corey Davis saves them 10+ Million) so he'd have Hackett and he would have a familiar trusted face. Their defense is incredible...if their offense had just had Brock Purdy level QB play they'd have won 10/11 games...their offense most games just needed to break 20 to win.

The best scenario from a surefire division set up would be for someone in the NFC South to make it happen...division is just bad overall and playoffs would nearly be guaranteed barring an injury if someone puts together a run with Aaron.

i'll keep it simple.
The Bucs had young proven studs at every level. Better defense at every level, better playmakers all over from RB, TE when Gronk came back, and 3 stud WR's plus depth. Offensive line was tremendous. and a proven coach.

Jets have some pieces, and they're good, I don't think they're nearly as ready as the Bucs were when Brady joined them. If I was a Jets manager, I'd want 2 years at least to realize the goal. I don't think they're as set up to do it now as others.

 

[Krabs]

Further complicating matters is that while we are going to want a two year commitment from Rodgers that's probably what any team trading for him would want as well. Not exactly for the same reasons as us, but most teams are going to be hesitant to give up many assets for a one-year rental player. So I would suspect we would probably need to agree to some sort of deal with conditional bits provided he plays in 24/25 (for instance a 2023 1st and a 2024 2-3 that can become a 1-2 if he plays in '24 or something like that, with extra bits here and there)

I feel like I'm missing something here. You're saying a team would want a commitment from Rodgers for two years. He's under contract for that long, so I don't believe it would be rental. Are you saying they would want a verbal that he is not going to retire after one season with a new team?

 

[tynimiller]

i'll keep it simple.
The Bucs had young proven studs at every level. Better defense at every level, better playmakers all over from RB, TE when Gronk came back, and 3 stud WR's plus depth. Offensive line was tremendous. and a proven coach.

Jets have some pieces, and they're good, I don't think they're nearly as ready as the Bucs were when Brady joined them. If I was a Jets manager, I'd want 2 years at least to realize the goal. I don't think they're as set up to do it now as others.

Gotcha, I atleast understand your take better. That'd be a good exercise to do sometime Bucs then vs Jets now....I honestly have no clue who would appear to have the better pieces in place but that's a lunch time exercise I may just do for kicks and giggles.

 

[Mondio]

yes, if they did feel Rodgers was here for 2 more years, they'd almost have to trade Love if they can. But it's so hard to see that actually happening. Put all those resources into a guy, and if you think he has it, you're not giving up that future. I just can't see it.

 

[fix8ed]

Should we just dump Rodgers even with the horrible cap issues?

He hasn't (he is the consistent Player) in last 11 years

Is it time?

If Rodgers chooses to remain in GB, he will need a tight end who (a) can catch, (b) gain a yard separation and (c) keep us away from the all too often 3 and out. Rodgers could still be the consistent player he always was, in my opinion. But then again, who needs Jared Cook when we can get.... Martellus Bennett! Why work early on re-signing Davante Adams when we can get.... Sammy Watkins! And on that subject, let me remind all Packer fans that Kenny Golladay is now available to replace Sammy next to the water cooler.

 

[tynimiller]

So nearly done with the Aubrey Marcus episode with him and I will say Aaron did say going into the darkness retreat he felt like there were two options:

One scary option and one and unknown option. Scary was retirement and the other was coming back and playing (no matter where that is)

When he came out he doesn't have fear at all of either option and sees both as beautiful.

 

[Krabs]

yes, if they did feel Rodgers was here for 2 more years, they'd almost have to trade Love if they can. But it's so hard to see that actually happening. Put all those resources into a guy, and if you think he has it, you're not giving up that future. I just can't see it.

I mean, anyone going into a situation with Rodgers has to fully know that at this point in his career it is a year by year basis. He's at the age that it going to be how he feels physically and mentally. That's the chance any team that wants him as their QB is going to have to take. With Love being in the mix, this is why I think he ultimately gets traded. I think the FO is ready to move to Love and Rodgers will obviously not sit behind him. Because I think teams have to play this by a year to year basis with Rodgers will be why the Packers can't expect too much in return for him. It all starts March 15th, so we have a couple more weeks to speculate.

 

[Mondio]

I mean, anyone going into a situation with Rodgers has to fully know that at this point in his career it is a year by year basis. He's at the age that it going to be how he feels physically and mentally. That's the chance any team that wants him as their QB is going to have to take. With Love being in the mix, this is why I think he ultimately gets traded. I think the FO is ready to move to Love and Rodgers will obviously not sit behind him. Because I think teams have to play this by a year to year basis with Rodgers will be why the Packers can't expect too much in return for him. It all starts March 15th, so we have a couple more weeks to speculate.

I agree, the next season is never a given and gets more unlikely at this stage of a career. which is why I think GB is in such a tough spot. I wouldn't commit to plans with him for 2 more seasons as a Packer GM or a team that has to trade for him. and if I thought he'd be our fit for a year, I wouldn't give up much to get him.

 

[Krabs]

If Rodgers chooses to remain in GB, he will need a tight end who (a) can catch, (b) gain a yard separation and (c) keep us away from the all too often 3 and out. Rodgers could still be the consistent player he always was, in my opinion. But then again, who needs Jared Cook when we can get.... Martellus Bennett! Why work early on re-signing Davante Adams when we can get.... Sammy Watkins! And on that subject, let me remind all Packer fans that Kenny Golladay is now available to replace Sammy next to the water cooler.

Every team makes mistakes on signings and players drafted. Bennett had question marks, but Cook was the one that rejected the Packers offer. They decided to move on. They also offered Adams a contract worth more than the Raiders. He wanted to leave. They definitely did not sign Watkins straight up thinking he would replace Adams. This is a weird take on things.

 

[tynimiller]

Every team makes mistakes on signings and players drafted. Bennett had question marks, but Cook was the one that rejected the Packers offer. They decided to move on. They also offered Adams a contract worth more than the Raiders. He wanted to leave. They definitely did not sign Watkins straight up thinking he would replace Adams. This is a weird take on things.

Exactly on Cook, I bet IMO he regretted not taking it once he realized no better offer elsewhere was coming and he wasn't going to have Aaron as his QB any longer.