Jordan Love signed to 4 year fully guaranteed deal

[gbgary]

two MORE? I didn't realize this past season was meh. lmao

the team overachieved but Rodgers was meh, for him, and especially for how his cap hit affects the team.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

the team overachieved but Rodgers was meh, for him, and especially for how his cap hit affects the team.

I'm quite sure not having a decent #2 receiving option significantly contributed to Rodgers struggling at times.

 

[gbgary]

It's a fact that the Packers would save close to $45 million in cap space until the end of the 2022 season if they trade Rodgers before the start of the '21 league year. There's no $10-15 million of cap space to throw in.

my $40ish was on the Packers releasing him after 2020. i didn't say anything about trading him the other day. don't think they'd be able to trade him easily (he may have a no-trade and his cost) and besides i think they'd give in to him wanting to hit free agency. since we don't know the 22 cap it's reasonable to predict a 10m+ increase.

Yeah, I know. It's as ridiculous as considering moving on from a HOF quarterback being a great idea. Unfortunately you don't understand that.

it's the current Rodgers we'd be moving on from. not the younger, fitter, cheaper, coachable Rodgers from years ago (who definitely is a HOF'er). why are you so resistant to transitioning to the Love era and having real cap room? the SB window with Rodgers is closed. it's about the future now...good or bad. with Rodgers their feet are stuck in concrete. we don't know if MLF is even a good head coach. at this point i'm kinda 45/55 on it.

 

[gbgary]

I'm quite sure not having a decent #2 receiving option significantly contributed to Rodgers struggling at times.

at times...but i think his reluctance to throw it to open guys in small windows, his inaccuracy, his looking to graham and adams first, had more to do with it. holding the ball.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

my $40ish was on the Packers releasing him after 2020. i didn't say anything about trading him the other day.

Wait a moment, you want the Packers to release Rodgers after the 2020 season??? I'm sorry but that is outright crazy.

since we don't know the 22 cap it's reasonable to predict a 10m+ increase.

The salary cap will be set no matter the Packers decision on Rodgers.

it's the current Rodgers we'd be moving on from. not the younger, fitter, cheaper, coachable Rodgers from years ago (who definitely is a HOF'er). why are you so resistant to transitioning to the Love era and having real cap room? the SB window with Rodgers is closed. it's about the future now...good or bad. with Rodgers their feet are stuck in concrete.

I don't consider Rodgers' championship window to be closed at all. With the Packers making it to the NFCCG last season that seems to be a reasonable approach.

I'm reluctant to transition to Love being the starting quarterback as it's not easy to adequately replace a HOF quarterback and nobody knows if Love is up to the task at this point.

at times...but i think his reluctance to throw it to open guys in small windows, his inaccuracy, his looking to graham and adams first, had more to do with it.

Either the receivers were open or Rodgers had to throw into small windows, it doesn't work both ways.

 

[gbgary]

Wait a moment, you want the Packers to release Rodgers after the 2020 season??? I'm sorry but that is outright crazy.

better than keeping him for all the reasons i've already mentioned. if they can trade him fine but if they can't...let him go.

The salary cap will be set no matter the Packers decision on Rodgers.

?? of. course. ??
so in effect, if gone after 2020, it's nearly 40m plus the '22 increase (10-15m) in 22. for 21 it's tight but still a 5m cap savings for the Packers...but they're done with his contract and the Love era begins.

I don't consider Rodgers' championship window to be closed at all. With the Packers making it to the NFCCG last season that seems to be a reasonable approach.

ok. it's your opinion. it's unrealistic but you're entitled to it.

I'm reluctant to transition to Love being the starting quarterback as it's not easy to adequately replace a HOF quarterback and nobody knows if Love is up to the task at this point.

but Rodgers doesn't play like a HOF'er anymore. so you're transitioning from an above average QB with issues.

Either the receivers were open or Rodgers had to throw into small windows, it doesn't work both ways.

sure it does. ball comes out quick as the wr first comes open.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

better than keeping him for all the reasons i've already mentioned. if they can trade him fine but if they can't...let him go.

Once again I'm sorry but that is the most stupid thing I've read in a long time.

?? of. course. ??
so in effect, if gone after 2020, it's nearly 40m plus the '22 increase (10-15m) in 22. for 21 it's tight but still a 5m cap savings for the Packers...but they're done with his contract and the Love era begins.

What's the point of adding the salary cap increase to the Packers savings by moving on Rodgers though???

ok. it's your opinion. it's unrealistic but you're entitled to it.

It's ignorant to not consider it a possibility after the Packers were one of the last four teams standing last season.

but Rodgers doesn't play like a HOF'er anymore. so you're transitioning from an above average QB with issues.

Once again, the lack of talent at pass catchers significantly contributed to Rodgers not performing up to potential.

sure it does. ball comes out quick as the wr first comes open.

No, a receiver is either open or it takes the quarterback to throw into a small window to get him the ball.

 

[Dblbogey]

They hated the Brian Brohm pick too

And the Mossy Cade trade.

 

[PackAttack12]

why are you so resistant to transitioning to the Love era and having real cap room? the SB window with Rodgers is closed. it's about the future now...good or bad. with Rodgers their feet are stuck in concrete. we don't know if MLF is even a good head coach. at this point i'm kinda 45/55 on it.

So you admit that you aren’t sure that MLF is a good head coach, but you’re comfortable with him developing Love who has as much bust potential as boom, if not more, and you’re comfortable doing this in 2021, as opposed to moving forward with a hall of fame quarterback who has had one losing season since 2009?

You’ve completely lost it. And I didn’t think you had anything to lose. But whatever it was, you lost that too.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

So you admit that you aren’t sure that MLF is a good head coach, but you’re comfortable with him developing Love who has as much bust potential as boom, if not more, and you’re comfortable doing this in 2021, as opposed to moving forward with a hall of fame quarterback who has had one losing season since 2009?

It's even more mind-boggling considering gbgary is adamant about MLF running his offense without allowing Rodgers to have an input or change the play at the LOS.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It's even more mind-boggling considering gbgary is adamant about MLF running his offense without allowing Rodgers to have an input or change the play at the LOS.

It's particularly mind boggling when you consider that the QB changing the play at the line of scrimmage is build into MLF's offense. One of the reasons it takes awhile to get plays in and the offense up to the line of scrimmage is that two plays are sent in--the pass call with a run audilble option or vice versa. This is common in the NFL, and attested to by Rodgers as the current approach. This is the most rudimentary level of audibling but applicable to all the run-pass tweener situations, more than half the plays in a given game.

Next, consider Sternberger's description of the "check with me" on his playoff TD. You can see it in the tape, Sternberger turning to the QB and Rodgers looking at him. I don't think Rodgers and Sternberger cooked up route adjustments at the line of scrimmage over a couple of beers.

These are just the audibling elements we've heard players talk about. And that's just the QB. WRs audible routes on their own; they have route options in reaction to defensive alignments. No passing offense can work without them. More experienced and accomplished receivers have a broader set of route options than rookies. A guy who amounts to a rookie in Sternberger might need to be told. With Adams it might be understood or communicated with a hand signal or a just a look.

It's also worth considering that you had a head coach with one year of play calling under his belt while having a HOF QB who had been through 11 wars. The idea that the learning and adapting process is or should be a one-way street is kinda silly no matter how often it is repeated in the media. This would extend back into game planning. Should LaFluer ignore what Rodgers has seen on tape as things likely to work or not? That's kinda silly as well.

This business of "run the play as called" falls somewhere between overcooked and outright wrong, in theory or practice. When Love first takes the field it might have to be that way. And since he should not be expected to be a once in a decade exception like Luck or Mahomes, it will not be pretty. Transitioning prematurely is the more likely path to somebody losing his job.

So, why does it take QBs and WRs a year or more of on-field experience to build up to productivity, some never getting there? They learn through experience to process the field pre-snap and make adjustments to maximize the chance of success on any given play. That requires 1) film study and 2) knowing what you are looking at when you do it. And you have to do it in a hurry--you've got to figure it out and internalize it against that defense that week.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I’ve only scanned the most recent comments so maybe I missed something. But I did see something along the lines of “transitioning to the Love era.”

Huh? The guy hasn’t thrown one pass yet. I’m hoping Rodgers regains some of his form (he hasn’t regressed THAT much) and we get to another SB (and win) with #12 under center. Best case for me is Rodgers completing his career in GB (as he has said he wants to do) and trading Love for a 3rd round pick in 2 or 3 years.

I’m still scratching my head over the Love draft anyway, seems like a wasted first round pick. If there’s a method to what seems to be Gluten’s madness, I’d love to see it.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

They hated the Brian Brohm pick too

I don't know that I'd say I "hated the pick" per se, but I did think he was a bit overrated and told my friends that Flynn would knock him out of the number two spot. Sure enough, played out exactly that way.

Honestly, and I will never ever change my mind on this, worst pick ever in Packer history was Brett Hundley whose IQ was negative 120.

 

[Mavster]

I’ve only scanned the most recent comments so maybe I missed something. But I did see something along the lines of “transitioning to the Love era.”

Huh? The guy hasn’t thrown one pass yet. I’m hoping Rodgers regains some of his form (he hasn’t regressed THAT much) and we get to another SB (and win) with #12 under center. Best case for me is Rodgers completing his career in GB (as he has said he wants to do) and trading Love for a 3rd round pick in 2 or 3 years.

I’m still scratching my head over the Love draft anyway, seems like a wasted first round pick. If there’s a method to what seems to be Gluten’s madness, I’d love to see it.

Trading Love in the next 2-3 seasons for a 3rd round pick would be a horrendous move by Gute.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Best case for me is Rodgers completing his career in GB (as he has said he wants to do) and trading Love for a 3rd round pick in 2 or 3 years.

With Gutekunst moving up to select Love in the first round the plan is definitely not to trade him for a day two pick down the road.

 

[jon]

Trading Love in the next 2-3 seasons for a 3rd round pick would be a horrendous move by Gute.

But it might end up this way. This possibility underscores the riskiness of the pick.

Of course, this could happen with any player, any pick, but risk is function of the probability of outcomes and the costs or benefits should they occur. Most people, it seems to me, see little likelihood that Love will become next in the Favre-Rodgers line (and might not get the chance) but rather a fairly high likelihood that he will be a prospect for whom GB over-paid with a first at the cost of losing someone of probable value to the team's performance. Lots of rambling words meaning 'risky pick'.

My crystal ball was made in China so it's cloudy on a good day so I don't know anything, but as I look at this pick in the context of all off-season moves, yes, risky.

 

[Mavster]

But it might end up this way. This possibility underscores the riskiness of the pick.

Of course, this could happen with any player, any pick, but risk is function of the probability of outcomes and the costs or benefits should they occur. Most people, it seems to me, see little likelihood that Love will become next in the Favre-Rodgers line (and might not get the chance) but rather a fairly high likelihood that he will be a prospect for whom GB over-paid with a first at the cost of losing someone of probable value to the team's performance. Lots of rambling words meaning 'risky pick'.

My crystal ball was made in China so it's cloudy on a good day so I don't know anything, but as I look at this pick in the context of all off-season moves, yes, risky.

Why on earth would any team trade away a 1st round QB on their rookie contract?? Especially one they traded up to acquire.

 

[melvin dangerr]

Untested, Unproven, Guaranteed, isn’t life great in the NFL......

 

[Mondio]

Untested, Unproven, Guaranteed, isn’t life great in the NFL......

Is a little weird compared to us normal folk, but I am a fan the new slotting system for rookie contracts. Guaranteed or not, most of them make equal amounts relative to where they were chosen. I figure a young QB is going to be given 4 years of development and opportunity as a 1st rounder in almost every situation, so odds are he was going to see all that money no matter what they called it.

 

[gbgary]

So you admit that you aren’t sure that MLF is a good head coach, but you’re comfortable with him developing Love who has as much bust potential as boom, if not more, and you’re comfortable doing this in 2021, as opposed to moving forward with a hall of fame quarterback who has had one losing season since 2009?

You’ve completely lost it. And I didn’t think you had anything to lose. But whatever it was, you lost that too.

how can anyone be certain how good he is after one year and not being able to run his system? the fact that he buckled so much to rodgers is concerning.
comfortable developing love? we have no choice in the matter. he's going to do it...or try.
there is no "forward" with rodgers after this season. the cap will prohibit it. can you see the Packers taking a 36m cap hit on rodgers in 2021 with the total cap not being any higher than it is this year? unless love is a total washout it's his job.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why on earth would any team trade away a 1st round QB on their rookie contract?? Especially one they traded up to acquire.

There could be different scenarios with either Rodgers performing at a HOF level or the front office realizing Love isn't a franchise quarterback just to name two.

there is no "forward" with rodgers after this season. the cap will prohibit it. can you see the Packers taking a 36m cap hit on rodgers in 2021 with the total cap not being any higher than it is this year?

It would definitely not be a smarter idea to have Rodgers count $31 million against the cap in dead money in 2021 while starting Love.

 

[gbgary]

It would definitely not be a smarter idea to have Rodgers count $31 million against the cap in dead money in 2021 while starting Love.

sure it would be...because they'd save $5m, be totally done with his contract, and won't have to face the following year's $39m rodgers cap hit.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

sure it would be...because they'd save $5m, be totally done with his contract, and won't have to face the following year's $39m rodgers cap hit.

It doesn't make any sense as the Packers would save a minimum amount of cap space for the 2021 season while moving from a HOF quarterback to a completely unproven starter though.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Is a little weird compared to us normal folk, but I am a fan the new slotting system for rookie contracts.

Is something that's been around since 2011 "new"?

 

[HardRightEdge]

It doesn't make any sense as the Packers would save a minimum amount of cap space for the 2021 season while moving from a HOF quarterback to a completely unproven starter though.

It makes perfect sense if you've got a 105 degree fantasy football fever. That doesn't even mean you have to be a fantasy player. gbgary has an evident belief that Rodgers is a mediocre or worse NFL QB which would all but guarantee you cannot win with him. I don't know how anybody would conclude that without being informed by stats like a sub-par completion percentage or QBR or mediocre passer rating.

All stats are flawed to one degree or another. There are certain intangilbles the numbers cannot account for, one of which is "13-3". When we look at passer rating, it was created in 1973, based on an entirely different game. We should consider that the formula understates the value of limiting INTs in the current game at the expense of a couple of throwaways per game, especially with an inexperience receiver group where what they will do at the point where the ball is put in the air is not particularly predictable if they didn't mess up the route option before that.

I think it's worth considering that a football mind such as Rodgers sees through statistical flaws. The same assessment applies to Garoppolo, an elite QB without elite statistics. As I've illustrated before, he is elite because he just wins football games compared to the guys coming in behind and in front of him do nothing but lose games with fundamentally the sam roster. Winning is the preeminent statistic.

I can't help but think the enthusiam for ground-and-pound, taking the ball out of Rodgers' hands by whatever percentage of snaps, may be function of fantansy leagues where RBs earn the same or more points than QBs and more than WRs when everthing about this game says you must pass to win, but I digress.

The luckist man in this picture is Mike Pettine, with all the yada yada surrounding the fictional friction between QB and head coach, the draft picks, and the on-going debates regarding Rodgers' decline. The true story line of the 2019 season is how SF handed Pettine his head, a defense ill-prepared for for what was thrown at them and simply unable to adjust.

We should also consider the possibility that Mr. Love might become the next Kizer (or C.J. Beathard for that matter), guys who do nothing but lose football games. We should recall that McCarthy declared Kizer "a first round talent" at the time of the trade. Now we have a new "first round talent". You can go from 13-3 to 4-12 or worse in a big hurry with a bad QB, no matter who else you've got and how much you run the ball.

I don't think the risk that Love will turn out to be a bad QB has been properly factored into gbgary's calculations.