Rodgers reportedly disgruntled, does not want to return to the Packers

[Voyageur]

I was referring to Aaron Rodgers himself being on many of Pat's Tuesday shows. Although, we have definitely heard Rodgers play word games as well.

I think Rodgers is leaving the whole thing open to the Packers front office to do what they want. He'll be there, if asked, or leave, if asked. He's trying to be non-committed in what he says, leaving the team make that decision. As for how he feels about it, I don't know. Only he knows what's really in his heart for the game, and Green Bay.

I do believe he'd prefer getting the money and running at this point, but that's purely my belief, and nothing more than opinion.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think Rodgers is leaving the whole thing open to the Packers front office to do what they want.

If you had listened to him on Tuesday, he placed conditions on him wanting to stay. Those conditions were that he wanted a situation that would still allow him to flourish. He only wants to be part of a reload, not a rebuild. Which funny enough, he commented that very few teams will admit to being in "rebuild mode". Which makes me think, he left that up for himself to decide. The Packers have stated that they want him back and thought they had him back for 2-3 years with the extension he signed last season. So no, Rodgers has the ball in his court.

One other thing about his wanting all of his older teammates back on team. If he is going to make his decision before the new league year starts, does he expect the Packers to have their roster done, so he can assess it? Guys like Lazard, who he mentioned in his "want back speech", seem pretty set on testing Free Agency.

 

[Mondio]

Just like he wasn't go to play here if they didn't re-sign Adams last year...

 

[Voyageur]

If you had listened to him on Tuesday, he placed conditions on him wanting to stay. Those conditions were that he wanted a situation that would still allow him to flourish. He only wants to be part of a reload, not a rebuild. Which funny enough, he commented that very few teams will admit to being in "rebuild mode". Which makes me think, he left that up for himself to decide. The Packers have stated that they want him back and thought they had him back for 2-3 years with the extension he signed last season. So no, Rodgers has the ball in his court.

One other thing about his wanting all of his older teammates back on team. If he is going to make his decision before the new league year starts, does he expect the Packers to have their roster done, so he can assess it? Guys like Lazard, who he mentioned in his "want back speech", seem pretty set on testing Free Agency.

Think about reload and rebuild. I understand his feelings. He's too old for a rebuild around him. It would be better for the team with a young guy to build around. A reload means boosting the team in some areas, to create another run at a championship, not take years to do it.

I think he believes that another year with the receivers he has will make a big difference. I think he believes these guys have the skill set to make them winners, and he's willing to do it.

The difference is rebuild and retool. Two completely different animals when you think about it.

 

[Pkrjones]

According to NFL Network's Ian Rapoport, the Packers believed that when Rodgers signed a three-year, $150 million contract last offseason, he would remain with the team for more than one season.

"My understanding is he committed to the Packers for two or three years. In fact—general manager Brian Gutekunst referenced this during his press conference this week—that is what the organization expected," Rapoport said.

I don't understand, then, why the contract was structured to make his retirement/trade more palatable after 1 year vs '24?

Trade/retirement now: dead money hit of $40.8mil.
Trade/retirement before '24 season: $68mil dead money.
Before '25: $45.4mil dead money & cap savings of $13.8mil.

Love is still cheap in '23 ($3.9mil), but on 5th year will be around $20mil in '24. GB can't swing $88mil for QB in 2024 ...something's gotta give. IMHO, this was structured as a 1 year deal ('22) & the best "out" is now.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Think about reload and rebuild. I understand his feelings. He's too old for a rebuild around him. It would be better for the team with a young guy to build around. A reload means boosting the team in some areas, to create another run at a championship, not take years to do it.

I think he believes that another year with the receivers he has will make a big difference. I think he believes these guys have the skill set to make them winners, and he's willing to do it.

The difference is rebuild and retool. Two completely different animals when you think about it.

The only way I see the Packers as technically being in "rebuild mode", is if they trade Rodgers or he retires. I am totally agreeing with you that they wouldn't be willing to bring Rodgers back, if that wasn't their intention (reload). However, if you listen to him speak about it, he very much gave the impression that the corp. group of vets, that he named by name, should be a part of the "reload". So let's say Gute doesn't resign Cobb, Crosby, Big Dog or Lazard, because Gute feels that is what is best for the team. Will Rodgers view that as being in rebuild mode and want out?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't understand, then, why the contract was structured to make his retirement/trade more palatable after 1 year vs '24?

Trade/retirement now: dead money hit of $40.8mil.
Trade/retirement before '24 season: $68mil dead money.
Before '25: $45.4mil dead money & cap savings of $13.8mil.

Love is still cheap in '23 ($3.9mil), but on 5th year will be around $20mil in '24. GB can't swing $88mil for QB in 2024 ...something's gotta give. IMHO, this was structured as a 1 year deal ('22) & the best "out" is now.

I don't have rock solid answers for you on that, just reporting what I read. Maybe the Packers have a plan to restructure Rodgers deal, each year he is still on the team?

 

[Voyageur]

The only way I see the Packers as technically being in "rebuild mode", is if they trade Rodgers or he retires. I am totally agreeing with you that they wouldn't be willing to bring Rodgers back, if that wasn't their intention (reload). However, if you listen to him speak about it, he very much gave the impression that the corp. group of vets, that he named by name, should be a part of the "reload". So let's say Gute doesn't resign Cobb, Crosby, Big Dog or Lazard, because Gute feels that is what is best for the team. Will Rodgers view that as being in rebuild mode and want out?

I agree. I think the whole thing is semantics. Rodgers considers some of the players who are free agents being reloads, not rebuild candidates. He sees it from inside, where all of us are looking at it as third party to the whole thing. That's one of the reason so many players make it a point to totally avoid cameras. They know that they don't come off right with what they say.

 

[Pugger]

The only way I see the Packers as technically being in "rebuild mode", is if they trade Rodgers or he retires. I am totally agreeing with you that they wouldn't be willing to bring Rodgers back, if that wasn't their intention (reload). However, if you listen to him speak about it, he very much gave the impression that the corp. group of vets, that he named by name, should be a part of the "reload". So let's say Gute doesn't resign Cobb, Crosby, Big Dog or Lazard, because Gute feels that is what is best for the team. Will Rodgers view that as being in rebuild mode and want out?

It will depend upon who Gute signs to replace these veterans.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It will depend upon who Gute signs to replace these veterans.

They don't have a ton of cap space to play with, so just replacing a few of them with non-rookies, might be too expensive. My point was that Rodgers did not say "I want to see vets on this team." He specifically dropped a bunch of names that he wants to see back. Is that an absolute "all or nothing"? I doubt it, but it leaves him with outs, as to why he wants to retire or play for another team.

 

[Pkrjones]

They don't have a ton of cap space to play with, so just replacing a few of them with non-rookies, might be too expensive. My point was that Rodgers did not say "I want to see vets on this team." He specifically dropped a bunch of names that he wants to see back. Is that an absolute "all or nothing"? I doubt it, but it leaves him with outs, as to why he wants to retire or play for another team.

Playing with OTC's interactive cap calculator GB can restructure Alexander, A. Jones, P Smith & Clark pushing cap into future years (more available if Bakhtiari's is restructured if desired). After trading AR GB is left with $24mil in space. Assuming $5mil "ish" needed for rookie pool that leaves over $19mil for Gute to sign FA's to fill out roster. Not a ton...but some to spend.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Playing with OTC's interactive cap calculator GB can restructure Alexander, A. Jones, P Smith & Clark pushing cap into future years (more available if Nakhtiari's is restructured if desired). After trading AR GB is left with $24mil in space. Assuming $5mil "ish" needed for rookie pool that leaves over $19mil for Gute to sign FA's to fill out roster. Not a ton...but some to spend.

Honestly, if they are going to trade AR, I would prefer them to figure out ways to start shedding the "owed cap" as quickly as they can and not push money out any further than they already have. It might take 2 or 3 seasons to get back to being cap happy. AR's departure would start the rebuild process, how long that process takes would depend on Love, but also, being able to go out and sign bigger FA's in 2024 and 2025.

If Rodgers is a Packer in 2023, they have no choice but to reload and do some of the moves you suggest, doing so, with Rodgers, is about the only way that they stay competitive next season.

 

[Pkrjones]

Honestly, if they are going to trade AR, I would prefer them to figure out ways to start shedding the "owed cap" as quickly as they can and not push money out any further than they already have. It might take 2 or 3 seasons to get back to being cap happy. AR's departure would start the rebuild process, how long that process takes would depend on Love, but also, being able to go out and sign bigger FA's in 2024 and 2025.

If Rodgers is a Packer in 2023, they have no choice but to reload and do some of the moves you suggest, doing so, with Rodgers, is about the only way that they stay competitive next season.

Unfortunately, no way around the cap in '23. Contracts will NEED to be restructured with money pushed into '24 just to get under the cap, regardless of what happens with AR.

 

[OldSchool101]

Wow. It’s so much to take in. Great arguments on both sides. After reconsidering things it’s my belief that Aaron should come back..or not

 

[Voyageur]

Wow. It’s so much to take in. Great arguments on both sides. After reconsidering things it’s my belief that Aaron should come back..or not

That's kind of where I stand. I no longer know if he should or shouldn't be our QB next year. It makes me want to take up drinking as a serious hobby, instead of watching football.

 

[Mondio]

I’m fine however this plays out. I’m 50/50 he comes back or retires. I guess in the past week my trade thoughts went from about 2% to maybe 15%. I should adjust my 50/50 then but I’m too lazy lol.

Neither option is necessarily bad, but both come with pitfalls. Potentially. And we won’t know if the decision was “right” until it plays out.

I can see the wisdom in all 3 scenarios, though my personal belief is as long as he’s playing well, he should be playing for GB until he calls it quits. And let the Jordan Love stuff work itself out when it’s time to.

 

[Guacamole]

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

 

[Voyageur]

I think Rodgers was referring to a level of play that would be necessary for the Packers to be in the hunt for a championship. Gronkowski's opinion is just that. Opinion.

 

[Mondio]

I actually am amending my predictions already. I think Rodgers is basically saying, I can play, I want to play, lets get it done. I still don't think he has any intention of playing anywhere else. I do think it's true if GB cleans cap and moves on, he'll be done, and I don't blame him. he's not going to be around for a rebuild to see it through.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Gronkowski's opinion is just that. Opinion.

Shared by many.

 

[Voyageur]

Shared by many.

Yes it is. I can't say they're wrong either. We all pretty much see what we see. I just try to see things from an observer point of view, and not based on my own biases. But, that does not mean I'm right. Just trying to think of it all logically, and somewhat like I did as a police officer, with interrogations and investigating crimes.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes it is. I can't say they're wrong either. We all pretty much see what we see. I just try to see things from an observer point of view, and not based on my own biases. But, that does not mean I'm right. Just trying to think of it all logically, and somewhat like I did as a police officer, with interrogations and investigating crimes.

I agree. Perception and perspective can be very different from one person to the other. One of the reasons I have kept my Avatar pic, Rodgers on GOT, is that I often struggle with what I really think of the guy. If you ever watched GOT, you will understand that statement.

 

[Voyageur]

I agree. Perception and perspective can be very different from one person to the other. One of the reasons I have kept my Avatar pic, Rodgers on GOT, is that I often struggle with what I really think of the guy. If you ever watched GOT, you will understand that statement.

I haven't gotten into Game of Thrones. I might, one of these days. Everything I've heard, Martin is a great writer. He knows how to create a story line. Most of what I've written, and read, deals with crime and punishment.

 

[Magooch]

Gronk’s take is kind of ridiculous to be honest but then again he is not exactly famous for his precise logic so it is what it is.

“I think I can win MVP”
“Why are you talking about MVP? Don’t you want super bowls?”

It’s just as insightful as if Rodgers had said “I like pizza” and Gronk said “why are you talking about pizza, don’t you like hamburgers?”

Saying “I can win MVP” does not remotely suggest or imply in any way that Rodgers does not want to win a Super Bowl or that he wouldn’t value winning that trophy or anything like that. If people are upset that he mentioned MVP first that’s fine but there’s no logic in taking that to mean he’s not interested in winning the Super Bowl, too. I can’t believe this needs parsed out this much but here we are…

 

[OldSchool101]

Yes it is. I can't say they're wrong either. We all pretty much see what we see. I just try to see things from an observer point of view, and not based on my own biases. But, that does not mean I'm right. Just trying to think of it all logically, and somewhat like I did as a police officer, with interrogations and investigating crimes.

Love that process! My wife often tells me I should’ve been a detective because she says I have good criminal instincts and street smarts and elite awareness of my surrounding. I worked in an area of commission sales where I had to be able to identify my customers perfectly by clothing and description or my income suffered. I can tell you what everyone in a grocery store line looks like and is wearing clothing wise on both sides of us. I used to never even realize who was next to me when I was young and naive.
I’m guessing in law enforcement it’s similar in you know what to look for and it becomes sorta habit from practice. I’m sure you know there’s an entire art to reading body language and eye contact, it’s very informative if you are aware.