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

[OldSchool101]

Absolutely no doubt I am guilty of this. Guilty as charged. My point is many of my posts are in sarcasm mode. There is no sarcasm button here. When they are taken out of context I have neither the time nor inclination to explain them.

That part is true. I’m as sarcastic as they come. I wholeheartedly agree with you here. But you’re still a …! Lol

I don’t see a trade happening for anything less than 2 draft picks this season alone. One has to have a #40-something in front of it. Aaron doesn’t want to play here but we shouldn’t get a D- grade draft puck either. This business about him being the same as Favre is silly too (not referencing you just generally)

In the last 3 seasons before Jets trade
Favre: 64/62 TD INT, 79% Passer
ONE 2nd TeamAP = 3rd Rounder 1 year rental
Vs
Rodgers:111/19 TD/INT, 108% Pass
TWO 1st Team AllPro
2 league MVP’s = #13 1year rental

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If the rumors are true, it isn't the Packers that are worried about getting more compensation if Rodgers plays in 2024, it seems that the Jets want compensation if he doesn't.

Sounds like Rodgers statement on the Pat M. a few weeks ago has the Jets nervous or if nothing else, using it to their advantage. That statement being the one where Rodgers said that prior to his darkness retreat, he was 90% sure he would retire.

So if I have the Jets position straight, they don't want to overpay for a 39 year old, that may only play one year and if in fact, he only plays 1 year, they want compensation back. I call that having your cake and eating it too.

 

[OldSchool101]

Z Za If the rumors are true, it isn't the Packers that are worried about getting more compensation if Rodgers plays in 2024, it seems that the Jets want compensation if he doesn't.

Sounds like Rodgers statement on the Pat M. a few weeks ago has the Jets nervous or if nothing else, using it to their advantage. That statement being the one where Rodgers said that prior to his darkness retreat, he was 90% sure he would retire.

So if I have the Jets position straight, they don't want to overpay for a 39 year old, that may only play one year and if in fact, he only plays 1 year, they want compensation back. I call that having your cake and eating it too.

The Jets are acting like this is Brett Favre. They had that set up like this if Favre retired they wanted
If Packers got a 1 they wanted a 5 back
If Packers got a 2 they wanted a 6 back
If Packers got a 3 they wanted a 7 back

But in no way shape or form is Brett Favre the equal to
I’d tell them if Rodgers retires after
1 season we’ll give them a 5th Rounder back for their #13 now.
That’s fair from a points deal.

If it’s anything less we’d kick them a 7th if he’s gone after 1 season.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Jets are acting like this is Brett Favre. They had that set up like this if Favre retired they wanted
If Packers got a 1 they wanted a 5 back
If Packers got a 2 they wanted a 6 back
If Packers got a 3 they wanted a 7 back

I’d tell them if Rodgers retires after
1 season we’ll give them a 5th Rounder back for their #13 now.
That’s fair from a points deal.

If it’s anything less we’d kick them a 7th if he’s gone after 1 season.

It should be a two way street though. If Rodgers keeps playing, whether it is for the Jets or someone they trade him to (and get compensation), then the Packers should be compensated.

I also don't particularly buy into Rodgers statement that he was "90% sure he was going to retire b4 his darkness retreat." Probably, just his way of steering the narrative to try and show just how important that retreat was for him and how "conflicted" he was. Also, he knew what saying that would do to his trade value.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I’d tell them if Rodgers retires after
1 season we’ll give them a 5th Rounder back for their #13 now.
That’s fair from a points deal.

The other aspect of all this tying into him playing, retiring or waffling at any particular time, what if he retires on March 15th, 2024. The Packers fork over a conditional pick, the Jets use it to draft a player and on July 1st, he unretires. Then what?

 

[thequick12]

Really? I have never heard of a team contacting players during the draft and saying "just a heads up dude, we are drafting a player that plays the same position as you, but don't worry, you are still our number 1 enchilada!:" No wonder Adams wanted out!!! I bet nobody contacted him about all the WR's that were drafted or signed while he was a Packer and a top WR in the league! How dare them!

Please don't come back with "Well, Rodgers earned being pacified by a heads up about Love being selected." If you believe that, I feel great sadness for you.

Adams would of been just as excited as Rodgers had the Packers completed the trade up for Justin Jefferson by offering just a bit more than they were.

Unlike a backup qb, a number 2 wr that plays like a bonafide #1 means more opportunities for everybody. I dont think your comparison is valid.

If you think they went into the draft not knowing there was a chance they would trade up for Jordan Love then Im not sure what you're watching. I hope theyre playing chess not checkers and if theyre playing chess they thought about that scenario. I mean as Ive said before, Love kept falling to me in mock drafts and I selected him in a lot of those mocks.

So that never happened for the Packers FO in the mocks Im sure they do using their board. Sht they should be predicting other teams boards based on past parameters. Their mocks should be beyond next level. Im sure they selected Love in at least one if their scenarios.

 

[thequick12]

It should be a two way street though. If Rodgers keeps playing, whether it is for the Jets or someone they trade him to (and get compensation), then the Packers should be compensated.

I also don't particularly buy into Rodgers statement that he was "90% sure he was going to retire b4 his darkness retreat." Probably, just his way of steering the narrative to try and show just how important that retreat was for him and how "conflicted" he was. Also, he knew what saying that would do to his trade value.

I agree I don't believe that 90% sht. But I dont think it was about the retreat. I think it was because they hurt dudes feelings. He wanted to play for the Packers but he didnt feel like they wanted him back. I get it, its baby sht but I think thats closer to the truth

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Adams would of been just as excited as Rodgers had the Packers completed the trade up for Justin Jefferson by offering just a bit more than they were.

Unlike a backup qb, a number 2 wr that plays like a bonafide #1 means more opportunities for everybody. I dont think your comparison is valid.

If you think they went into the draft not knowing there was a chance they would trade up for Jordan Love then Im not sure what you're watching. I hope theyre playing chess not checkers and if theyre playing chess they thought about that scenario. I mean as Ive said before, Love kept falling to me in mock drafts and I selected him in a lot of those mocks.

So that never happened for the Packers FO in the mocks Im sure they do using their board. Sht they should be predicting other teams boards based on past parameters. Their mocks should be beyond next level. Im sure they selected Love in at least one if their scenarios.

Yet, none of that convinces me that the Packers should have changed their draft policy and consulted/discussed with Rodgers or any other player, about all the potential players that they were considering drafting.

If you think that players aren't watching the draft and wondering how their teams selections influence their job stability, then you are watching the sport with blinders on. It's a business, one full of difficult decisions, that sometimes aren't always going to be popular with its employees or its customers. That said, like most businesses, it isn't employee run, which seems to be what Rodgers was pushing for.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I agree I don't believe that 90% sht. But I dont think it was about the retreat. I think it was because they hurt dudes feelings. He wanted to play for the Packers but he didnt feel like they wanted him back. I get it, its baby sht but I think thats closer to the truth

I guess one could look at the last 3 off seasons and question his desire to play for the Packers.

As far as his feelings being hurt, the dude flew too close to the fire and got burned. However, I can give you 60+ million reasons why I don't feel sorry for the guy who seemed hell bent on piloting his way out of Green Bay.

 

[thequick12]

Yet, none of that convinces me that the Packers should have changed their draft policy and consulted/discussed with Rodgers or any other player, about all the potential players that they were considering drafting.

If you think that players aren't watching the draft and wondering how their teams selections influence their job stability, then you are watching the sport with blinders on. It's a business, one full of difficult decisions, that sometimes aren't always going to be popular with its employees or its customers. That said, like most businesses, it isn't employee run, which seems to be what Rodgers was pushing for.

Exactly and theres proper ways to go about difficult decisions, even in buisness. The Packers have repeatedly been called out by legendary players for not doing so...

 

[thequick12]

I guess one could look at the last 3 off seasons and question his desire to play for the Packers.

As far as his feelings being hurt, the dude flew too close to the fire and got burned. However, I can give you 60+ million reasons why I don't feel sorry for the guy who seemed hell bent on piloting his way out of Green Bay.

I dont feel sorry for him either man, lets get that straight. I just have the ability to see things from both sides without bias.

He may very well have wanted to go somewhere else and wanted it to look like he wanted to stay. I definitely understand both are possible.

Bottom line is hes getting 60 m you're correct and he's gonna likely have a better or similar chance to win a SB in NY. I wouldnt be surprised if the next two years go well with that young team...he signs an extension with the Jets

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Exactly and theres proper ways to go about difficult decisions, even in buisness. The Packers have repeatedly been called out by legendary players for not doing so...

Despite that noise, I view them as one of the more successful NFL franchises in the history of the NFL. So I'm just fine with how they've conducted business. There are always going to be those who question that practice, doesn't make them right.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I dont feel sorry for him either man, lets get that straight. I just have the ability to see things from both sides without bias.

If you are implying that I'm somehow biased, I'm not. I gain nothing, no matter what Rodgers or the Packers do. I love what Rodgers has done on the field for the Packers. However, I won't let that cloud my opinion of things that he does off the field that, also IMO, effects his employer and his team, in a negative way.

 

[thequick12]

Despite that noise, I view them as one of the more successful NFL franchises in the history of the NFL. So I'm just fine with how they've conducted business. There are always going to be those who question that practice, doesn't make them right.

Jordy Nelson, Charles Woodson, Aaron Rodgers, Julius Peppers...those arent exactly jags

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Jordy Nelson, Charles Woodson, Aaron Rodgers, Julius Peppers...those arent exactly jags

Not saying they are JAG's. However, just because 1 or any of them have said something negative about the front office, doesn't move the meter that much for me and make me want to see a change. You forgot Greg Jennings and Za’Darius Smith.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Then, the 2021 draft came around, and he realized that by openly fighting in the press, the team started appeasing him.

Just for the record, it was Adam Schefter who broke the "news" on draft day in 2021. Rodgers didn't say a single word publicly until training camp that year.

Rodgers is/was paid millions of dollars to be the Packers QB, not its GM or coach. The fact that he has reacted with passive aggressive negativity to things those above him have done and subsequently put himself, a first ballot HOF'er on the trading block, tells you a lot. Rodgers isn't being traded because his skills have declined, Rodgers isn't being traded because the Packers have a sure thing in Love. Rodgers is being traded, because the Packers have finally grown tired of his crap.

Rodgers is being traded because of the cap implications holding on to him would have. Gutekunst and Ball structured the extension in a terrible way last offseason which has led to the current situation.

Had Love not been selected, do you think Rodgers has back to back MVP years?

Yes, without a doubt.

Really? I have never heard of a team contacting players during the draft and saying "just a heads up dude, we are drafting a player that plays the same position as you, but don't worry, you are still our number 1 enchilada!:"

The Packers should have given Rodgers a heads up that they would possibly select a quarterback early in the 2020 draft long before the pick actually happened. Gutekunst should have picked up the phone and called him like he supposedly did several times this offseason. That would have taken one minute and could have resulted in the situation playing out completely different.

And GB would be in the same position they were in last January. They’d have 2 QB’s to choose from. It’s not ideal, buts it’s better than NO good QB!

It's definitely true that it's better to have two quarterbacks instead of none. But it would be awfully tough for the Packers to make it work regarding the cap. In addition I would imagine they would find themselves in a pretty toxic situation if Rodgers returns for this season.

The Patriots drafted 10 QB's while Brady was their starting QB, might have ruffled his feathers some, but never seemed to be a big issue in New England.

None of them was a first rounder. And all three of them who were good enough to be a starter in this league were traded out of New England within the first four seasons with the team. It seems Brady didn't like being challenged by one of the QBs either.

Yet, none of that convinces me that the Packers should have changed their draft policy and consulted/discussed with Rodgers or any other player, about all the potential players that they were considering drafting.

I'm not suggesting the Packers should have changed their plans because of Rodgers. They should have definitely informed him about it though.

Despite that noise, I view them as one of the more successful NFL franchises in the history of the NFL. So I'm just fine with how they've conducted business. There are always going to be those who question that practice, doesn't make them right.

Rodgers is the main reason for the Packers having been successful over the past 15 seasons. Gutekunst only deserves a small part of the credit for that.

 

[thequick12]

Not saying they are JAG's. However, just because 1 or any of them have said something negative about the front office, doesn't move the meter that much for me and make me want to see a change. You forgot Greg Jennings and Za’Darius Smith.

I know youre joking but if I recall they offered Jennings something similar to what he got from the Vikings. Not exactly the same. I also dont recall Jennings saying the Packers FO mistreated him

Now Z...they did do him dirty in a similar fashion. I get by rule they are allowed to convert his base to signing bonus to save against the cap. A simple restructure. However the whole then not paying that money out right away but instead paying it out weekly through out the season. Is certainly disingenuous at best. Once again I get the contract allows them to do that. Its just not the right way to do buisness.

I gurantee the Packers have missed out on free agents, because of the Front Offices bad reputation for how they "take care" of players.

Its part of the reason Adams asked to be traded. He also did not like the way the FO treated him. Felt disrespected by how they went about it.

 

[thequick12]

If you are implying that I'm somehow biased, I'm not. I gain nothing, no matter what Rodgers or the Packers do. I love what Rodgers has done on the field for the Packers. However, I won't let that cloud my opinion of things that he does off the field that, also IMO, effects his employer and his team, in a negative way.

You are definitely bias...Im not sure where it says you have to gain something in order to be bias. The vast majority of the time when people are bias, they dont gain anything and in fact they usually lose something or miss out on something.

To not be bias you would have to not let your opinion of him off the field effect your opinion of him on the field. You are unable to do that and you just said so yourself.

I dont like the dude as a person either and thats from more than just watching tv and reading articles. I definitely got a bad vibe, the one time Ive had to interact with him. However I wouldn't ever let that cloud my judgment of him as a football player or of how he should be treated by the FO. I can keep those seperate

 

[Mondio]

I know youre joking but if I recall they offered Jennings something similar to what he got from the Vikings. Not exactly the same. I also dont recall Jennings saying the Packers FO mistreated him

Now Z...they did do him dirty in a similar fashion. I get by rule they are allowed to convert his base to signing bonus to save against the cap. A simple restructure. However the whole then not paying that money out right away but instead paying it out weekly through out the season. Is certainly disingenuous at best. Once again I get the contract allows them to do that. Its just not the right way to do buisness.

I gurantee the Packers have missed out on free agents, because of the Front Offices bad reputation for how they "take care" of players.

Its part of the reason Adams asked to be traded. He also did not like the way the FO treated him. Felt disrespected by how they went about it.

Jennings got more guaranteed from MN if I remember correctly. The biggest beef I remember from him going out was the Packers "brainwash" you into thinking they're the best. Which i'm sure you'll find in every locker room across the NFL. I don't remember him being upset with the FO in particular. Always sounded like someone trying to convince themselves why they liked their new girlfriend better even though they really liked the old one.

 

[Mondio]

Rodgers is the main reason for the Packers having been successful over the past 15 seasons. Gutekunst only deserves a small part of the credit for that.

MLF had a good response the other day. Many people have been rewarded for his play on the field. I don't think anybody can deny that.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

To not be bias you would have to not let your opinion of him off the field effect your opinion of him on the field. You are unable to do that and you just said so yourself.

LOL....You obviously do not know what my opinion or stance on Rodgers has been through the years.

I can't even count the number of times I have praised and defended Rodgers for what he has done on the field. Even continuing to do that, after my opinion of him off the field changed. To be honest, it actually has been quite difficult for me to come off my "Rodgers Mountain" and maybe that is one of the reasons I have been so critical of all this off the field stuff. BTW, just because it is "off the field", it doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't effect what the team is doing.

I will say it again, my avatar of Rodgers sitting on the Game of Thrones "throne" serves a purpose. Like most of the kings in GOT, his followers are conflicted. Do they bow down and succumb to the man because he is king or do they look at the entire man and act accordingly?

Great football player, one of the best to play the game, but I'm fine with him leaving. Not because I think he can't still be a really solid QB, but because he is no longer a team player. When I say "team", I mean the entire organization, not just his teammates.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I gurantee the Packers have missed out on free agents, because of the Front Offices bad reputation for how they "take care" of players.

Its part of the reason Adams asked to be traded. He also did not like the way the FO treated him. Felt disrespected by how they went about it.

I understand that some might view the Packers way of living up to the terms of a contract might be "troubling", but they are doing things that a contract allows them to do. Don't like it, don't sign it. Don't understand it, get it explained. There are reasons why contracts give flexibility for a team, same as there are reasons why players want guaranteed money.

Now Z...they did do him dirty in a similar fashion.

I look at a guy like Z-Dog, saying the team done him dirty and then holding a grudge. Well guess what, the team did exactly what the contract he signed, allowed them to do. If he didn't like it, he should have been angry at his contract lawyer, not the Packers.

Any business has to make tough decisions, especially when it involves people/employees. Many fans seem to side with the players and blame the organization for "doing players dirty." I guarantee you, the organization is doing what they feel is best for the success of that organization and if they don't, they will fail. Hated seeing Jordy go, turns out, it was probably a smart move. Loved seeing the Packers bring Cobb back, turns out, probably wasn't all that smart of a move.

 

[OldSchool101]

The other aspect of all this tying into him playing, retiring or waffling at any particular time, what if he retires on March 15th, 2024. The Packers fork over a conditional pick, the Jets use it to draft a player and on July 1st, he unretires. Then what?

Yeah. I think someone in here mentioned that it would need to be a 2025 selection. That’s kinda along the thought process I was thinking as a 5th Rounder in 2025 really isn’t much value to throw back. Most drafts we get a 5th-7th area comp picks so it’s a washable stain.

Through that whole conversation you’ll notice I said for #13. We both know that getting a #13 over a couple 2nds is a substantial difference. Even a 5th Rounder now this year wouldn’t buy your way from #17 (best overall sum value of #42,#43 packaged) to #13. Meaning to throw back a 2025, 5th totally eliminates their primary excuse AND puts ALL the focus on 2023, using the Jets very own crafty tactics. It lets them know we know that 2025 pick won’t hold the deal up, we’d even give them one. We want to focus on now. Remember that a one #13 in a trade back into later Day 1 gets a 2024 First Rounder. We don’t need the Jets to give us 1, we can do that math ourselves.

I think the Jets are using all this talk about Brett Favre and being scared of Aaron retiring as an fabricated act to minimize current value. It’s really a distraction technique imo.
It has 0% bearing on 2023 play. That’s just my opinion. Aaron Rodgers in 2023 alone is Worth a mid round Day 1. So give them a future 2025 5th rounder to eliminate that distraction technique and bring it back to what we are selling.. which is 2023 services.

Now that 2024 is behind us. Give us equivalent of 2023 pair of Seconds plus switch a Day 3 selection and keep your #13. Just get us close to #16 overall value for 2023 Aaron Rodgers. That’s not an unreasonable #, we’re playing fair not asking for #13 and we expect NY to reciprocate.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yeah. I think someone in here mentioned that it would need to be a 2025 selection. That’s kinda along the thought process I was thinking as a 5th Rounder in 2025 really isn’t much value to throw back. Most drafts we get a 5th-7th area comp picks so it’s a washable stain.

Through that whole conversation you’ll notice I said for #13. We both know that getting a #13 over a couple 2nds is a substantial difference. Even a 5th Rounder now this year wouldn’t buy your way from #17 (best overall sum value of #42,#43 packaged) to #13. Meaning to throw back a 2025, 5th totally eliminates their primary excuse AND puts ALL the focus on 2023, using the Jets very own crafty tactics. It lets them know we know that 2025 pick won’t hold the deal up, we’d even give them one. We want to focus on now. Remember that a one #13 in a trade back into later Day 1 gets a 2024 First Rounder. We don’t need the Jets to give us 1, we can do that math ourselves.

I think the Jets are using all this talk about Brett Favre and being scared of Aaron retiring as an fabricated act to minimize current value. It’s really a distraction technique imo.
It has 0% bearing on 2023 play. That’s just my opinion. Aaron Rodgers in 2023 alone is Worth a mid round Day 1. So give them a future 2025 5th rounder to eliminate that distraction technique and bring it back to what we are selling.. which is 2023 services

I would actually choose swapping our #15 for their #13 over a 2025 5th round pick.

Others might have said it, but I have been saying all along that anything tied to a future draft pick, has to have the chance to already happen (Rodgers plays in 2024) before the contingency of, can be completed (draft pick). Obviously, language could be used to state just about anything. "If Rodgers plans on playing in 2024, the Packers get a 2nd round pick in the 2024 draft. However, if Rodgers retires or does not play in 2024 and the draft pick has been used by the Packers, the Jets receive the Packers 2025 2nd round pick." Add in all the legal "therefore, quashal, aliquot, usurious, objectionable, art thou, wherein ther's" and you have an airtight deal that only 2 drunk lawyers could decipher during a 5 day darkness retreat on the other side of Brokeback mountain.

 

[OldSchool101]

Add in all the legal "therefore, quashal, aliquot, usurious, objectionable, art thou, wherein ther's" and you have an airtight deal that only 2 drunk lawyers could decipher during a 5 day darkness retreat on the other side of Brokeback mountain.

Oh I love usurious. I use it all the time. Especially in negotiating I ask
“u-surious?” Every time the offered interest rate seems high. It’s code for I think I’m getting screwed!