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

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Not sure I agree with your points,

Although I am not sure if I would give up a decent QB myself for an older QB if I didn't have a QB problem, or QB wasn't a team weakness, it is Rodgers we are talking about, one of the best QBs ever and one coming off an MVP season.

I do think that we should request a QB in a trade if possible because we don't know if Love is ready. Throwing him in too soon(unless you are saying we should start Bortles?), even if you want to just forget this season and get his rookie season out of the way, could hinder his development and may even ruin his career, and Love is also an unknown, you don't know how he is going to turn out long term. Finally, while you are not going to replace Rodger's production in QB play, this is a Super bowl contending team, so you hate to throw away this season completely and rebuild for the future if you can help it. Hopefully, we could get a quality starter or two in a trade while getting a qb that combined with the other new players, is good enough to keep this team from having a big drop off in talent/play on the field.

I am not anti-Bortles, but I do think most of the names being mentioned except for the Denver QBs are a lot better than Bortles, and I think we would be a playoff team with a decent starter. Also, I know this probably sounds crazy to many, but I actually think that Carr is a very underrated QB, he has played on some bad teams. I think he may even be considered a star QB/top 10 QB if he had played for a decent organization that fielded good teams. His stats are actually very good, and he is also up there in terms of leading his team on game winning drives and 4th quarter comebacks.

No I disagree on many counts on this

1. We don't need to flood the zone with QBs. If Rodgers is not here this fall, go back to 2 QBs on game day (Bortles and Love) so we can open up other important spots on the depth chart like the OL, WR or CB group

2. I like Carr too, and if Rodgers was traded to the Raiders he probably would be sent here. But if not, Gruden's made it clear he wants to keep Carr.

3. You have another problem though if Carr or potentially even Bortles were to succeed.

Well maybe less so with Bortles because you'd probably get 1 good year out of him but see him tank the following year, or at least thus far his career has shown.

Carr, on the other hand, is not a placeholder type of QB. His type of success is such that would definitely repeat over a number of years, and while it's only my opinion, I would not go after a guy like him unless I saw him as a long-term option.

I mean hypothetical scenario here, Rodgers leaves but the coaches and GM determine Love isn't ready to start this season, or will start but have a short leash. See, if you went out and got a guy like Carr, started him.from week 1 on out, and he had a great season, no way in hell you're going to just let him walk outta here. With Carr, you got a guy who's in his prime who if he does well stays around for a while, and under this scenario potentially shuts the door on Love ever seeing the field as a Packer.

If Bortles started week 1, I mean sure you could run that same risk, but I think it'd be far less likely as thus far he's not proven to be anything special really.

I guess the whole point is if you trade up to get your guy in the first round, you damn well had better get him on that field ASAP and even more so if the guy he's supposed to replace is now gone.

Now to be clear, I'm not saying it's gotta be now that he's put in, but I definitely think it's gotta be 2022 at minimum if Rodgers is gone. And I back that up by the fact that all the following QBs were starters by year 2 at the latest:

Favre
Both Mannings
McNabb
Brady
Brees
Rothlisberger
Ryan
Stafford
Dalton
Prescott
Goff
Mayfield
Machines

List could go on with many names, but the point being even if you don't start Love now, you shouldn't just go suspending his starting date indefinitely just because you're too afraid to risk starting him. Spending a first round pick on a QB obligates you to get him on that field and see if he'll swim or sink. Delaying this does not change the risk.

Now the reason I'm glad Rodgers didn't have to become the starter his rookie season was because our team was a mess thanks to that clown Mike Sherman leaving us devoid of talent. Thankfully we restocked it bigger and better on offense by 2008 making Rodgers's job easier. But we're not in rebuilding right now and therefore Love wouldn't be stuck on some talentless island.

 

[AmishMafia]

Favre
Both Mannings
McNabb
Brady
Brees
Rothlisberger
Ryan
Stafford
Dalton
Prescott
Goff
Mayfield
Machines

All well and good, but the list of QBs who started early and flopped is much longer. Most of these guys had longer careers in college under stable situations.

Recapping Jordan Loves pre pro career:

Highly regarded coming out of HS
Took over as redshirt freshman and played well
Looked like a phenom as soph and potential high draft pick
Coaching change - new system - many new starters for Jr season
Did not look good as a Jr.

Had Love kept the same coaches and staff he would have had another year of development. He probably puts up a monster season and he probably goes to 10 in the draft.

His college career is a great example of the benefits of developing.

And not sure what the trade up has to do with when you start him. He is on the team and we should put him in the best position to suceed, whether we acquired him by a trade up, down, stayed put, udfa, trade, cloned Starr, etc.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Carr, on the other hand, is not a placeholder type of QB. His type of success is such that would definitely repeat over a number of years, and while it's only my opinion, I would not go after a guy like him unless I saw him as a long-term option.

Very much my point. As long as the Packers think Love could be their next franchise QB, you just need a starting QB in place during the time it takes to get Love ready. I also don't expect Love to come out like a FHOF QB in his first year or 2, if at all. I also consider this to be Love's rookie season. So if he showed some promise this season, might not be a bad idea to throw him in there as your starter in 2022. If he starts to look like the 2nd coming of Mitch Turdbiscuit, then you start thinking about taking swing #2 at replacing Rodgers.

Could Carr or even Lock come to Green Bay and become a franchise QB? Sure, but kind of odd that the Raiders or the Broncos would give up on them if they thought it would happen. I also wouldn't be a fan of paying Carr $20M/season, just to be a placeholder for Love.

I'm guessing the Packers got Bortles for around $1M, I think a decent value (by NFL standards), whether Rodgers stays or goes.

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

No I disagree on many counts on this

1. We don't need to flood the zone with QBs. If Rodgers is not here this fall, go back to 2 QBs on game day (Bortles and Love) so we can open up other important spots on the depth chart like the OL, WR or CB group

2. I like Carr too, and if Rodgers was traded to the Raiders he probably would be sent here. But if not, Gruden's made it clear he wants to keep Carr.

3. You have another problem though if Carr or potentially even Bortles were to succeed.

Well maybe less so with Bortles because you'd probably get 1 good year out of him but see him tank the following year, or at least thus far his career has shown.

Carr, on the other hand, is not a placeholder type of QB. His type of success is such that would definitely repeat over a number of years, and while it's only my opinion, I would not go after a guy like him unless I saw him as a long-term option.

I mean hypothetical scenario here, Rodgers leaves but the coaches and GM determine Love isn't ready to start this season, or will start but have a short leash. See, if you went out and got a guy like Carr, started him.from week 1 on out, and he had a great season, no way in hell you're going to just let him walk outta here. With Carr, you got a guy who's in his prime who if he does well stays around for a while, and under this scenario potentially shuts the door on Love ever seeing the field as a Packer.

If Bortles started week 1, I mean sure you could run that same risk, but I think it'd be far less likely as thus far he's not proven to be anything special really.

I guess the whole point is if you trade up to get your guy in the first round, you damn well had better get him on that field ASAP and even more so if the guy he's supposed to replace is now gone.

Now to be clear, I'm not saying it's gotta be now that he's put in, but I definitely think it's gotta be 2022 at minimum if Rodgers is gone. And I back that up by the fact that all the following QBs were starters by year 2 at the latest:

Favre
Both Mannings
McNabb
Brady
Brees
Rothlisberger
Ryan
Stafford
Dalton
Prescott
Goff
Mayfield
Machines

List could go on with many names, but the point being even if you don't start Love now, you shouldn't just go suspending his starting date indefinitely just because you're too afraid to risk starting him. Spending a first round pick on a QB obligates you to get him on that field and see if he'll swim or sink. Delaying this does not change the risk.

Now the reason I'm glad Rodgers didn't have to become the starter his rookie season was because our team was a mess thanks to that clown Mike Sherman leaving us devoid of talent. Thankfully we restocked it bigger and better on offense by 2008 making Rodgers's job easier. But we're not in rebuilding right now and therefore Love wouldn't be stuck on some talentless island.

I actually do agree that Carr is not a placeholder type QB, and I have given some thought to that scenario you describe(he would play to well for us to move on from him), but I would really hate to throw away this season completely by starting a rookie QB or a washed up QB who is not good enough to be a starter. I do think that MLFs offense is very qb friendly, and that we don't actually need a star qb anymore. With that being said, you usually don't see teams win with a rookie QB, and I think we have a very good team this year.

Picking QB is also a crapshoot, and we don't know if Love is going to be any good or not. Maybe Bortles could do well in this offense? I would be very surprised if we were a contender with him(although I do think that he was a good signing to be a backup QB), but maybe I am wrong because he could play well in our offense?

Regardless, if what you say is true about QBs not usually sitting on the bench a while before starting, then drafting Love may not have been a good move.

 

[longtimefan]

Farve
Both Mannings
McNabb
Brady
Brees
Rothlisberger
Ryan
Stafford
Dalton
Prescott
Goff
Mayfield
Machines

List could go on with many names, but the point being even if you don't start Love now, you shouldn't just go suspending his starting date indefinitely just because you're too afraid to risk starting him. Spending a first round pick on a QB obligates you to get him on that field and see if he'll swim or sink. Delaying this does not change the risk.

.

How many started because of injury . I dont see mahomes? He was in 2nd year. That would be 3

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think the the "problems" you might encounter with starting Love this year are compounded by a few things.

• Jumping in right after Rodgersgate might not be the ideal scenario for what I consider a rookie.
• Most would still want to view the Packers as a playoff contender and if that doesn't happen, Love might be blamed by many.

Basically, if the Packers were in full blown rebuild and not expected to compete, the pressure on Love to perform well would be marginal. The added pieces about why and when he was drafted and potentially that being the straw that broke Aaron' back, that could just add another huge layer of potential nastiness on his attempt at taking over for the Packers GOAT.

If I am Gute and MLF and Rodgers is gone, no way am I tossing Love into that fire right now.

 

[Pkrjones]

How many started because of injury . I dont see mahomes? He was in 2nd year. That would be 3

Mahomes was auto-corrected (my phone does the same thing!) to Machines, so last on list should be Mahomes.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If I saw this flash across my screen and it was a done deal, I think at this point I would be ecstatic to get that kind of haul and to move on. I would rather have another 2nd round pick, instead of Lock, but who knows, maybe he would be plan 1b, with Love 1a, for our future starter.

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

 

[gopkrs]

I think the the "problems" you might encounter with starting Love this year are compounded by a few things.

• Jumping in right after Rodgersgate might not be the ideal scenario for what I consider a rookie.
• Most would still want to view the Packers as a playoff contender and if that doesn't happen, Love might be blamed by many.

Yes, and so for me, it's start Bortles and if he fails and we still have a chance...Love. That will at least give Love some time on the bench hopefully.

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

If I saw this flash across my screen and it was a done deal, I think at this point I would be ecstatic to get that kind of haul and to move on. I would rather have another 2nd round pick, instead of Lock, but who knows, maybe he would be plan 1b, with Love 1a, for our future starter.

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

If we are going to trade with Denver, I am not sure I want a QB from them. That would be a great deal, I think that I would want one of their WRs or Dre Mont Jones for the DL. I may also consider swiping Stokes for Surtain. I would love having Bradley Chubb on our defense, I saw him play at NC State and I know he is a rising superstar. Maybe they would let us have those players if we didn't take Lock and took 2 of their first round draft picks instead.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

If we are going to trade with Denver, I am not sure I want a QB from them. That would be a great deal, I think that I would want one of their WRs or Dre Mont Jones for the DL. I may also consider swiping Stokes for Surtain. I would love having Bradley Chubb on our defense, I saw him play at NC State and I know he is a rising superstar. Maybe they would let us have those players if we didn't take Lock and took 2 of their first round draft picks instead.

Yeah, like I have said a few times, I don't expect that kind of "haul". If its on the table though and Rodgers isn't coming back, I'm grabbing it.

The "Good news" for the Packers, if there is any truth to the rumors, having both AFC West division members, Denver and Las Vegas potentially in a bidding war against each other for Rodgers, could up the haul.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes, and so for me, it's start Bortles and if he fails and we still have a chance...Love. That will at least give Love some time on the bench hopefully.

I honestly think that is the contingency plan if Rodgers is gone. Obviously, if the Packers are really iffy on Love's future, they might consider someone like Lock being thrown into a trade package. That way they have 2 development options and one might push the other for that #2 spot behind Bortles. Lock might even push for the starting job.

 

[gopkrs]

I honestly think that is the contingency plan if Rodgers is gone. Obviously, if the Packers are really iffy on Love's future, they might consider someone like Lock being thrown into a trade package. That way they have 2 development options and one might push the other for that #2 spot behind Bortles. Lock might even push for the starting job.

I've got all my eggs in the Love basket. So don't want another young guy. And Lock has not been very impressive imho though I have not centered on him at all. Still rather have Rodgers. But not at a debilitating cost.

 

[Mondio]

Overall all I like the job Gute has done. Didn't really care for Graham or the Lowry extension, but other than that it's been pretty solid to really good overall. Didn't care for the Love pick, but it's what they did. I will say, they may not think he's ready, that's fine. I don't expect him to be after a weird year, but if they don't still believe he's the guy and are looking at 2 developmental guys, they royally ****** it up.

IF it is at that point they're not confident in their evaluation of Love that they'd be considering taking another young QB to develop they better ship Love right off for a 5th rounder if that's all they get, release the pressure on the situation, and roll with Rodgers, or they should have before it got to this point.

If they're confident in Love as being the guy, as they should be or they never should have picked him, a guy like Bortles is probably the best play, stop gap and move on.

 

[sschind]

If I saw this flash across my screen and it was a done deal, I think at this point I would be ecstatic to get that kind of haul and to move on. I would rather have another 2nd round pick, instead of Lock, but who knows, maybe he would be plan 1b, with Love 1a, for our future starter.

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

I'd fly Rodgers out there in the team jet before anyone in Denver could come to their senses if I got that offer.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'd fly Rodgers out there in the team jet before anyone in Denver could come to their senses if I got that offer.

Yup....I think delusional Packer fans or maybe even Bronco fans are spreading those type of trade rumors. All I know is that something is better than nothing and if a deal only includes a first and a second, I'm taking that over being the team that forces Aaron to retire and getting nothing in the process. I would hope they can get more, but I do not think its going to be 3 firsts, a second and 2 starters like Chubb and Risner AND Lock.

 

[G0P4ckG0]

Yeah, like I have said a few times, I don't expect that kind of "haul". If its on the table though and Rodgers isn't coming back, I'm grabbing it.

The "Good news" for the Packers, if there is any truth to the rumors, having both AFC West division members, Denver and Las Vegas potentially in a bidding war against each other for Rodgers, could up the haul.

IF a trade becomes probable there will be 29 other teams besides those 2 who will make an offer...even if it's just a "Hey what the heck, maybe Green Bay will take just 1 4th for him". I think realistically there will be 5 teams in a serious bidding war and it should result in us getting an extra pick out of it that we otherwise would not.

Fwiw Washington, Miami, NYG, Denver, Vegas would be my guesses

 

[longtimefan]

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

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

PACKERS want QB back for AARON RODGERS as JON GRUDEN "TALKS UP" DEREK CARR on the RAIDERS??! - YouTube

It looks like the Raiders are a real possibility. Regardless, it looks like they may want a quality starting QB in a trade, so that may take Denver out of the running. I agree somewhat with this guy about a trade with the 49ers. I think Jimmy G would have fit our offense and Trey Lance is an excellent prospect with a great chance to be a star. However, the downside to that trade would be the 49ers are an NFC team, so I would have to think about that one.

 

[G0P4ckG0]

PACKERS want QB back for AARON RODGERS as JON GRUDEN "TALKS UP" DEREK CARR on the RAIDERS??! - YouTube

It looks like the Raiders are a real possibility. Regardless, it looks like they may want a quality starting QB in a trade, so that may take Denver out of the running. I agree somewhat with this guy about a trade with the 49ers. I think Jimmy G would have fit our offense and Trey Lance is an excellent prospect with a great chance to be a star. However, the downside to that trade would be the 49ers are an NFC team, so I would have to think about that one.

Think about it this way...NFC team means you can ask for a better return AND their team will be screwed cap-wise and talent-wise for a solid 5 years after Rodgers retires.

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

Think about it this way...NFC team means you can ask for a better return AND their team will be screwed cap-wise and talent-wise for a solid 5 years after Rodgers retires.

That's true, I haven't thought about that aspect of trading with an NFC team.

 

[AmishMafia]

Mahomes was auto-corrected (my phone does the same thing!) to Machines, so last on list should be Mahomes.

And here I thought you gave him a new nickname.

 

[longtimefan]

Next week Friday we know?? Heard a snip maybe in 8 days

I was off 3 days.

 

[tynimiller]

If I saw this flash across my screen and it was a done deal, I think at this point I would be ecstatic to get that kind of haul and to move on. I would rather have another 2nd round pick, instead of Lock, but who knows, maybe he would be plan 1b, with Love 1a, for our future starter.

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

If any team would send this much for Rodgers their GM, entire coaching staff, the lady that sells the popcorn and the bus driver need fired. Dear lord.

 

[AmishMafia]

If any team would send this much for Rodgers their GM, entire coaching staff, the lady that sells the popcorn and the bus driver need fired. Dear lord.

I heard that list on local radio in GB. They said it came from and insider who spoke with several front offices and what they thought the value was. One of the hosts actually changed his prior opinion that we should never trade Rodgers if that was our return.

I'm not sure the Broncos will be all that even with Rodgers. I think the draft picks could still be top 20.