The Big Choice

[Heyjoe4]

The Super Bowl window closes immediately if the Packers decide to trade Rodgers. In my opinion the team needs to take advantage of their HOF quarterback as long as possible and then take the dead money hit in the season after moving on from him.

There's no guarantee the Packers will be able to reload once they don't have an elite QB anymore, not even with a ton pf draft capital.



In my opinion the Packers won't get anywhere close to winning 10 games without Rodgers next season.

As a side note, with Adams set to become a free agent the team won't be able to trade him at this point.



The Packers would need to completely rebuild the roster if they move on from Rodgers this offseason. It doesn't make any sense to spend up to the cap if there's no chance of winning the Super Bowl in 2022.

Well, the Packers have shown in the past they can't play even .500 ball w/o Rodgers. Of course, those teams had lousy Ds. I think the team can win 10 games with a truly elite D, some additions to the offense as I noted, and average to above average QB play. That sounds good but hasn't been tested. If Rodgers does move on, we'll find out. (When I referenced trading Adams, it was in a tag and trade scenario.)

I don't disagree with riding Rodgers as long as possible. It may be more logical for the l.t health of the team to trade him, but let's face it, this is a win now league. Rodgers gives them the best chance.

 

[tynimiller]

I wouldn't expect 10 wins and have shared I think 10 is the ceiling of a no Rodgers team with a realistic over/under number of around 6.5 or 7.5 that first season with chance to get hot if Love starts clicking.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I wouldn't expect 10 wins and have shared I think 10 is the ceiling of a no Rodgers team with a realistic over/under number of around 6.5 or 7.5 that first season with chance to get hot if Love starts clicking.

6 or 7 wins is what we've seen in the past when Rodgers goes down for significant time. Those teams also had average to bad Ds. The Packers, at least for now, have a very good D, and with draft capital from a Rodgers and/or Adams trade, could potentially become elite - that is, top 5 or top 3. Defenses win games too, although not as much as in the past. The NFL likes its scoring.

So while 10 wins without Rodgers sounds like a reach, maybe not with a top tier D and an offense with a great running game, in need of two, solid WRs, a TE, and some OL depth. I don't know that I'd bet money on it, but it wouldn't surprise me either.

 

[Pkrjones]

The '22 schedule is pretty tough so getting 10 wins might be a challenge even with AR.

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

The Super Bowl window closes immediately if the Packers decide to trade Rodgers. In my opinion the team needs to take advantage of their HOF quarterback as long as possible and then take the dead money hit in the season after moving on from him.

There's no guarantee the Packers will be able to reload once they don't have an elite QB anymore, not even with a ton pf draft capital.



In my opinion the Packers won't get anywhere close to winning 10 games without Rodgers next season.

As a side note, with Adams set to become a free agent the team won't be able to trade him at this point.



The Packers would need to completely rebuild the roster if they move on from Rodgers this offseason. It doesn't make any sense to spend up to the cap if there's no chance of winning the Super Bowl in 2022.

I think they may let some veterans, and or players on the borderline of coming back or leaving, go if Rodgers doesn't come back. Do you really think there would be a complete roster rebuild? That we would lose every star/key player, and that we would basically be starting over from scratch with no team foundation or core to build around?

That's what I mean by rebuild, and what I don't want to happen because it could mean years, or even decades, of being a bottom feeder.

 

[McKnowledge]

As mentioned on numerous occasions by multiple posters, it's possible to keep Rodgers and Adams and surround them with a competitive team. It seems the front office is planning on going all-in for next season.

I agree Cap with going all-in. However, I think a lot of fans are snake-bitten.

They're done.

I try to be as objective as possible, but I do understand where they coming from.

 

[Voyageur]

I think people have way too high of expectations in what the Packers can do over the course of a season, without Rodgers. If Rodgers goes, you can pretty well count on Adams being gone, and several other players as well. The team will be in a retooling mode in a lot of respects, and even if it isn't considered a total rebuild, it's pretty darned major.

I think winning 8 games might be difficult, with Love at QB. Until he shows me he can do enough on the field to augment the running game, I'm not going to heap praise on him. He's gonna have to prove it.

 

[McKnowledge]

Zadarius scrubbed his social media of packers references. Not shocked but also just not cool IMO. He was a favorite of mine but not classy move here

Theory:

Maybe he didn't want to leave. Maybe Z. Smith didn't like the negotiations for restructuring his contact, but he really wanted to stay. So...being upset, and knowing the inevitable, he clears his media.

 

[Voyageur]

Theory:

Maybe he didn't want to leave. Maybe Z. Smith didn't like the negotiations for restructuring his contact, but he really wanted to stay. So...being upset, and knowing the inevitable, he clears his media.

I don't blame him. Too many nasty people on social media who have no filters. I'd guess he scrubbed it to avoid having to hear their crap.

 

[McKnowledge]

I don't blame him. Too many nasty people on social media who have no filters. I'd guess he scrubbed it to avoid having to hear their crap.

That's something I didn't even consider. But its definitely a smart play. Stay off the media. Don't engage. Focus on getting a new deal.

 

[Raleigh NC Packers Fan]

6 or 7 wins is what we've seen in the past when Rodgers goes down for significant time. Those teams also had average to bad Ds. The Packers, at least for now, have a very good D, and with draft capital from a Rodgers and/or Adams trade, could potentially become elite - that is, top 5 or top 3. Defenses win games too, although not as much as in the past. The NFL likes its scoring.

So while 10 wins without Rodgers sounds like a reach, maybe not with a top tier D and an offense with a great running game, in need of two, solid WRs, a TE, and some OL depth. I don't know that I'd bet money on it, but it wouldn't surprise me either.

I do think we are looking at 1-3 seasons of missing the playoffs until Love either develops or we find an adequate replacement if love doesn't pan out. Unless of course we trade for a decent starter like Carr or Tannehill.

I don't buy the common narrative that we are Rodgers, Adams, and nothing else, but the QB position is the one position you can't be bad at and win football games, no matter how good the rest of the team is, and rookie QBs are usually not very good. Even the "game manager" QBs, whose teams win most games primarily with defense and running the ball and don't have impressive passing stats, still have to make good decisions with the ball, don't turn the ball over, read defenses, provide team leadership, complete difficult passes under pressure from opposing defenses in the critical moments of a game/3rd down, and be able lead the offense down the field on a game winning drive in close games. These are things rookie qbs are not known for.

Not to mention that QBs usually also have to learn a new offense, scheme, and get familiar with playing with the new teammates, when switching teams. So, I do think that there is going to be a transition period.

 

[tynimiller]

That's something I didn't even consider. But its definitely a smart play. Stay off the media. Don't engage. Focus on getting a new deal.

lol Z has still be quite active on social media, it wasn’t a getting off the outlets move

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Before I would disagree with this, what constitutes a complete rebuild in your opinion Captain? Very well may agree.

If Rodgers doesn't come back in my opinion it makes sense to move on from Z, Preston, Cobb, Turner, Lowry, Crosby and Lewis this offseason as well as Bakhtiari and Jones next year while not re-signing any of the free agents that will take a significant amount of money to do so. In my opinion that should be considered a complete rebuild.

I think the team can win 10 games with a truly elite D, some additions to the offense as I noted, and average to above average QB play.

First of all I don't think the Packers have an elite defense to begin with. In addition the offense without Rodgers and Adams would struggle mightily, making it all but guaranteed they won't get anywhere near winning 10 games in 2022.

6 or 7 wins is what we've seen in the past when Rodgers goes down for significant time.

The Packers are 6-11-1 in games Rodgers hasn't started in since 2008. Those teams had more talent that one that would be in a rebuild mode next season though.

I think they may let some veterans, and or players on the borderline of coming back or leaving, go if Rodgers doesn't come back. Do you really think there would be a complete roster rebuild? That we would lose every star/key player, and that we would basically be starting over from scratch with no team foundation or core to build around?

That's what I mean by rebuild, and what I don't want to happen because it could mean years, or even decades, of being a bottom feeder.

The Packers would most likely build around a core of players on defense in Alexander, Clark, Gary and Stokes but aside of Jenkins the offense doesn't feature any player to do the same on offense though.

I do think we are looking at 1-3 seasons of missing the playoffs until Love either develops or we find an adequate replacement if love doesn't pan out. Unless of course we trade for a decent starter like Carr or Tannehill.

I don't think the Packers should either pursue Carr or Tannehill to replace Rodgers.

 

[Mondio]

I'm with you, if Rodgers is gone, the guys that aren't part of the 3-5 year plan get gone for picks or savings whichever. We have some nice young guys to build around, and we have a lot of work to do on offense. While I think our team is good and not "just Rodgers" I also don't think this team would threaten to win anything meaningful with another QB either. Don't really want to waste my time with a "vet" to replace him just to lessen the hurt of a rebuild. If we're going to suck, suck and get it over with.

 

[gopkrs]

If Rodgers doesn't come back in my opinion it makes sense to move on from Z, Preston, Cobb, Turner, Lowry, Crosby and Lewis this offseason as well as Bakhtiari and Jones next year while not re-signing any of the free agents that will take a significant amount of money to do so. In my opinion that should be considered a complete rebuild.

I don't know why you would want a complete re-build. Sounds like sour grapes. If we get a bunch of draft picks; they could fill holes and we end up with a solid team. The ones I would keep, depending how they keep playing, are Turner, Preston and Jones.

 

[tynimiller]

If Rodgers doesn't come back in my opinion it makes sense to move on from Z, Preston, Cobb, Turner, Lowry, Crosby and Lewis this offseason as well as Bakhtiari and Jones next year while not re-signing any of the free agents that will take a significant amount of money to do so. In my opinion that should be considered a complete rebuild.



First of all I don't think the Packers have an elite defense to begin with. In addition the offense without Rodgers and Adams would struggle mightily, making it all but guaranteed they won't get anywhere near winning 10 games in 2022.



The Packers are 6-11-1 in games Rodgers hasn't started in since 2008. Those teams had more talent that one that would be in a rebuild mode next season though.



The Packers would most likely build around a core of players on defense in Alexander, Clark, Gary and Stokes but aside of Jenkins the offense doesn't feature any player to do the same on offense.

You’re dislike for Dillon is showing again lol

 

[mradtke66]

I don't know why you would want a complete re-build. Sounds like sour grapes. If we get a bunch of draft picks; they could fill holes and we end up with a solid team. The ones I would keep, depending how they keep playing, are Turner, Preston and Jones.

The idea is relatively simple--without Rodgers, the team is going to hurt for a while. As such, look at the roster. Which guys aren't likely to last more into that future?

On offense, we have either older guys, expensive guys, or just guys. Bhak is in category 1 and 2, Jones in 3...really the only impressive parts on offense would be Dillion and Jenkins. Turner is in a weird spot where he isn't in any, so maybe he survives one more year. But I wouldn't re-sign him after his contract expires post 2022.

On defense, Preston and Z are category 1 and 2.

Shedding all the players is applying same "Trade Rodgers Now" logic to the rest of the roster.

 

[Heyjoe4]

There are a lot of ifs, a lot of different opinions, and a lot of good ideas as to what the future, near-term and long-term, of the Packers might look like. Those opinions will get sharpened once we know if Rodgers and/or Adams stays or not, what a trade might bring, what a rebuild might look like, and on. It keeps us busy in the off season! Anyway, we'll know a lot more in March.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The idea is relatively simple--without Rodgers, the team is going to hurt for a while. As such, look at the roster. Which guys aren't likely to last more into that future?

On offense, we have either older guys, expensive guys, or just guys. Bhak is in category 1 and 2, Jones in 3...really the only impressive parts on offense would be Dillion and Jenkins. Turner is in a weird spot where he isn't in any, so maybe he survives one more year. But I wouldn't re-sign him after his contract expires post 2022.

On defense, Preston and Z are category 1 and 2.

Shedding all the players is applying same "Trade Rodgers Now" logic to the rest of the roster.

Good points. I don't think Z will be back under any circumstances due to his injury. That's a shame - great guy, great player. I don't quite get the logic behind letting all or most players walk. The reason a team drafts is in the hope some of them become All
Pro. Then you have to pay them. GB is fortunate to have a few. That said, there are only so many guys who can be paid $15 or $20 mil or more a year. Well, they don't pay us to make decisions on who to keep. Anyway, with the players GB has, I don't see the need for a rebuild.

 

[tynimiller]

If the rumors (which Lordy we’ve learned at times are spot on or so far in left field it is ludacris) of him wanting $50M a year are true I look at him and laugh.

He has expressed anger at Packers not seeking veterans or guys in free agency yet wants a team strapped to do that? Absolutely not

 

[sschind]

Good points. I don't think Z will be back under any circumstances due to his injury. That's a shame - great guy, great player. I don't quite get the logic behind letting all or most players walk. The reason a team drafts is in the hope some of them become All
Pro. Then you have to pay them. GB is fortunate to have a few. That said, there are only so many guys who can be paid $15 or $20 mil or more a year. Well, they don't pay us to make decisions on who to keep. Anyway, with the players GB has, I don't see the need for a rebuild.

The logic is to set yourself up with a ton of cap space in 3 years after you have nailed down your core of young guys and the slew of draft picks and Jordan Love has had some time to develop. Banking on draft picks to become all pros within 2 years is a stretch even for first rounders. Yes we might get 3 firsts and a couple of seconds out of Rodgers and Adams (tag and trade) but would they develop in time to really help the older expensive guys before you would likely move on from them anyway.

You don't think its logical because you believe that a bunch of rookies can come in and help a Jordan Love lead team to be competitive. Many do not think that is realistic. They are not necessarily saying Love won't develop but that it will take time and if its going to take 2 years for him to come into his own why waste salary in those 2 years on players who won't be around after that. Cut them loose now and use the money to get in some young guys who may be around for another 3-5 years or more.

 

[Heyjoe4]

The logic is to set yourself up with a ton of cap space in 3 years after you have nailed down your core of young guys and the slew of draft picks and Jordan Love has had some time to develop. Banking on draft picks to become all pros within 2 years is a stretch even for first rounders. Yes we might get 3 firsts and a couple of seconds out of Rodgers and Adams (tag and trade) but would they develop in time to really help the older expensive guys before you would likely move on from them anyway.

You don't think its logical because you believe that a bunch of rookies can come in and help a Jordan Love lead team to be competitive. Many do not think that is realistic. They are not necessarily saying Love won't develop but that it will take time and if its going to take 2 years for him to come into his own why waste salary in those 2 years on players who won't be around after that. Cut them loose now and use the money to get in some young guys who may be around for another 3-5 years or more.

That actually wasn't what I was thinking but that's ok. I can see the logic of building a team with very good players, not All Pros, who can play well enough to win and don't cost a fortune - at least for a few years. I mean I love Bakh, but can GB find someone who can play LT at, say 75% of Bakh's level for a whole lot less money? I'm sure that's possible. Elgton Jenkins is a good example.

And Ty referenced the likelihood that Rodgers will want $50 mil/year. Well, given that Pat Mahomes is at $45 mil/year, and Rodgers was the MVP the last two years, I can see where he would expect to get paid that much.

And there is the problem with bringing Rodgers back. At some point, after all the extensions and voidable years and other tricks, the cap will have to reflect all or a good part of that $50 mil for each year Rodgers plays. And if Adams can command, say $25 mil/year - entirely possible - then GB has two guys eating up $75 mil/year of a - say $230 mil cap (I'm guessing here). Talk about logic, or lack of it, that's just not sustainable. Two guys won't carry a team to a SB win.

And yeah, Russ Ball can restructure contracts and other tricks so that Rodgers, Adams, and a bunch of other players can stay. That would work for one, maybe two years. And then the wave hits and the cap has to reflect those sky-high salaries. And then the team has to rebuild.

But with all that, I still want to see Rodgers and Adams and as many of last year's players back as possible to make a run for a SB - in 2022 and 2023. Rodgers is a generational, maybe a lifetime talent we likely won't see again. Pay the man - and dammit Rodgers start winning the big games!

 

[OldSchool101]

The logic is to set yourself up with a ton of cap space in 3 years after you have nailed down your core of young guys and the slew of draft picks and Jordan Love has had some time to develop. Banking on draft picks to become all pros within 2 years is a stretch even for first rounders. Yes we might get 3 firsts and a couple of seconds out of Rodgers and Adams (tag and trade) but would they develop in time to really help the older expensive guys before you would likely move on from them anyway.

You don't think its logical because you believe that a bunch of rookies can come in and help a Jordan Love lead team to be competitive. Many do not think that is realistic. They are not necessarily saying Love won't develop but that it will take time and if its going to take 2 years for him to come into his own why waste salary in those 2 years on players who won't be around after that. Cut them loose now and use the money to get in some young guys who may be around for another 3-5 years or more.

You can do that in your scenario by doing what we did a few seasons ago. Trade back later into Day 1-Early Day2 for future draft picks.

As an example, you’d be shocked what todays #9 overall trading back into the 20’s overall draft placing etc.. would land you in draft capital next season. That’s just 1 easy move that would pay huge dividends.

That doesn’t even touch the $150,000,000+ we’d potentially net over several years of no 50Mil annual contract. We haven’t even spoken of Adams yet. Plus a slew of other draft picks outside Round 1. Add to that several nice Comp picks coming our way.
I’m very confident our Staff would land some huge names in the College circuit and FA inside 2 seasons. If Love just happened to hit in any way shape or form all bets are off. We don’t even need him either way he’s just a bonus option.

I’m sorry but Rodgers has just become indignant and that is highly likely to not end well. I don’t trust that guy at all and that’s very rare for me to say that. We need a leader not self indulgent players.
Those types tend to bring catastrophe upon themselves. It’s just a matter of time and we’ve already experience little peeks into his world of self induced chaos. You don’t need to be a sorcerer to study human interaction and it’s outcomes. You just go gut feeling

 

[Heyjoe4]

You can do that in your scenario by doing what we did a few seasons ago. Trade back later into Day 1-Early Day2 for future draft picks.

As an example, you’d be shocked what todays #9 overall trading back into the 20’s overall draft placing etc.. would land you in draft capital next season. That’s just 1 easy move that would pay huge dividends and give us future draft firepower (by delaying our draft expenditures in 2022, we could suddenly gyrate around the board and have 3
Day 1 selections next season as one example.

And what you have outlined OldSchool is really important. The QB draft class this year is weak, to be generous. The 2023 QB draft class is excellent. With three first-round picks, the GM could move way up if there was a rock-solid QB.

I know, even "can't miss" QBs coming out of the draft miss. Just giving an example of what can be done with draft capital. Thanks for the comment.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Packers need REALLY good players, self-indulgent or not. I guarantee you that humility and altruism are A) not things that pro sports athletes tend to have in large supply and B) aren't worth a thing on the field of play. I don't think it's a good idea to tie up $50m a season in the QB position BUT that's probably because the Packers have been such consistent winners for 30 years. I guarantee you that teams who have struggled would happily pay that much for the best QB in the NFL. I'm also sure that Gute will happily pay that much because his job security is the most important thing to him and letting Rodgers go will probably cost the Packers 6-7 games and that puts a GM's job in jeopardy (especially if Love doesn't look worth that 1st round trade-up).