OldSchool101
Pack
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2014
- Messages
- 16,518
- Reaction score
- 7,367
Fair enough and I can see that argument in and unto itself.I didn't suggest it's impossible for a team to win the Super Bowl without having an elite quarterback. But having one is more important than the cap space being saved over featuring an average replacement.
However There’s more to the study that was just 1 of several benefits of moving on. Even IF Rodgers stays, the Rodgers era is waning and likely done inside 2-3 seasons.
We are also talking about adding major draft capital in a trade, plus reeling our fiscal budget $ back into orbit. It’s more than 1 angle if you will. So even if I agreed that $20-30m saved isn’t a good trade off, we can’t just look at this moment in time. We’ve got a opportunity cost trade off that’s multi faceted. He’s a wonderful QB by talent standards, but he’s not 30 anymore. He’s about to turn 40yrs old, we can’t just assume he’ll play at a high level or even play at all until 45 like Brady.
Chiefs' Patrick Mahomes: To be ready for OTAs
Chiefs' Patrick Mahomes: To be ready for OTAs
www.cbssports.com
That’s commitment. Mahomey is not “too good” for coming to work……
aka Mr. Aaron Rodgers.
Last edited: