What do you REALLY think Rodgers would garner in a trade?

[Mondio]

I don't think we should be expecting 1st's and some of the other compensations we've been hearing. I still think it's GB or retire more than anything. I don't think the Raiders are a serious landing spot. I'm sure it's possible, but I guess I would never give up a pick that high for a guy that might only be here 1 year, 2 absolute tops best case scenario IMO.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I could absolutely see a scenario where that pick simply isn’t tradable to the degree we’d hope….I truly believe it is as much likely this way as the other.

Even if you couldn't find a desirable trade back with that #7 pick, you are probably going to find an instant starter and impact player. Then you still have the #15 pick to potentially trade back or get another really decent player. I don't expect Love and the Packers to have a mind blowing 2023 season, so the 2024 draft might bring a top ten pick as well.

At some point you have to jump off the Rodgers Carousel, in hind sight, it should have been last year. I don't want to be sitting here in 2024 saying "Christ, why didn't we trade him in 2023, the cap situation is worse and he isn't worth much more than a day 3 pick?" So get what you can now, use it to improve the team and let the process of getting this team cap healthy and the Love era begin.

 

[tynimiller]

Even if you couldn't find a desirable trade back with that #7 pick, you are probably going to find an instant starter and impact player. Then you still have the #15 pick to potentially trade back or get another really decent player. I don't expect Love and the Packers to have a mind blowing 2023 season, so the 2024 draft might bring a top ten pick as well.

At some point you have to jump off the Rodgers Carousel, in hind sight, it should have been last year. I don't want to be sitting here in 2024 saying "Christ, why didn't we trade him in 2023, the cap situation is worse and he isn't worth much more than a day 3 pick?" So get what you can now, use it to improve the team and let the process of getting this team cap healthy and the Love era begin.

You know I don’t disagree with that

 

[tynimiller]

I don't think we should be expecting 1st's and some of the other compensations we've been hearing. I still think it's GB or retire more than anything. I don't think the Raiders are a serious landing spot. I'm sure it's possible, but I guess I would never give up a pick that high for a guy that might only be here 1 year, 2 absolute tops best case scenario IMO.

I personally believe any future picks will be highly conditionally driven.

 

[Schultz]

You wonder why I am confused? This is what I hear from you:








So explain to me, when should people start listening to Rodgers and when shouldn't they?

Personally I believe the Packers should pay attention to what Rodgers says to them in house. I do not believe they should pay attention to anything he says in front of a microphone.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Actually, you do contradict yourself. At times you state that the Packers organization shouldn't bother listening to what is being said about Rodgers and only listen to what Rodgers himself says. Then you go on to say that even what Rodgers himself says publicly, should be of little importance to the Packers.

Finally I understand why you're confused. First of all, you got it right, the Packers shouldn't care what the media says about Rodgers at all. Neither should you but it seems that won't happen as you spent a good amount of time finding articles on the web which denigrate the team's quarterback. While they should follow what he says to the media most of the stuff he actually does is of absolutely no importance to the team at all.

That shouldn't be that difficult to understand and isn't contradictory by any means.

Do you think that the rest of us take what the media says as "The gospel truth"? Most of us don't, but we like to discuss it and its merits or lack thereof.

You definitely act as if you believe the narrative the media has created about Rodgers despite being mostly wrong about the situation over the past few years instead of focusing on what is actually happening though.

I realize you don't pay much attention to the media, which is cool. However, why do you feel the need to jump into a discussion about something the media said? IF all you are doing is reminding us that you don't believe what the media says, trust me, we know.

How dare I jump into a discussion about the Packers quarterback on a team's forum? I promise to do better in the future

Once again, I will repeat what I said:

I never said anything about the Packers excepting a "lesser offer because of Rodgers spending four days in a dark room."

What I did say is that all of these perceived "negatives" might be reflected in a team(s) offer. Which has nothing to do with what you are implying and the Packers saying "sorry, but your offer is too low because your perception of Rodgers is all wrong, we reject your offer."

Once again, while you consider Rodgers spending four days in the darkness to figure out if he wants to continue playing it should actually be a non-issue. I'm absolutely convinced most teams interested in trading for him don't consider that as a negative at all.

If GB and Rodgers goes a trade route.

I see about 5-6 teams in the serious running for a QB. I don’t see Aaron playing for the Texans and their draft positioning has them selecting a rookie QB.
I see another 1-2 eliminated by Aaron as “I won’t go there”
That leaves 2-3 remaining options. Las Vegas, Jets and Saints are in my top list. There’s some others that could pop up such as Miami or Indi but there’s 1-2 that might change directions also.

I highly doubt Rodgers would be OK with a trade to the Colts.

At some point you have to jump off the Rodgers Carousel, in hind sight, it should have been last year. I don't want to be sitting here in 2024 saying "Christ, why didn't we trade him in 2023, the cap situation is worse and he isn't worth much more than a day 3 pick?" So get what you can now, use it to improve the team and let the process of getting this team cap healthy and the Love era begin.

I agree that's the way to go if the Packers believe they have no chance of contending for a Super Bowl. Otherwise they should hold on to Rodgers and take another shot at it.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I highly doubt Rodgers would be OK with a trade to the Colts.

Why is that? I never heard him mention that he wouldn't. Did you hear him say that he wouldn't?

Once again, while you consider Rodgers spending four days in the darkness to figure out if he wants to continue playing it should actually be a non-issue. I'm absolutely convinced most teams interested in trading for him don't consider that as a negative at all.

Once again, I never said that Rodgers spending 4 days in the dark would be a deal breaker for a team to trade for him. What I did say, for the 3rd time, is this:

Bottom line, teams will use anything they can in negotiations. Why wouldn't they, if it gets them a lower price? So will all these things that we talk about be discussed in trade parameters? Probably, will they have a negative effect for the Packers? That is any ones guess.

Do you see where the statement below, that you made, is very conflicting with facts, keep in mind that this is the THIRD offseason, that Rodgers has waffled on his future.

I don't think Rodgers not having decided if he wants to play for another season has any effect on his trade value. A team acquiring him will make sure that he will play for them next season before making a trade. Therefore it's a non-issue.

How do you propose a team will do that? Make him sign a contract?

Much like the Mason Crosby discussion, we are going round and round in circles. I respect your opinion on Rodgers, but in many cases, I don't agree with it.

 

[OldSchool101]

So one fear of say the hypothetical trade where we get the #7 overall from LV and chump change elsewhere.

I agree that spot could hold an immense trade back power move to still add pieces around a new Love led offense but hedge bets with 2024 draft picks if Love falters.

BUT there is a real possibility no one is going to give up a ton there….yes one of the top 3 or 4 QBs may still be there…but if they are two of the arguably most QB needy possibles sit just a pick or a few from there….Tampa Bay arguably the only far away team that may swing for the fences if the right QB prospect is there.

I could absolutely see a scenario where that pick simply isn’t tradable to the degree we’d hope….I truly believe it is as much likely this way as the other.

However there is still most likely a trade package someone would do for it, even if it isn’t a massive haul back inclusive of two firsts….could still be worth it in long run.

Yes.
Another thought in that scenario #7 is trading using our #15 overall selection.
I especially like what we did in the 2018 draft and it’s a recent, real life example. We essentially made several trades:
1. using #14 we traded back to get #27,#147,2019-1st Rounder
2. We packaged our #27,#76,186 to get #18 (J’aire) and a #248

We may not have to do it if we work a Rodgers trade. However it’s a way to “buy” a future Day 1 even if it’s a more even equity to equity offer.

I don’t think we’d miss a beat because just a #7 alone added in looks like this (using 2018 draft move)
#7,#20,#45,#117,#152,#166,#172+compensatory awards+2024 1st Rd

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why is that? I never heard him mention that he wouldn't. Did you hear him say that he wouldn't?

It's amazing that you seem to follow every single episode of the Pat McAfee show to find something negative about Rodgers but aren't able to remember one of only a few quotes which actually have had some importance.

He was pretty clear about not wanting to play for a team in a rebuild. Do you believe the Colts are just a QB away from being a contender? I definitely don't, therefore it's pretty unrealistic to expect Rodgers to agree to a trade to Indianapolis.

Once again, I never said that Rodgers spending 4 days in the dark would be a deal breaker for a team to trade for him.

I never mentioned you consider it a deal breaker but believe teams interested in him might see it as a negative. I don't think there's any truth to that though.

Do you see where the statement below, that you made, is very conflicting with facts, keep in mind that this is the THIRD offseason, that Rodgers has waffled on his future.

How do you propose a team will do that? Make him sign a contract?

Do you honestly believe a team would trade for Rodgers without making sure he will play for them in 2023?

 

[longtimefan]

Carolina called

 

[Pkrjones]

Carolina called

Panther's beat writer Sheena Quick is saying Shefter's report is untrue...Carolina has not contacted GB (yet).

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Carolina has the #9 pick and 2 2nd round picks. Maybe they feel they can't realistically move up to get the QB they want. But talk about a team that isn't just a QB away from a SB.

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

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm not much of a CowTurd fan, but his OPINION and comparison of the 2 athletes is spot on here. Funny too, because I have always wondered how Celtic and then Nets fans could put up with Kyrie's BS.

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

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not much of a CowTurd fan, but his OPINION and comparison of the 2 athletes is spot on here. Funny too, because I have always wondered how Celtic and then Nets fans could put up with Kyrie's BS.

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

You're not much of a Cowherd fan aside when he says something negative about Rodgers. Then you fully embrace him

Kyrie Irving is on a much different level when considering his off the field stuff. Just to name a few examples, it seems he believes the earth is flat, supports the notion that secret societies are administering COVID-19 vaccines in a plot to connect Black people to a master computer for a plan of Satan, promotes the New World Order conspiracy theory and alleges that state actors are planning to oppress the public by intentionally releasing viruses. On top of that he seems to be an anti-Semite as well.

It's ridiculous to consider Rodgers being as bad as that guy.

 

[Sanguine camper]

Since the end of the season, Rodgers has tried to outdo himself with the strange antics. How difficult is it to come out and make your preferences known? Other than the fact that he said he doesn't want to play for a team that is rebuilding, he's toyed with the front office with his incognito sceme. I think Gute should've made a move or two that showed AR, he isn't the QB and the GM anymore such as the team is moving on from Randall Cobb. If Love is really ready to play, the Packers need to commit to him and tell Rodgers he can take his prima dona stuff to another team. Doesn't look like the FO has made any indication of that which leads me to believe Rodgers knows he still holds all the cards.

 

[Pkrjones]

Throwing this out for discussion sake... Baltimore is closer to SB contender than NYJets and are at a crossroads with starting QB. Could the Ravens Tag & trade Jackson, try to get something for him, and then go after AR? As ridiculous at it sounds, AR's contract over next 2 years is considerably LESS than what Lamar Jackson is asking for/will to settle for... AND Jackson has been UNavailable for the last 2 years' playoffs. IF this is conceivable maybe that deal is already on the table but the Ravens need to play-out their portion (tag/trade Jackson) first?

 

[tynimiller]

Throwing this out for discussion sake... Baltimore is closer to SB contender than NYJets and are at a crossroads with starting QB. Could the Ravens Tag & trade Jackson, try to get something for him, and then go after AR? As ridiculous at it sounds, AR's contract over next 2 years is considerably LESS than what Lamar Jackson is asking for/will to settle for... AND Jackson has been UNavailable for the last 2 years' playoffs. IF this is conceivable maybe that deal is already on the table but the Ravens need to play-out their portion (tag/trade Jackson) first?

Not to mention they’d probably still have picks easily left this year to add more. I could see a world where this makes sense, but I also am unsure Baltimore would do it

 

[Mondio]

Throwing this out for discussion sake... Baltimore is closer to SB contender than NYJets and are at a crossroads with starting QB. Could the Ravens Tag & trade Jackson, try to get something for him, and then go after AR? As ridiculous at it sounds, AR's contract over next 2 years is considerably LESS than what Lamar Jackson is asking for/will to settle for... AND Jackson has been UNavailable for the last 2 years' playoffs. IF this is conceivable maybe that deal is already on the table but the Ravens need to play-out their portion (tag/trade Jackson) first?

that's some thinking. I hadn't considered. Makes some sense. I didn't pay much attention to Baltimore this year so unsure how their offense is built. But I could see that, another I think people should consider is Miami. I could see those 2 more than the Raiders.

 

[Pkrjones]

Not to mention they’d probably still have picks easily left this year to add more. I could see a world where this makes sense, but I also am unsure Baltimore would do it

Only reason it came to mind is that Jackson is sticking to his guns about a fully guaranteed contract at over $50Mil/yr which I'm reasonably certain Baltimore won't cave to. The team is playoff-caliber but need a high-end QB (available throughout playoffs) to make a serious push to SB.

Jackson is currently under contract (until 3/07) and can't "talk" to other teams since he's both player & agent. After he's non-exclusive-tagged he can begin discussions with other teams and will find out that either some team is foolish enough to fully-guarantee a contract (& at what amount) OR that he needs to drop his demands.

I still think the Ravens would rather have AR for 2 years than be locked-into the top-paid QB for 4 yrs who is injured by the time playoffs begin.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Throwing this out for discussion sake... Baltimore is closer to SB contender than NYJets and are at a crossroads with starting QB. Could the Ravens Tag & trade Jackson, try to get something for him, and then go after AR? As ridiculous at it sounds, AR's contract over next 2 years is considerably LESS than what Lamar Jackson is asking for/will to settle for... AND Jackson has been UNavailable for the last 2 years' playoffs. IF this is conceivable maybe that deal is already on the table but the Ravens need to play-out their portion (tag/trade Jackson) first?

Anything is possible

Only reason it came to mind is that Jackson is sticking to his guns about a fully guaranteed contract at over $50Mil/yr which I'm reasonably certain Baltimore won't cave to. The team is playoff-caliber but need a high-end QB (available throughout playoffs) to make a serious push to SB.

Jackson is currently under contract (until 3/07) and can't "talk" to other teams since he's both player & agent. After he's non-exclusive-tagged he can begin discussions with other teams and will find out that either some team is foolish enough to fully-guarantee a contract (& at what amount) OR that he needs to drop his demands.

I still think the Ravens would rather have AR for 2 years than be locked-into the top-paid QB for 4 yrs who is injured by the time playoffs begin.

I see the logic and welcome as many suitors for Rodgers as possible. Since if that happens, the Packers actually might get some decent draft capital for him. Unfortunately, as teams find other solutions to their QB issues, the market, if it already hasn't, will dwindle. I also think that many of the teams that need a QB are also positioned in the draft, where they could draft one of the top 4 college QB's. They will just have to weigh having a rookie, that might bust out, versus a sure thing in Rodgers, at least for 1 season, but at a very high cost of money and draft picks to obtain him. Of course a team trading for Rodgers, probably is using the same or maybe even less draft capital, as they would use on drafting a QB.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't want to say this too loud, but I think a team would be crazy to trade too much for Rodgers. Sure, maybe they are a QB away, but the factors and unknowns that they have to consider are:

- cost to obtain (both real and opportunity costs)?
- cost to pay?
- might be an investment with only a 1 year payoff?
- injury to him or other key players?
- wildcard of his chemistry with new teammates?
- the negative perception some have of him, will it follow him?
- will everything align perfect for a Super Bowl win?

A team that pursues Rodgers is basically going all in, in 2023, on the hope of winning a Super Bowl. In doing so, they will be forfeiting some of their future potential with the draft picks and money they give up for Rodgers. Both the Buccaneers and Rams did it with older, new to their team QB's, but is that going to work for another team with Rodgers? Not sure, but its a big gamble, that I doubt I would take as a GM.

 

[Schultz]

The negative perception some have of him, will it follow him? Yes if you become a fan of the team he is traded to.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

The negative perception some have of him, will it follow him? Yes if you become a fan of the team he is traded to.

Works for me, since I am not a fan of any other team.

I included that, because if you jump around to other teams websites like this, there are a definite mix of fans that want him and don't want him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Since the end of the season, Rodgers has tried to outdo himself with the strange antics. How difficult is it to come out and make your preferences known? Other than the fact that he said he doesn't want to play for a team that is rebuilding, he's toyed with the front office with his incognito sceme.

How difficult is it to understand for some fans that it might take a 39-year old quarterback some time to decide if he wants to play for another season? As I have said repeatedly, as long as Rodgers makes a decision before the start of the new league year there's no negative effect on the Packers whatsoever.

Unfortunately, as teams find other solutions to their QB issues, the market, if it already hasn't, will dwindle.

Please enlighten me, which team has found a solution to their QB woes since the season has ended?

 

[Sanguine camper]

How difficult is it to understand for some fans that it might take a 39-year old quarterback some time to decide if he wants to play for another season?

Rodgers signed a huge contract making him the highest paid player in the NFL a season ago. That action should have signaled to the team he was committed for the length of the contract without the "need" for any extraneous antics. He could've insisted on a shorter contract if he felt that retirement was an immanent option. He's had his so-called darkness retreat and is still waffling about his desires. I don't expect anything less from him but Gute is probably sick of his behavior.