I see all these absolutes being tossed around... as if Love and Rodgers cannot both exist on the same team. The truth is no one knows how good he is. You can get the Packers are investing time in him as we speak. They envision another Mahomes. Looking forward to seeing him on the field. I’m over the draft thing- if Love has the ability to lead this team in the event of a Rodgers injury, it was a great pick. That’s really the only measure worth discussing at this stage.
@BrainDed posted:If AR stays around another 3 or 4 years and they win 1 or more Owls, who gives a fuck about Love and 2 picks?
I do, because the picks could have been used on players that contribute to that owl and, more importantly, could even contribute PAST the 3 or 4 years. Winning the owl does not justify trading up in the 1st round and using those picks for an insurance policy that you never cash in. That's bad management. The only way Gute looks good with this is if he has to cash in his insurance policy and nobody is rooting for that.
Or those picks could be busts or get injured and be out of the league in a couple years.
Winning the Owl in the next 3-4 years justifies everything. Beyond that...
Again, this isn’t Madden 2021 where you can just ignore the cap and sign every free agent on the market that’s available.
They have to follow the cap. If you choose to restructure and kick more money down the road and gets hurt or retires you are fucked. For what? Adding 6-8MM more this year and next? That gets them what, one more Kevin King type player? And you escalate future liability? I’ll pass.
The root cause to this whole mess is Rodgers makes too much damn money. That’s not his fault, but it’s tough to win Superbowls when your QB is taking up 20% of the cap. You have to be perfect on hitting on draft picks and we all know the draft (like free agency) can be a crapshoot.
Rodgers Wants A New Contract????
When he gets a new one can I have his old one?
https://www.cbssports.com/writ...l-with-david-samson/
Rodgers gone after this season. Fans should be up in arms, per Samson.
Ah, another story with this BS.
Demovsky also is reporting that Rodgers wants "assurances" that he won't enter next season as a "lame duck," which means that the quarterback wants a contract extension of some sort.
@MichiganPacker2 posted:In all seriousness, the week that Rodgers spends as a guest host on Jeopardy in April may become important in all this. I'm not saying he's going to be the guy that replaces Alex Trebek, but if he comes off well he could really set himself up to be a guy with a place in the media or entertainment world (if he hasn't already).
If he ends up being good on camera, he might eventually be looking at a Tony Romo-like role. What better job could anyone have than Tony Romo? 20 million a year to take 20 3-day trips a year to talk to players for an afternoon leading up to the game and then call a game? 20 million for that is a lot better gig than 40 million to get hit a lot by 300-pound guys at age 40.
If he ends up being wooden and awkward on camera, then he's not ever going to be a candidate for a Romo-like position and it makes it likely he'll want to play even longer.
In terms of getting paid, yeah you can't beat that. But these guys are competitive at their core and there isn't much of anything competitive with being in broadcasting.
I think if you gave Romo and others like him the choice of continuing what they do now or they could go back to being 35, healthy and able to play again they would jump at the 2nd option regardless of that that NFL contract looks like.
I don't think a 37 year old QB can expect any assurances on his future. At best, this is a discussion to be had next offseason, when he has 2 years left on his deal. And I would consider his play in 2021 and Love's development and likely tell Aaron he's the starter in 2022 and then guarantee his salary. But 2023 will be uncertain until that offseason. And if Rodgers doesn't understand that then it'll be up to him to cause a scene in the media which despite "reports" over the years, he really has never done. I just don't see this path as unreasonable by the Packers.
@CUPackFan posted:I don't think a 37 year old QB can expect any assurances on his future. At best, this is a discussion to be had next offseason, when he has 2 years left on his deal. And I would consider his play in 2021 and Love's development and likely tell Aaron he's the starter in 2022 and then guarantee his salary. But 2023 will be uncertain until that offseason. And if Rodgers doesn't understand that then it'll be up to him to cause a scene in the media which despite "reports" over the years, he really has never done. I just don't see this path as unreasonable by the Packers.
You literally said what I just posted in one nice neat little paragraph saying the same thing I posted under an entirely new thread, a multi paragraph mega essay. I feel so lame.
I am just got to kill the thread and post my essay here for no-one to read. 
The essay? The case against keeping Aaron Rodgers:
First of all, let me add that football will be a lot less fun without 12 in Green and Gold, and I am just trying to project what the leadership of the Packers maybe thinking.
A strong case can be made that, despite the fact that an argument can be made that superstar QB's are the most valuable athletes in sports (I think that label actually belongs to basketball superstars like Lebron and Michael), they have become HUGELY overpaid, and Aaron is no exception. These QB's are consuming huge chunks of their team's salary caps. If they could win championships "by themselves" they would be worth it. We have seen that despite having the best QB in NFL history we have "only" won one Super Bowl.
This year, Aaron Rodgers is taking up about 20% of our cap. Rumor has it that if we extend him he will request 60 million per year. That is a huge chunk of change, particularly in the era of the COVID cap. No team has won a Super Bowl over the last 20 years with the QB taking up more than 12.7% of the cap.
We Packers fans are always whining about how much better Tom Brady's teams are. Perhaps, that's not a coincidence. Tom Brady tends not to involve himself in the salary arms race most QB's engage in. He literally leaves more money on the table for his teammates than the other top QBs.
15 of the last 20 Super Bowls were won by QB's taking less than 10% of their team's salary cap, among them our very own Aaron Rodgers in 2010. Other than Tom Brady most of these QBs consist of QB's on their rookie deals, underpaid QB's like Rodgers in 2010 or lower paid journeymen like Nick Foles.
We have a QB on his rookie deal. If Jordan Love can showcase his skills next pre-season does Gute choose to go with him in 2022? He can collect a king's ransom of draft picks by trading Aaron Rodgers. That option becomes a very real one next year when Aaron's dead money becomes more than manageable.
What do you think? Do the Packers have the guts to trade an all-world QB?
The post above would be so much better if I just posted the words,
DITTO WHAT CUPackFan SAID.
@CUPackFan posted:I don't think a 37 year old QB can expect any assurances on his future. At best, this is a discussion to be had next offseason, when he has 2 years left on his deal. And I would consider his play in 2021 and Love's development and likely tell Aaron he's the starter in 2022 and then guarantee his salary. But 2023 will be uncertain until that offseason. And if Rodgers doesn't understand that then it'll be up to him to cause a scene in the media which despite "reports" over the years, he really has never done. I just don't see this path as unreasonable by the Packers.
Coming off a MVP season.
Makes sense.
If AR has another year in '21 like he had in '20, and if toward the end of '21 there is no indication of him declining - I have a hard time seeing a way they trade him in the next 12-24 months. One possible avenue would be to an AFC team in '22 or early '23 for a boatload of picks, but I still think that is a long shot. I think the more likely scenario is they stick with him on his current deal, and really there is little reason for them to do otherwise, and then discuss an extension in '22.
*edit* agree with what CUPackFan said
Outkick says he's gone after this year...
Why would you wait? They could get a king's ransom for him this off-season.
No offense Chongo, but Outkick (Matt Loede) is not saying that AR is gone after '21, they just quoted the David Samson opinion.
“So the Packers would get two years of Jordan Love and then maybe sign his fifth-year rookie option,” Samson said on his show Nothing Personal with David Samson.
“So they could get three years before deciding whether or not he’s the next franchise quarterback following [Brett] Favre and Rodgers. But if you had no plans to do that with Jordan Love, then you would’ve converted Rodgers.
“I’m not sure why Packers fans aren’t up in arms. But the executives are very aware that they’ve got him for one more year then they’re going to move on.”
Both Loede and Samson misrepresented what Demovsky wrote where Demo referenced "League Sources".
League Sources are agents, coaches, other teams personnel guys all wanting AR to move so:
a) they have a shot at getting him
b) the Packers no longer have him
So what? The don't have the cap room for FA's, which is understandable. They don't want to extend Rodgers contract, which would create cap room. If last year's draft is any indication Gunt won't be drafting for immediate need.
You have a 1st round HOFer coming off a MVP season. That would be massive future capital from a team willing to win now.
interesting conversation/topic/takes here, but in my mind - I will refer everyone to Exhibit A) Chicago Bears, and Exhibit B) Minnesota Vikings, Exhibit C) Detroit Lions; nuff said, be careful what you wish (ask) for.
@H5 posted:League Sources are agents, coaches, other teams personnel guys, and GB-Brandon, all wanting AR to move so: ............
Can't forget him. 99 posts of the same message means he has "earned" the right to let us include him wherever it is deemed necessary.
The recent click-bait articles from many saying that the Packers are going to move on from Rodgers after '21 or that he doesn't want to be a lame-duck QB are all due to the last paragraph (below) from Demovsky in his ESPN article on the 23rd. Demo's article was themed on ARs contract and the league year roster bonus that was paid on schedule.
Multiple league sources said they believe Rodgers wants assurances that he will be Green Bay's quarterback beyond just the 2021 season and that he won't be a "lame-duck" quarterback. The team could do that by adjusting his contract without adding any money to it. The Packers could convert a large portion of his $14.7 million base salary into a signing bonus. That would give them additional cap space this season but also would increase the amount of dead money he would count on next year's cap if they moved on.
There was another paragraph in that ESPN/Demovsky article, which was much earlier in the piece, hasn't been repeated or even commented on, and likely because it doesn't create clicks. Here it is.
When asked whether a restructure or extension was still in the works, the source, who is familiar with the Packers' plans, said "possibly."
This "source" was quoted in the beginning of the article in regards to the $6.8mm roster bonus. Not a "source" in the group of "league sources" referenced in the final paragraph from the article.
Link to the Demovsky article for reference
Could they still trade AR this year? Sure.
Could they move on from him after this year? Sure.
I think it's all just speculation.
Something to consider...
The Packers once had Julius Peppers signed and literally standing on Lambeau Field before the public knew anything. Rodgers kept his engagement quiet an entire football season. Feel safe saying that if the two sides talk extension, we won’t hear about it until it’s done.
— Aaron Nagler (@AaronNagler) March 19, 2021
Packers fan often say how the national media don't like GB. I think the comments in this piece about the AR situation from some national media types clearly shows why the media is frustrated or less enamored with GB. They know nothing of what is happening, so they speculate in a negative tone, all while disregarding any signings of the Packers own. We saw this with Wolf & Thompson.
ESPN Around the Horn speculates on Packers/Rodgers
13-3 back-to-back years.
NFCCG back-to-back years.
Does week 1 start tonight? If only Gutekunst had more time to add to the team.
@H5 posted:Because he's still arguably the best QB in the league.
And, his replacement is not ready.
His replacement isn't even out of college yet.
Russ Balls was whispering in Gunt's ear "think of all the money we can save!"
I've seen some media types compare this to the Bert situation...completely different.
Bert is an attention whore...his whole game of "will I retire or won't I?" got old. Bert wanted to whip the ball downfield and sand lot every game. We saw that when he went to the Jets and the Queens. Bert was always going to be Bert.
In year one of the MLF tenure, 12 did it a little too much his way at times...and I think Gunt figured "here we go again," and took Love. But 12 showed he IS a team player, he bought into the offense and had his best year in forever.
Time to put your big boy pants on Gunt, extend 12, and let him retire a Packer. At every turn, 12 has demonstrated he's the anti-Bert. He deserves to go out when he's ready, not when you and Balls decide.
TOG wanted to play; he didn't want to put the work in to make that happen.
He was/would be content with not working out or doing the OTA stuff, doing the least possible amount of work during TC, and just go out and wing it on game days.
Rhodes and Sherman were willing to let him get by with it.
McCarthy wasn't.
Goalline I read every word of your essay and glad you posted it!! You raise an interesting point about QB value - at some point, the cap percentage no longer justifies the player. Hypothetically, would you sign Patrick Mahomes as a free agent and pay him 50% of your cap? What about 40%? 30%? I'd say no but at some point you'd say yes. Does anyone think the Cowboys have any shot to win a Super Bowl these next 4 years after giving Dak $160m? I mean other than Jerruh?
I think if I were a GM I would draft a QB high in the draft every few years like Gute did with Jordan Love. It seems to me that hitting on a young QB is one of the surest ways to win the big one, and trading your Super Bowl winning star QB is the surest way of recouping bucketfuls of life giving draft picks.
@Henry posted:So drafting Jordan Love was fucking stupid.
If we hit it big with Love a lot of Packers fans are going to look pretty fucking stupid,
Rodneys thoughts on why the Packers and Gute should keep their options open on Rodgers:
1) Unlike the measly conditional fourth-rounder they got for Brett Favre in 2008, the Packers should be able to turn Rodgers into multiple high draft picks. Assuming he plays well next season, there will be numerous teams interested in acquiring a Pro Bowl-caliber quarterback – even one who just turned 38. New England, Miami, Pittsburgh, Las Vegas, Denver – just to name a few. And if Gutekunst is willing to trade within the conference, Washington, Carolina, New Orleans, and San Francisco would be among the possibilities depending on what happens in next month’s draft. A hefty haul of picks would go a long way in helping the Love era get off to a good start.
2) Trading Rodgers would help get the Packers out of a very challenging cap situation. Assuming there are no major manipulations to his contract between now and the end of next season, clearing $23 million would enable general manager Brian Gutekunst to not only hold onto most of the team’s best players, but it would also allow him to add veteran talent through free agency and/or trades. And with a young quarterback under center, adding talent would be paramount since nobody could possibly expect Love to do more with less the way Rodgers has for years.
3) Gutekunst would be able to watch Love play for an entire season before having to decide in May 2023 whether or not to pick up his fifth-year option, which figures to be worth $20 million. That’s a lot of money to commit to an unknown commodity. The alternative would be to decline the option and trade Love before he ever gets to start a game for the franchise that moved up in the first round to get him. That seems unlikely since every quarterback taken in the first round this century – all 60 of them – have started games for their original team by choice and not injury.
Im evolving into the position that paying such a ridiculous percentage of the cap to one player is an admission by a GM that they have failed to properly draft a young QB.
There’s no room for ego in the front office. They have to make an honest assessment of what is best for the team in terms of being top contenders every year that they possibly can be, while, yes, also making sure the future of the franchise is stable.
They must know that AR is still able to be a guy who can win Super Bowls, but the drafting and spending of cap dollars has to be incredibly efficient to get the team over the hump. Just because they drafted Love doesn’t mean they have to usher AR out if things are now different than the brain trust saw them as prior to last season.
Maybe trading Aaron is best for the Packers, if the return is massive and if they strongly believe Love can succeed after the 2021 season. Maybe trading Love and getting something for him is the way to go. But whatever they decide to do, the reason that they moved up to pick Love, and therefore don’t want to look foolish for changing gears , must be zero percent of the decision making process. There are so many other QBs, both pro and collegiate at this very moment, that could be the Packers next QB. I don’t purport to know the answer to this, but I sure hope the triumvirate does the right things for the right reasons. Right or Rong.
The problem is, 12's contract is such that teams know the Packers will have to cut him in 2022 unless they restructure...yeah, teams will want to guarantee they get the rights to him, but I don't think it's going to be the pot of gold many are hoping for. Maybe a first rounder, a second and a fourth or something along those lines.