@Henry posted:BTW, I've been wanting to mention this for awhile but I give full credit to Goalline and Pakrz being Rodgers haters before this all blew up.
The rest of you, well.
I am just allergic to crybabies. That's all.
Amos must not have in been in on the A-aron group chats..
Attachments
Images (1)
@Grave Digger posted:All I'm saying is that its not like Harlan's record was spotless when it came to sorting out his subordinates, he made some mistakes that in hindsight probably set the organization back. Sherman was undone because he was not equipped to be HC and GM (very few are), something Harlan should never have entertained. Harlan said he would support whatever TT wanted to do because he left the football stuff to TT. Why didn't he say "well maybe have a 10 minute conversation with Favre and let him know..."? Because that conversation certainly did not happen with Favre. Besides, those "conversations" do not happen all the time in the league because very rarely do teams have franchise QBs over 35 that are playing at MVP levels...like maybe year 1 Peyton Manning in Denver, maybe Brady circa Garapolo drafting, any other examples? If you're drafting a QB early its because you either need a QB NOW or you think you will need a new QB shortly and very rarely does the latter coincide with an MVP. I'm not saying it didn't need to happen, obviously it did, but lets not pretend this was some routine situation that Gute botched. This was an incredibly unique, franchise shifting, career threatening move that was a gamble most teams are unwilling to take. New Orleans and New England botched their succession plans and they're stuck paying big money to Taysom Hill and a washed up Cam Newton. Yeah, GB botched it, but it doesn't mean they were wrong for having a succession plan or following their gut in the draft. TT and Wolf missed on lots of draft picks and made bonehead mistakes, hell TT blew a top 50 pick on a QB right at the beginning of Rodgers HOF tenure.
What are you talking about? I don't even know what state of retirement Favre was in when they drafted Rodgers so I don't even know how that applies. The spermheads and Bears both talked to their QBs this year after drafting QBs.
Considering Rodgers is one of those franchise QBs over 35 playing at MVP levels he should've gotten the call?
Again, having a succession plan and I sure the hell hope they didn't follow their gut in the draft is different from being unbelievably inflexible with that plan. Rodgers isn't a washout. Rodgers isn't even at the level of the declining super star. The phone call is the simple part. Saying their succession plan is a gamble is an insult to gambling addicts. The more we hear about approaching him with the restructure instead of the extension and the perceived lack of respect it's becoming pretty apparent they had already packed Rodgers bags for him no sooner than 2021. That's like taking a frickin' hit on 20.
Harlan wasn't perfect but he was responsive. He built his system with Wolf and actively steered it through mistakes and successes. It was his guidance that produced 3 SB appearances and two victories. Yes, I am giving him credit for 2010. Murphy decides to act when the building is burning down or to strike the match himself.
@Steve of Norway posted:Amos must not have in been in on the A-aron group chats..
Your shtick is old and it's tired. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. There are other threads to peruse. If you can't do that, give yourself the break from here you obviously need.
Favre was in year 13 when they drafted Rodgers, entrenched as the face of the franchise. Did he not deserve a call saying what they were doing? Brandt has said how often Favre and his camp talked to him about the awkwardness of the situation. Seems like, if this conversation is common practice, that TT should have done it too. They obviously should have included Rodgers in the discussion, who could even argue at this point that they shouldn't have. They probably should have given Favre a heads up in 2005.
Not to get too far off the rails, but if you look at Murphy through the lens of I HATE MARK MURPHY then yes he always looks like a dolt. The truth is he has kept the GBP revenue stream strong and competitive with the rest of the league. Its no small task considering we're a small market and we don't have a deep pocket owner. Make fun of the sledding hill and titletown district, but the revenue coming in from those tourist attractions are the reason GB can still afford to pay Aaron Rodgers $70M in cash or whatever his SB was the last contract. It's why they can continue to pay for renovations to the stadium without public funding while adding thousands of jobs to the area. I don't love Murphy's meddling in football ops any more than you do, but give the guy some context.
I guess I just have a problem treating this incredibly delicate problems like they have very obvious DUH solutions.
12 is done in GB.
GB ain’t winning a SB this year with or without 12 on the roster with a brutal schedule and a 38-ish QB that looks like he’s been stranded on an island for 2 months.
Trade his fucking ass to the highest bidder and move into the JL era.
All BS aside, I have a weird feeling 12 is going to sustain a season-ending injury this year. Just an odd feeling that it’s time again.
@Grave Digger posted:Favre was in year 13 when they drafted Rodgers, entrenched as the face of the franchise. Did he not deserve a call saying what they were doing? Brandt has said how often Favre and his camp talked to him about the awkwardness of the situation. Seems like, if this conversation is common practice, that TT should have done it too. They obviously should have included Rodgers in the discussion, who could even argue at this point that they shouldn't have. They probably should have given Favre a heads up in 2005.
Not to get too far off the rails, but if you look at Murphy through the lens of I HATE MARK MURPHY then yes he always looks like a dolt. The truth is he has kept the GBP revenue stream strong and competitive with the rest of the league. Its no small task considering we're a small market and we don't have a deep pocket owner. Make fun of the sledding hill and titletown district, but the revenue coming in from those tourist attractions are the reason GB can still afford to pay Aaron Rodgers $70M in cash or whatever his SB was the last contract. It's why they can continue to pay for renovations to the stadium without public funding while adding thousands of jobs to the area. I don't love Murphy's meddling in football ops any more than you do, but give the guy some context.
I guess I just have a problem treating this incredibly delicate problems like they have very obvious DUH solutions.
Pure sophistry from the “gunt and the FO and Murphy are all idiots” brigade that the board would just dump them all..
@Grave Digger posted:Besides, those "conversations" do not happen all the time in the league because very rarely do teams have franchise QBs over 35 that are playing at MVP levels...like maybe year 1 Peyton Manning in Denver, maybe Brady circa Garapolo drafting, any other examples?
And to your point, the Broncos drafted Brock Osweiler that year after signing Peyton Manning in free agency. I don't remember hearing a peep from Peyton about that. And Elway asked Peyton to take a pay cut after 3 years with the Broncos. How do you think Rodgers would respond to that?
@Pakrz posted:12 is done in GB.
GB ain’t winning a SB this year with or without 12 on the roster with a brutal schedule and a 38-ish QB that looks like he’s been stranded on an island for 2 months.
Trade his fucking ass to the highest bidder and move into the JL era.
All BS aside, I have a weird feeling 12 is going to sustain a season-ending injury this year. Just an odd feeling that it’s time again.
I concur.
To be fair also, we don't know that Gute/Murphy/LaFleur are NOT a big bunch of idiots. They HAVE ridden Rodgers to success, TT actually built a SB team basically from scratch around Rodgers. Its not their fault they inherited the best QB in league history hitting his second prime and they certainly have built a quality team around him, but we can't really call them anything until they succeed without Rodgers. Elway has sucked so bad without Manning he basically had to fire himself to save face, Arians was average without HOF QBs like Warner/Brady, Schneider and Carroll were set to feature fucking Matt Flynn as their franchise QB before Wilson made them realize that was dumb, heck Belichick has only made the playoffs once without Brady and that was with the Browns!
@Pakrz posted:12 is done in GB.
GB ain’t winning a SB this year with or without 12 on the roster with a brutal schedule and a 38-ish QB that looks like he’s been stranded on an island for 2 months.
Trade his fucking ass to the highest bidder and move into the JL era.
All BS aside, I have a weird feeling 12 is going to sustain a season-ending injury this year. Just an odd feeling that it’s time again.
You're probably right unfortunately and it may be time.
@Grave Digger posted:To be fair also, we don't know that Gute/Murphy/LaFleur are NOT a big bunch of idiots. They HAVE ridden Rodgers to success, TT actually built a SB team basically from scratch around Rodgers. Its not their fault they inherited the best QB in league history hitting his second prime and they certainly have built a quality team around him, but we can't really call them anything until they succeed without Rodgers. Elway has sucked so bad without Manning he basically had to fire himself to save face, Arians was average without HOF QBs like Warner/Brady, Schneider and Carroll were set to feature fucking Matt Flynn as their franchise QB before Wilson made them realize that was dumb, heck Belichick has only made the playoffs once without Brady and that was with the Browns!
What was that real reason why Arians didn’t want to even interview for the Packers HC then? Did he think Rodgers was declining or he wanted more say on roster moves? I always thought it odd he went out of his way to make sure people heard he wasn’t interested.
None of this is giving me any hope about society's future. We're all screwed.
@Grave Digger posted:Favre was in year 13 when they drafted Rodgers, entrenched as the face of the franchise. Did he not deserve a call saying what they were doing? Brandt has said how often Favre and his camp talked to him about the awkwardness of the situation. Seems like, if this conversation is common practice, that TT should have done it too. They obviously should have included Rodgers in the discussion, who could even argue at this point that they shouldn't have. They probably should have given Favre a heads up in 2005.
Not to get too far off the rails, but if you look at Murphy through the lens of I HATE MARK MURPHY then yes he always looks like a dolt. The truth is he has kept the GBP revenue stream strong and competitive with the rest of the league. Its no small task considering we're a small market and we don't have a deep pocket owner. Make fun of the sledding hill and titletown district, but the revenue coming in from those tourist attractions are the reason GB can still afford to pay Aaron Rodgers $70M in cash or whatever his SB was the last contract. It's why they can continue to pay for renovations to the stadium without public funding while adding thousands of jobs to the area. I don't love Murphy's meddling in football ops any more than you do, but give the guy some context.
I guess I just have a problem treating this incredibly delicate problems like they have very obvious DUH solutions.
Favre says he's probably going to retire. I don't even remember where he was in that whole scenario at the time. It's pretty logical they'd be drafting his replacement and Rodgers straight up fell into their lap.
Rodgers has said nothing but how committed he is and he wants to play as long as possible. That doesn't diminish planning for succession but they took a hell of a baffling approach.
Entirely different scenarios. Hell, Cowherd's clip flat out tells you other QBs around the league are getting more input and respect. I just can't believe the Packers FO would be that tone deaf or literally have on blinders to their approach.
That's not a ringing endorsement for the future, at all.
As far as Titletown District, of course it's a plus but the guy still has to keep his eyes on the road. The flip side is a winning team makes further development possible. Of course it's a symbiotic relationship. When everything was revealed about TT and McVince it was a holy hell kind of revelation. I don't think anyone had issues with TT and McVince exiting after find out the crazy stuff like Ball making personnel decisions.
What's hard not to blame isn't so much that there's an issue but it's another huge blow up. It's not some rumblings about power it's an atomic bomb detonation. How do you let things get so out of control TWICE over the span of 5 years?
Murphy certainly is not perfect overall, but again Harlan oversaw his GM go through craziness with letting the SB coach walk, a poor replacement and culture with him, missing the playoffs, really poor drafts, then hiring an unknown coach who then was hired as GM…all this in like a 3/4 year period. You can’t praise Harlan for letting his football people do their job while overseeing the business side, but chide Murphy for letting his football guys figure it out on their own. Hindsight is 2020 in both cases.
But I can blame him specifically for this incident because he changed up the structure to be much more involved. There's zero chance he doesn't have a ton of skin in the game on this one. Again, it's like zero to shitburger in two seconds with this FO.
The Packers won't trade Rodgers this year, he gives them the best chance to win.
Rodgers won't retire and give back ~$30mm. He wants commitment which means $$.
If Rodgers has another MVP level year his price goes up next offseason.
Rodgers knows all this. The Packers know all this.
Both parties also know that a decision on the future does not need to happen last month, last week, today, tomorrow, next week, or even next month. The future between Rodgers and the Packers will be decided in August is my guess. That's the timing that makes the most sense to me, from a business perspective.
@H5 posted:The Packers won't trade Rodgers this year, he gives them the best chance to win.
Rodgers won't retire and give back ~$30mm. He wants commitment which means $$.
If Rodgers has another MVP level year his price goes up next offseason.
Rodgers knows all this. The Packers know all this.
Both parties also know that a decision on the future does not need to happen last month, last week, today, tomorrow, next week, or even next month. The future between Rodgers and the Packers will be decided in August is my guess. That's the timing that makes the most sense to me, from a business perspective.
Just want we want...12 in a c*nty mood for the season.
What bd said. Talk about a chip on his shoulder, going out putting up another season like last season, winning the Super Bowl, turning to Gute and Murphy on the stand and telling them, "How's that timetable?'
Why is it that the same posters who loved the FO when McCarthy was fired mid-season are the same posters who now hate the FO with a passion? How could they go from the greatest FO to the worst FO in about 30 months?
You mean from doing the right thing for the organization vs. doing the wrong thing for the organization?
Kind of answers itself.
It should also be noted that the FO wasn’t praised rather than “it’s about f’in time”. A situation as obvious as making a phone call.
@CUPackFan posted:And to your point, the Broncos drafted Brock Osweiler that year after signing Peyton Manning in free agency. I don't remember hearing a peep from Peyton about that. And Elway asked Peyton to take a pay cut after 3 years with the Broncos. How do you think Rodgers would respond to that?
Manning's new contract kicked cap money down the road, he didn't take a pay cut.
@Henry posted:You mean from doing the right thing for the organization vs. doing the wrong thing for the organization?
Kind of answers itself.
It should also be noted that the FO wasn’t praised rather than “it’s about f’in time”. A situation as obvious as making a phone call.
And that's the saddest thing. You make the call if you're smart, something like "Hey Aaron, I just wanted to touch base with you before everything shakes out this weekend. You've told us you want to play until you're 40 and be part of this team. That's what I/we want, as well. That also puts us on a bit of a timetable, however. We want a couple more shots at a Super Bowl before then but we also have to think of the future. There are a couple of guys we have an eye on who might need some time, but we think could give us a stronger backup position for that run and maybe take over down the road. You're still our guy and we'd even like to maybe move some money around to give us some more cap flexibility by throwing a little more your way while also kicking some cap dollars down the road a bit, but we can work on that later. I just wanted to let you know we have a plan."
Rodgers wins a lot more games and moves a lot more revenue than some shitty cookie pushers.
@H5 posted:The Packers won't trade Rodgers this year, he gives them the best chance to win.
Rodgers won't retire and give back ~$30mm. He wants commitment which means $$.
If Rodgers has another MVP level year his price goes up next offseason.
Rodgers knows all this. The Packers know all this.
Both parties also know that a decision on the future does not need to happen last month, last week, today, tomorrow, next week, or even next month. The future between Rodgers and the Packers will be decided in August is my guess. That's the timing that makes the most sense to me, from a business perspective.
I'm thinking that's optimistic but then even with the best of educated guesses we don't know what's happening behind the scenes. If Rodgers is truly that pissed, I think he'll bleed them all the way up to the beginning of the season.
Rodgers can be pissed, but the Packers have him under contract for 3 more seasons.