It’s Time!

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

He hasn't said or done anything to add to the situation in the slightest. It's just been Skip Bayless, Cowherd, and the other sports media airheads that have nothing better to do.

So True.
I hate sports figures, they stay up nights dreaming up BS about this stuff.

Rodgers will do what makes him happy and the Packers will move forward
in a professional manner on as usual.
If there's a problem with management, it will be taken care of sooner then later.

 

[Heyjoe4]

This is the crazy part, Rodgers has literally not added a THING to this discussion and people are ready to be upset at Rodgers because the media and fans are bored in the NFL off-season. Seriously, what has Rodgers done since the news broke that would lead you to want to move on? He hasn't said or done anything to add to the situation in the slightest. It's just been Skip Bayless, Cowherd, and the other sports media airheads that have nothing better to do.

I think it's human nature to dislike uncertainty. We went through it with Favre, it's just part of life. Most of the talking on this has been by the usual talking heads, that is, no one who matters. A better approach for us fans is to accept we can't change anything or anyone, and simply let this play out. That's a lot easier.

 

[mradtke66]

Had TT been using FA to the team's advantage, Gluten wouldn't have had so much talent to find.

I like to pick on this premise.

FA should be used to fill in small gaps. When you go out to to spend what Gute did on Z, Amos et al, you have big gaps.

TT's failing wasn't (necessarily) ignoring FA, it was his last drafts just failing so perfectly. Had he drafted better, there would have been more in-house talent worthy of re-signing. There wasn't, so go and spend.

 

[Schultz]

He hasn't done anything to add to the situation? He skipped both optional and mandatory camp for the 1st time in his career. To me skipping mandatory and getting fined speaks volumes.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I like to pick on this premise.

FA should be used to fill in small gaps. When you go out to to spend what Gute did on Z, Amos et al, you have big gaps.

TT's failing wasn't (necessarily) ignoring FA, it was his last drafts just failing so perfectly. Had he drafted better, there would have been more in-house talent worthy of re-signing. There wasn't, so go and spend.

I do agree that FA should be used at the margins, to shore up a weak position group for example. I don't like GMs spending a ton of money on a guy just because he had a career year. What is his motivation to improve once he's substantially cashed in? And in fairness, TT brought in Woodson and Peppers and those two guys, especially Woodson, were key to a lot of success as measured by wins. Gluten overpaid because he had to. As good as those 4 guys turned out, they're all overpaid. Fortunately, they did work out (so far). And yeah TT's last few drafts were pretty close to disasters. I don't want to speculate on why that was the case. They were just lousy drafts.

 

[rmontro]

This is the crazy part, Rodgers has literally not added a THING to this discussion and people are ready to be upset at Rodgers because the media and fans are bored in the NFL off-season.

Not entirely true, he gave an interview on the Kenny Mayne show, where he said as much by what he didn't say as by what he did. It was pretty clear that he indicated his problem was with management, in a round about passive aggressive way. Also he hasn't showed up for camp. He didn't break the story, but it clearly isn't a figment of people's imagination.

 

[mradtke66]

As good as those 4 guys turned out, they're all overpaid.

I'm not so sure about that.

Partially, I think we as fans somehow think it's "our money" going to contracts. And in normal years, with the cap going up, every big contract brings out "back in my day, a coke was 5 cents!!!!" We should breathe a little more each year and readjust what is a big contract.

Yes, as a general rule, FAs are overpriced. You're bidding against other teams, the numbers will drive upward.

HOWEVER

For all edge players, Z is 10th in cap hit this year. Preston is 29th. Both are near the bottom in terms of 2021 salary (123 and 122 respectively).

Billy Turner is 64th.

Amos is 17th.

I picked cap hit, as I think it's the most fair--Z's sub-million dollar salary doesn't tell the story of his cost!

 

[Heyjoe4]

I'm not so sure about that.

Partially, I think we as fans somehow think it's "our money" going to contracts. And in normal years, with the cap going up, every big contract brings out "back in my day, a coke was 5 cents!!!!" We should breathe a little more each year and readjust what is a big contract.

Yes, as a general rule, FAs are overpriced. You're bidding against other teams, the numbers will drive upward.

HOWEVER

For all edge players, Z is 10th in cap hit this year. Preston is 29th. Both are near the bottom in terms of 2021 salary (123 and 122 respectively).

Billy Turner is 64th.

Amos is 17th.

I picked cap hit, as I think it's the most fair--Z's sub-million dollar salary doesn't tell the story of his cost!

Yeah that's the problem with salary structures and making comparisons between players. Even so your stats show GB is not paying excessively for these guys. And it's good to keep in mind we have a QB (maybe) who takes up about 20% of cap, and that certainly limits what a GM can do in FA, keeping in mind the draft picks have to be signed every year.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

He hasn't done anything to add to the situation? He skipped both optional and mandatory camp for the 1st time in his career. To me skipping mandatory and getting fined speaks volumes.

Anyone that thinks him skipping was a new development isn't being realistic. He's done nothing new since the draft news broke.

 

[mradtke66]

Yeah that's the problem with salary structures and making comparisons between players. Even so your stats show GB is not paying excessively for these guys. And it's good to keep in mind we have a QB (maybe) who takes up about 20% of cap, and that certainly limits what a GM can do in FA, keeping in mind the draft picks have to be signed every year.

To really take it a step further, I don't think a single player making a boatload of cap percentages impacts a team that much (there is obviously a limit, though I'm not sure where it is). I think struggling to build a roster and giving a quarterback a large contract are symptoms of the same issue: Having a Good Quarterback. I'll try to illustrate this...

I am of the opinion that the draft is the single most important way to build your roster. This is the premise I operate under while drawing this picture.

You cannot give every player what they are worth. If you gave every of the 53 market-rate, you wouldn't make it to 53 before you ran out of cap. Part of what lets you compete is having many players on their initial rookie deals. Even if they are not super-starts, you gotta have 11 people on punt coverage. In this way, even the Janis-es of the world have value. Cheap relative to the value they gave us on game day.

Second, you find those superstars here and there in the draft.

What that good quarterback does to screw all this up is win games. The more games you win, the later in the draft you pick. The later you pick, the harder it is to get good players. And eventually, the good quarterback is going to want that big contract. And if you don't give it to him, another team will.

Yes, you'll also lose existing players, but you're more likely to lose them because they got older. Or they weren't actually that good and you declined to re-signed them.

 

[OldSchool101]

He hasn't done anything to add to the situation? He skipped both optional and mandatory camp for the 1st time in his career. To me skipping mandatory and getting fined speaks volumes.

Yes. History is a powerful tool in getting an in-depth look at a persons character. Aaron Rodgers is 100% responsible for an accessory to the crime of the attempted hijacking of the entire 2021 NFL draft. Aaron willfully and purposefully used the news on draft night to highlight his dissatisfaction with the team’s management. His involvement was passive, but just because you didn’t directly rob the bank and kill hostages, does NOT acquit you if you had knowledge of the crime beforehand and did nothing to stop it or accompany the effort to mitigate the criminal behavior in the immediate aftermath.

If the team had done anything unethical or distasteful, Aaron just double matched stupid and raised it in intensity. So he lost any meaningful ability to stand on ethical ground imo.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Regarding those that want a cheaper QB so they can field a more "balanced" team; do you think fans are the only ones that think this way? That GMs and coaches haven't thought the same thing? It should tell you something that the guys being held responsible for their decisions (unlike us fans) keep signing those expensive QBs. It's because those expensive QBs impact games FAR more than any other position on the roster. Put Jaire Alexander and Jalen Ramsey at corner with Carr at QB and that team is maybe winning 10 games. I'd much rather have a team I root for spend $30 million on an elite QB and $7 million on an average CB than $20 million on an elite CB and $15 million on an average QB.

GMs and coaches don't want to be fired. Having a REALLY expensive, REALLY good QB gives those people a lot of job security. Just look at MM as a prime example.

 

[OldSchool101]

It should tell you something that the guys being held responsible for their decisions (unlike us fans) keep signing those expensive QBs.

In this case though you used a terrible example. Agree or Disagree.. it’s very apparent to the vast majority of us that “the guys responsible” disagree with you. They just went out and drafted his replacement and are building the team around Jordan Love.

In an effort to shame us fans by saying we’re not understanding the plot, you basically just showed you’re not following the recent story line very well at all. Leave the Roster building to the guys that do this for a living and you just might learn something along the way.

Sunshine I know you mean well trying to apologize for our QB and I respect that to a point. However if someone tells you you’re crazy and they hate working with you.. let them go and find peace elsewhere. I know it’s hard to accept losing Aaron, but embrace change and let him chase happiness somewhere else.

PS. you ain’t getting Aaron Rodgers for $30mil. Try $45mil+ or he’ll block your calls.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

In this case though you used a terrible example. Agree or Disagree.. it’s very apparent to the vast majority of us that “the guys responsible” disagree with you. They just went out and drafted his replacement and are building the team around Jordan Love.

In an effort to shame us fans by saying we’re not understanding the plot, you basically just showed you’re not following the recent story line very well at all. Leave the Roster building to the guys that do this for a living and you just might learn something along the way.

Sunshine I know you mean well trying to apologize for our QB and I respect that to a point. However if someone tells you you’re crazy and they hate working with you.. let them go and find peace elsewhere. I know it’s hard to accept losing Aaron, but embrace change and let him chase happiness somewhere else.

PS. you ain’t getting Aaron Rodgers for $30mil. Try $45mil+ or he’ll block your calls.

Yup, they disagreed so much they signed him to a 4-year, $134 million contract in 2018! How could I have been so foolish!

I'll continue to root for the Packers having an all-time great at the position that is FAR more valuable than any other position on the team (Rodgers, Love, Mahomes, etc.) while other people complain and believe they can build a team like the 2002 Bucs and just hire the only GM in the history of the sport that can consistently find great QBs every 5 years in the draft.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Yup, they disagreed so much they signed him to a 4-year, $134 million contract in 2018! How could I have been so foolish!

I'll continue to root for the Packers having an all-time great at the position that is FAR more valuable than any other position on the team (Rodgers, Love, Mahomes, etc.) while other people complain and believe they can build a team like the 2002 Bucs and just hire the only GM in the history of the sport that can consistently find great QBs every 5 years in the draft.

Yeah, the simple fact is this is a much better team for 2021 and likely beyond with Rodgers. A very solid team has been built around him (not Jordan Love, at least not yet). We'll see if Rodgers shows up. I hope he does and everyone can move on and start thinking about winning football games, again.

 

[OldSchool101]

Yup, they disagreed so much they signed him to a 4-year, $134 million contract in 2018! How could I have been so foolish!

Again disagree or agree with the move we made. Either way, you continue to ignore the facts. I’ll give Aaron Rodgers credit, at least he saw it coming. He’s smart enough to get past the surface level math by tracing the calculus derivatives backwards.
In addition. It doesn’t this matter what you or I think. It matters what this FO thinks. They obviously have been planning Aaron’s departure in the next couple of seasons or they wouldn’t have spent 2 draft picks on his replacement. They’d like to give him 1-2 seasons to prove you correct, but he turned down the largest annual contract by a QB to date. That’s in the area of $45mil tacos annually. Unfortunately our QB is the one telling us to kick rocks. All eyes are on Rodgers now its his decision to make.

I’ll ask once again.Are you staying publicly that the GBP will fail with anyone other than Aaron Rodgers?
It’s ok to have your opinion I respect that. But stand by that opinion and quit all the dancing around and word posturing.
Yes or No?

I’ll answer first. NO
1. Matt LaFleur is a heck of an Offensive mind.
2. Brian Gutenkunst might not be smooth from the political aspect of GMing, but it’s glaringly apparent he knows personnel and he’s effective at finding talent.
These 2 paired will continue to be effective if given time and resources.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Again disagree or agree with the move we made. Either way, you continue to ignore the facts. I’ll give Aaron Rodgers credit, at least he saw it coming. He’s smart enough to get past the surface level math by tracing the calculus derivatives backwards.
In addition. It doesn’t this matter what you or I think. It matters what this FO thinks. They obviously have been planning Aaron’s departure in the next couple of seasons or they wouldn’t have spent 2 draft picks on his replacement. They’d like to give him 1-2 seasons to prove you correct, but he turned down the largest annual contract by a QB to date. That’s in the area of $45mil tacos annually. Unfortunately our QB is the one not telling us to kick rocks. All eyes are on Rodgers now its his decision to make.

I’ll ask once again.Are you staying publicly that the GBP will fail with anyone other than Aaron Rodgers?
It’s ok to have your opinion I respect that. But stand by that opinion and quit all the dancing around and word posturing.
Yes or No?

I’ll answer first. NO
1. Matt LaFleur is a heck of an Offensive mind.
2. Brian Gutenkunst might not be smooth from the political aspect of GMing, but it’s glaringly apparent he knows personnel and he’s effective at finding talent.
These 2 paired will continue to be effective if given time and resources.

Once again, at no point have I claimed the Packers will fail without Rodgers (I HAVE said they'll be much worse with Love next season because, well, I don't think Love will play like an MVP in his first starting season).

I am simply pointing out that the logic of building a "balanced" team without having to pay a QB is a risky strategy that demands your team have pretty much the best GM ever if you want a consistently good team. You HAVE to draft a decent, at minimum QB, while also drafting elite players at numerous positions.

Let's work this out. Teddy Bridgewater is probably not the QB that most "balanced" team advocates would like. I'm guessing, at a minimum, you're looking for Tannehill or Cousins and, guess what, they're going to cost a LOT to extend after their rookie deals (the aforementioned QBs are making $29.5 and $33 million per year), so now you're relying on the GM drafting ANOTHER good QB to replace the new guy the team is moving on from. If you could promise me that Green Bay would have the first GM in history to be able to draft good QBs every 4-5 seasons while ALSO drafting elite corners, dline, and oline, then I would be all for the "balanced" team. That's just unrealistic though.

So please, explain to me the logic of moving on from Rodgers to balance out the team when, if you play out this logic, you're relying on constant turnover at QB and every year having an elite draft. I'm not saying the team can't win without Rodgers, just that deciding you don't want an elite QB because you'd rather have 2 elite corners and a great ILB isn't a good team building move.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Once again, at no point have I claimed the Packers will fail without Rodgers (I HAVE said they'll be much worse with Love next season because, well, I don't think Love will play like an MVP in his first starting season).

I am simply pointing out that the logic of building a "balanced" team without having to pay a QB is a risky strategy that demands your team have pretty much the best GM ever if you want a consistently good team. You HAVE to draft a decent, at minimum QB, while also drafting elite players at numerous positions.

Let's work this out. Teddy Bridgewater is probably not the QB that most "balanced" team advocates would like. I'm guessing, at a minimum, you're looking for Tannehill or Cousins and, guess what, they're going to cost a LOT to extend after their rookie deals (the aforementioned QBs are making $29.5 and $33 million per year), so now you're relying on the GM drafting ANOTHER good QB to replace the new guy the team is moving on from. If you could promise me that Green Bay would have the first GM in history to be able to draft good QBs every 4-5 seasons while ALSO drafting elite corners, dline, and oline, then I would be all for the "balanced" team. That's just unrealistic though.

So please, explain to me the logic of moving on from Rodgers to balance out the team when, if you play out this logic, you're relying on constant turnover at QB and every year having an elite draft. I'm not saying the team can't win without Rodgers, just that deciding you don't want an elite QB because you'd rather have 2 elite corners and a great ILB isn't a good team building move.

I think most would agree that QB is the most important position on the team. Have there been SB champs w/o elite QBs? Yeah, three that I can think of - Trent Dilfer (Bucs), Nick Foles (Eagles), Peyton Manning (Broncos). In the case of Manning, he was at the end of his career and the Denver team won with D. I think Manning threw for 150 yards in that SB. He just wasn't a factor. despite being a generational talent and HOFer.

There are probably a few other instances I missed. My point is that all the other SB winners had an elite QB at the position. I mean it's really easy. GB's best chance of a SB this year is with Rodgers. Not Teddy Bridgewater and not Jordan Love.

You've got it right Sunshine.

 

[OldSchool101]

Once again, at no point have I claimed the Packers will fail without Rodgers (I HAVE said they'll be much worse with Love next season because, well, I don't think Love will play like an MVP in his first starting season).

I am simply pointing out that the logic of building a "balanced" team without having to pay a QB is a risky strategy that demands your team have pretty much the best GM ever if you want a consistently good team. You HAVE to draft a decent, at minimum QB, while also drafting elite players at numerous positions.

Let's work this out. Teddy Bridgewater is probably not the QB that most "balanced" team advocates would like. I'm guessing, at a minimum, you're looking for Tannehill or Cousins and, guess what, they're going to cost a LOT to extend after their rookie deals (the aforementioned QBs are making $29.5 and $33 million per year), so now you're relying on the GM drafting ANOTHER good QB to replace the new guy the team is moving on from. If you could promise me that Green Bay would have the first GM in history to be able to draft good QBs every 4-5 seasons while ALSO drafting elite corners, dline, and oline, then I would be all for the "balanced" team. That's just unrealistic though.

So please, explain to me the logic of moving on from Rodgers to balance out the team when, if you play out this logic, you're relying on constant turnover at QB and every year having an elite draft. I'm not saying the team can't win without Rodgers, just that deciding you don't want an elite QB because you'd rather have 2 elite corners and a great ILB isn't a good team building move.

I see what your saying. I’ve argued the QB thing before when you were a young grasshopper! You act like this is some new cutting edge idea about QB.
But the most obvious thing you are not allowing for is the matter at hand… .
Aaron Rodgers does not want to play for the GBP. What do you say about that??

Are you suggesting we kidnap him in the middle of the night and beat him into submission? I’ll participate if nothing else to let some frustration out on him.

Or Maybe sign him to a 6 year deal at $45mil a season and $200+ guaranteed and fire Brian Gutenkunst and make Aaron 50/50 co GM. Then send Jaire AND Davante packing because we can’t afford either? Am I the only one that sees were 125k deep in credit card debt? But you want to divorce your wife, foster your kids.. then go on a tropical island vacation and take the company card?

So you take a step back with a new QB. (It took Aaron Rodgers 5 years to get to the playoffs if you recall) You don’t trust this GM or HC or you ignore the financial aspect of this fork in the road or both. Great employees come and go and had Ron Wolf or Ted Thompson not went out of their way to draft another one? You wouldn’t have a QB to argue about! That’s the irony of this QB argument to me, they wouldn’t be here without the GM supporting them!

That means you’re putting the cart before the horse and admittedly, it might drive backwards looking all fancy for a bit. But you’ll eventually roll both off a cliff backwards long term.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I see what your saying. I’ve argued the QB thing before when you were a young grasshopper! You act like this is some new cutting edge idea about QB.
But the most obvious thing you are not allowing for is the matter at hand… .
Aaron Rodgers does not want to play for the GBP. What do you say about that??

Are you suggesting we kidnap him in the middle of the night and beat him into submission? I’ll participate if nothing else to let some frustration out on him.

Or Maybe sign him to a 6 year deal at $45mil a season and $200+ guaranteed and fire Brian Gutenkunst and make Aaron 50/50 co GM. Then send Jaire AND Davante packing because we can’t afford either? Am I the only one that sees were 125k deep in credit card debt? But you want to divorce your wife, foster your kids.. then go on a tropical island vacation and take the company card?

So you take a step back with a new QB. (It took Aaron Rodgers 5 years to get to the playoffs if you recall) You don’t trust this GM or HC or you ignore the financial aspect of this fork in the road or both. Great employees come and go and had Ron Wolf or Ted Thompson not went out of their way to draft another one? You wouldn’t have a QB to argue about! That’s the irony of this QB argument to me, they wouldn’t be here without the GM supporting them!

That means you’re putting the cart before the horse and admittedly, it might drive backwards looking all fancy for a bit. But you’ll eventually roll both off a cliff backwards long term.

Well, Rodgers does contribute more to winning than Jaire and Adams but if you don’t want to pay him to play here, then trade him. If he wanted 2 years for $90 million, sure, pay him and figure out the cap issues (which works not include letting Adams and Jaire walk btw).

Great quarterbacks are expensive. Great quarterbacks also contribute far more to winning than great players at any other position.

Refusing to pay market value for a great QB means you think you’re GM can draft good QBs every 5 years. That’s unrealistic.

 

[Poppa San]

Well, Rodgers does contribute more to winning than Jaire and Adams but if you don’t want to pay him to play here, then trade him. If he wanted 2 years for $90 million, sure, pay him and figure out the cap issues (which works not include letting Adams and Jaire walk btw).

Great quarterbacks are expensive. Great quarterbacks also contribute far more to winning than great players at any other position.

Refusing to pay market value for a great QB means you think you’re GM can draft good QBs every 5 years. That’s unrealistic.

Somebody around here threw out a stat that no SB team ever had a QB consume more than 13% of the team's cap. Or maybe it was a SB winning team. It could be old. I don't recall exactly. So you, instead of the precedent of finding elite players every year, advocate being the first to have a 20% of the cap in one player dynasty.

 

[JK64]

We also know for sure besides the Love pick that the Packers FO did not try and extend Rodgers right after the season...they first tried to just do a simple restructure which wouldn't of tied them to Rodgers beyond this season...

We also know about the "insult offer" to Jordy Nelson as they kicked him out the door...this is exactly what Rodgers was talking about with his "people" comments. It's about the people and theirs ways to do tough things without being a deck for lack of a better word

I agree with you on his "people" comments. What does he expect the GB Packers to do? Keep and pay aging players out of sentimentality? I doubt any team in the NFL would run a team Rodgers' way. Rodgers is a real ****.

 

[ARPackFan]

Somebody around here threw out a stat that no SB team ever had a QB consume more than 13% of the team's cap. Or maybe it was a SB winning team. It could be old. I don't recall exactly. So you, instead of the precedent of finding elite players every year, advocate being the first to have a 20% of the cap in one player dynasty.

I believe that is true and it passes a basic sanity check because a team obviously has less to spend on other positions. Steve Young won the SB in 1994 and was 13% of the cap.

 

[rmontro]

I believe that is true and it passes a basic sanity check because a team obviously has less to spend on other positions. Steve Young won the SB in 1994 and was 13% of the cap.

If Rodgers was enough to win a Super Bowl, we'd be eleven time defending champs.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Somebody around here threw out a stat that no SB team ever had a QB consume more than 13% of the team's cap. Or maybe it was a SB winning team. It could be old. I don't recall exactly. So you, instead of the precedent of finding elite players every year, advocate being the first to have a 20% of the cap in one player dynasty.

If you have the magic strategy of constantly drafting good QBs because you don’t want to pay them, then I’m all for it. Barring that, I’d rather go the great QB route than the Vikings/Bears route of “more balance with bad QB”.