Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers vs Saints Preseason Game 2: Game Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 966110" data-attributes="member: 10086"><p>I’ve never fully understood decisions our FO makes on aging players. While I understand the general principle of moving on from a player a year too early is better, I don’t think that’s the case at HOF QB, HOF WR or the like. The Jerry Rice types you milk every last drop until they are empty.</p><p>I don’t know the talk going on for the last couple of seasons “behind the scenes” with #12. My hypothesis is that Rodgers gave our FO reason to believe he wasn’t committed anymore. The specific and public threats of retirement or being traded did not help his longevity with GB. His personality can sometimes be a bit vindictive in nature, but employers have to take threats seriously.</p><p>That said. We can “like” the response or “not like” that response (which ended up being our FO drafting of a QB with relatively limited resources). Having a late Date 1 selection is rarely enough firepower to get a quick reliable answer. So the next scenario I’d go “high ceiling” with medium firepower. There are risks involved. All this said, I’m going to guess it was the right thing to do. Can you imagine had Rodgers bailed out with no immediate answers? We’d be even more furious with Brian for allowing that.</p><p></p><p>I just don’t see beating up a GM for only doing what he thought was a reasonable response to a major predicament. Especially now that we actually got a best case outcome. We negotiated with #12 to buy his allegiance for a reasonable $$ .</p><p>We also have that “high ceiling” guy starting to get primed at QB. At this rate, if Jordan keeps a slow and steady improvement, we’ll have 2 options at starting QB by 2023-2024. That’s really almost an ideal scenario when a team has a 40 year old at the helm. I’m guessing many franchises would love to be in our shoes at QB room.</p><p>As far as Jimmy G. I wouldn’t trade a 23 year old making 3.3M to overpay Garapolo $30M, which really isn’t much better upgrade, to be frank</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="OldSchool101, post: 966110, member: 10086"] I’ve never fully understood decisions our FO makes on aging players. While I understand the general principle of moving on from a player a year too early is better, I don’t think that’s the case at HOF QB, HOF WR or the like. The Jerry Rice types you milk every last drop until they are empty. I don’t know the talk going on for the last couple of seasons “behind the scenes” with #12. My hypothesis is that Rodgers gave our FO reason to believe he wasn’t committed anymore. The specific and public threats of retirement or being traded did not help his longevity with GB. His personality can sometimes be a bit vindictive in nature, but employers have to take threats seriously. That said. We can “like” the response or “not like” that response (which ended up being our FO drafting of a QB with relatively limited resources). Having a late Date 1 selection is rarely enough firepower to get a quick reliable answer. So the next scenario I’d go “high ceiling” with medium firepower. There are risks involved. All this said, I’m going to guess it was the right thing to do. Can you imagine had Rodgers bailed out with no immediate answers? We’d be even more furious with Brian for allowing that. I just don’t see beating up a GM for only doing what he thought was a reasonable response to a major predicament. Especially now that we actually got a best case outcome. We negotiated with #12 to buy his allegiance for a reasonable $$ . We also have that “high ceiling” guy starting to get primed at QB. At this rate, if Jordan keeps a slow and steady improvement, we’ll have 2 options at starting QB by 2023-2024. That’s really almost an ideal scenario when a team has a 40 year old at the helm. I’m guessing many franchises would love to be in our shoes at QB room. As far as Jimmy G. I wouldn’t trade a 23 year old making 3.3M to overpay Garapolo $30M, which really isn’t much better upgrade, to be frank [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
162-0
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 11:49 PM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Packers to Play in Brazil
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 11:40 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
The Packers All-Personality Team
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 11:30 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2024 Packers Top 30 Prospect Visits
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 11:23 PM
Draft Talk
Free Agency Thread
Latest: tynimiller
Yesterday at 10:50 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Packers vs Saints Preseason Game 2: Game Thread
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top