Tae Adams

[Heyjoe4]

While Davante and Rodgers are 2 of the best in the NFL, I don't like the approach that either are currently taking. I would rather see the Packers trade them both (Adams now, Rodgers 2022). Get the most that you can out of them, while you can, instead of letting them continue to poison the well, end up with a late 3rd round for Davante and nothing but more negative media with Rodgers.

Instead of viewing this as "the demise" of the Packers, view this as a golden opportunity to fix the cap, get some nice draft capital at the cost of 2 players that seem like they really don't want to be in Green Bay.

Nice summary. Whether we like it or not, everything changes and we all move on. This has been particularly hurtful to the fans who supported Rodgers for 16 years. And GB stuck with Adams despite a rocky start his first two years. So now they wanna leave? Let them, but get fair value.

 

[gopkrs]

While Davante and Rodgers are 2 of the best in the NFL, I don't like the approach that either are currently taking. I would rather see the Packers trade them both (Adams now, Rodgers 2022). Get the most that you can out of them, while you can, instead of letting them continue to poison the well, end up with a late 3rd round for Davante and nothing but more negative media with Rodgers.

Instead of viewing this as "the demise" of the Packers, view this as a golden opportunity to fix the cap, get some nice draft capital at the cost of 2 players that seem like they really don't want to be in Green Bay.

So are you just against anyone that is going to negotiate for more money? Does that show that they don't want to play for the GBP? And are therefore unworthy? I'm being sarcastic but all this talk of poisoning wells will eventually help us trade places with Detroit before the well is even poisoned. Maybe it would make sense to trade Adams. But for me that would be a decision based on what we think is best for the GBP going forward on the field. A dollars vs. production type thing. Though more complicated than just that.

 

[Half Empty]

Isn't negotiating for more money what happened when he signed the contract that binds him to the team through 2023? If that's the case, then we apparently are getting into the butt-hurt ego realm. Somewhere in there, I think 'unworthy' starts to appear.

 

[gopkrs]

Isn't negotiating for more money what happened when he signed the contract that binds him to the team through 2023? If that's the case, then we apparently are getting into the butt-hurt ego realm. Somewhere in there, I think 'unworthy' starts to appear.

Who are you talking about? Well, obviously Rodgers which means you really did not try to understand what I was saying.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So are you just against anyone that is going to negotiate for more money? Does that show that they don't want to play for the GBP? And are therefore unworthy? I'm being sarcastic but all this talk of poisoning wells will eventually help us trade places with Detroit before the well is even poisoned. Maybe it would make sense to trade Adams. But for me that would be a decision based on what we think is best for the GBP going forward on the field. A dollars vs. production type thing. Though more complicated than just that.

I have never seen Packer players this passive aggressive before. If you aren't seeing that or you aren't understanding that neither seem to want to play in Green Bay (Rodgers for sure), then I don't know what to say to you. Every season the Packers are negotiating new or reworked contracts with multiple players, these 2 players are taking a completely different approach than most.

 

[sschind]

I have never seen Packer players this passive aggressive before. If you aren't seeing that or you aren't understanding that neither seem to want to play in Green Bay (Rodgers for sure), then I don't know what to say to you. Every season the Packers are negotiating new or reworked contracts with multiple players, these 2 players are taking a completely different approach than most.

I don't know about Adams. Maybe I just don't want it to be true. We have seen it before when guys at the top of the heap want more money than anyone else. It doesn't mean they don't want to be there. Its an ego thing but that's not always bad and it doesn't always mean there are deep problems.

Right now the Packers don't want to pay Adams that much money. Maybe it has to do with the uncertainty with Rodgers. It could be they don't know where they will be sitting cap wise with the Rodgers situation. It could be that they don't want to commit to Adams if they don't have Rodgers though I doubt that. Its also possible they simply don't want to pay him that much money. I'm still hopeful that once the Rodgers thing gets clearer they will work things out with Adams but if it is not to be it is not to be.

 

[pacmaniac]

Why does Adams want to stick with a proven underachiever?

 

[OldSchool101]

So are you just against anyone that is going to negotiate for more money? Does that show that they don't want to play for the GBP? And are therefore unworthy? I'm being sarcastic but all this talk of poisoning wells will eventually help us trade places with Detroit before the well is even poisoned.

No. I am however in support of cutting ties with players that openly voice their displeasure with our team (on multiple occasions or in various capacities). Right now those players are Rodgers and Adams.
No way do I pay anywhere near league tI a player not 100% committed. That’s just a financial nightmare ready to happen. Do you not remember Martellus Bennett and how that distraction cost us dearly? That wasn’t even a pinky finger, we’re talking about our Right hand (Rodgers) and left thumb (Davante) here.

I have never seen Packer players this passive aggressive before. If you aren't seeing that or you aren't understanding that neither seem to want to play in Green Bay (Rodgers for sure), then I don't know what to say to you.

Amen. Rodgers is all over the map and he’s put our entire team in a compromising situation. Adams is going out of his way to show more loyalty to Rodgers than his own employer.
What a specific few forget is that Aaron Rodgers does not employ Davante Adams. While I appreciate Davante is trying to support his QB, Tae is allowing his emotions to dictate his future. Having the Packers bid on retaining Adams is only going to aid a competitive offer for a new contract, the less teams are competing for Davante, the less favorable his contract terms.
Im perplexed that these guys don’t have any meaningful representation and the disgruntled players just can’t refrain from making crucial public statements. Seems odd to me.

 

[longtimefan]

No. I am however in support of cutting ties with players that openly voice their displeasure with our team (on multiple occasions or in various capacities). Right now those players are Rodgers and Adams.
No way do I pay anywhere near league tI a player not 100% committed. That’s just a financial nightmare ready to happen. Do you not remember Martellus Bennett and how that distraction cost us dearly? That wasn’t even a pinky finger, we’re talking about our Right hand (Rodgers) and left thumb (Davante) here.


Amen. Rodgers is all over the map and he’s put our entire team in a compromising situation. Adams is going out of his way to show more loyalty to Rodgers than his own employer.
What a specific few forget is that Aaron Rodgers does not employ Davante Adams. While I appreciate Davante is trying to support his QB, Tae is allowing his emotions to dictate his future. Having the Packers bid on retaining Adams is only going to aid a competitive offer for a new contract, the less teams are competing for Davante, the less favorable his contract terms.
Im perplexed that these guys don’t have any meaningful representation and the disgruntled players just can’t refrain from making crucial public statements. Seems odd to me.

We really dont know if his supporting rodgers means he done here

 

[Mondio]

I have zero against Adams at this point. He's playing like one of the best in the league, this is probably his last big pay day, he's trying to maximize it. He's not really cryptic other than he was apparently not happy with latest offer, and i'm fine with that. He probably wants more than we can afford, it's the reality of the situation. Doesn't mean anybody is wrong.

But he's not holding out, threatening anything, just going to show up and play and let it work itself out. These deals get gone, or don't every year. There were no meaningful talks with BakhT last year either, or Jones. and both are still here. Nothing is done yet.

 

[Half Empty]

Who are you talking about? Well, obviously Rodgers which means you really did not try to understand what I was saying.

One alternative is that you were talking about Adams, in which case the question is why you think anyone is against him negotiating as his current contract runs out. I haven't seen any of that sentiment. If it's not that, please clarify.

 

[gopkrs]

One alternative is that you were talking about Adams, in which case the question is why you think anyone is against him negotiating as his current contract runs out. I haven't seen any of that sentiment. If it's not that, please clarify.

I have seen negative comments directed at Adams.

 

[Heyjoe4]

So are you just against anyone that is going to negotiate for more money? Does that show that they don't want to play for the GBP? And are therefore unworthy? I'm being sarcastic but all this talk of poisoning wells will eventually help us trade places with Detroit before the well is even poisoned. Maybe it would make sense to trade Adams. But for me that would be a decision based on what we think is best for the GBP going forward on the field. A dollars vs. production type thing. Though more complicated than just that.

Good point. After the last few seasons, Adams should expect a healthy raise, regardless of the circumstances with GB. Now if he wants to leave the team, it changes the calculus a bit for GB. Best approach then is to tag him and trade him when this season is over. The Packers have handed out some big contracts lately - Bakhtiari and Clark. Ya can't pay everyone market value. My guess is that Adams is worth $23 mil/year on the open market (comparing to Julio Jones at $22 mil). If that's the case, I'm not sure GB can afford to keep him.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I have seen negative comments directed at Adams.

Much like many of us have been with Rodgers, I think we have the same questions about Adams. You may think we are being negative. I call it keeping your eyes wide open and much like Rodgers, having to draw conclusions based on some of the reports, as we watch what each player says/doesn't say or does/doesn't do.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Adams is arguably more valuable to GB without Rodgers because he is so good that he can help a QB a ton. They don’t have another WR like that.

With that said, he’s near 30, he’s been injury prone, and I can’t think of the last team that paid a WR huge money and won a SB. Just a poor use of salary cap, imo.

The whole "can't think of the last team that won a Super Bowl after paying X..." line is kind of a ridiculous argument. One team wins a Super Bowl each year. So, in the last 10 years, at most 10 teams could have won. The argument should really be "I can't think of the last team that consistently won a Super Bowl because their great QB took a below-market contract because he was the house-dad to his wife who was making WAY more than he was".

 

[Sunshinepacker]

The Texans messed all the receiver contracts up with the deal they gave Hopkins; Hopkins is making 25% more per year than the second highest paid WR. Adams should not be paid $27m per year but he has a strong argument to be paid more than Julio Jones. Plus, Adams skillset is one that should age well; he doesn't rely on elite speed or physical skills.

 

[thequick12]

Isn't negotiating for more money what happened when he signed the contract that binds him to the team through 2023? If that's the case, then we apparently are getting into the butt-hurt ego realm. Somewhere in there, I think 'unworthy' starts to appear.

To be fair Rodgers said at the time he signed that extension...that this issue would come up now because of the way the contract was structured

 

[thequick12]

The Texans messed all the receiver contracts up with the deal they gave Hopkins; Hopkins is making 25% more per year than the second highest paid WR. Adams should not be paid $27m per year but he has a strong argument to be paid more than Julio Jones. Plus, Adams skillset is one that should age well; he doesn't rely on elite speed or physical skills.

Adams will not be paid 27 m per by any team and DeAndre Hopkins isn't either...his deal is 5 years 95 million that comes to 19 m per not 27

 

[GleefulGary]

Man between Rodgers and Adams what a mess in GB. The finger can be pointed at Rodgers, and maybe at Adams, for being selfish divas. But I think the incompetent Murphy and the incompetent Gluten play a bigger role. Maybe if we never had Bob Harlan, this would all be ok in the FO. But Murphy and Gluten win the diva contest. My way or the highway. We're the bosses, you guys are employees. Just bad management with the best players on the team and in the NFL.

What have they done wrong with Adams?

 

[GleefulGary]

Adams will not be paid 27 m per by any team and DeAndre Hopkins isn't either...his deal is 5 years 95 million that comes to 19 m per not 27

His extension was 27/yr I believe.

 

[thequick12]

His extension was 27/yr I believe.

Yeah over 2 years while he had 3 years remaining on his current contract...so you see what I'm saying it ain't 27 m per. The extension was 2 years 54 million but the other 3 years aren't at 27 m per. You have to take into account the entire contract not just the 2 year extension

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

To be fair Rodgers said at the time he signed that extension...that this issue would come up now because of the way the contract was structured

Yet, he still signed the contract. So to be fair, he never should have taken all that up-front guaranteed money, if he wasn't planning on honoring a written contract.

"Oh hell, I knew when I signed the car lease that there was a huge cost at the end if X happened, but but but....."

 

[longtimefan]

Yet, he still signed the contract. So to be fair, he never should have taken all that up-front guaranteed money, if he wasn't planning on honoring a written contract.

"Oh hell, I knew when I signed the car lease that there was a huge cost at the end if X happened, but but but....."

Thats my point..he signed it.. Now did the team promised something? Thats why its an issue now?

 

[thequick12]

Yet, he still signed the contract. So to be fair, he never should have taken all that up-front guaranteed money, if he wasn't planning on honoring a written contract.

"Oh hell, I knew when I signed the car lease that there was a huge cost at the end if X happened, but but but....."

I think he wanted a fully guaranteed contract or maybe it was something to do with a percentage I can't exactly recall...and the Packers weren't down so they compromised on the extension he signed. Both knowing thisvwas gonna come up at this time

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think he wanted a fully guaranteed contract or maybe it was something to do with a percentage I can't exactly recall...and the Packers weren't down so they compromised on the extension he signed. Both knowing thisvwas gonna come up at this time

Again though, they mutally agreed on a deal that was beneficial to both parties. What if Rodgers game went to hell? What if he suffered a career ending injury? Should the Packers be able to say "see, we were afraid this might happen and we talked about it, so I think we should get a lot of that up-front money back." It's life, it's contracts, I do think feel sorry for the Packers when they lose out on a guy like Mo Bennett and I surely don't feel bad about Rodgers.