The Aaron Rodgers performance thread

[Packer Fan in SD]

Dude, I stopped eating ****** buttons in the 1970’s. Get current.

 

[HardRightEdge]

i predict this upcoming season is Rodgers last as a Packer. they'll take the $5m cap savings and move on to Love. i can't imagine them taking the $36m cap hit, and paying him $22m in 2021, with that cap being screwed by covid. by the end of the 2020 season Rodgers will have received all his guaranteed money and then some. no reason to delay the inevitable.
the last sentence...MLF wants to run HIS system (not a 75/25 mixture of MM's O [75 being MM's] and his own) and the only way that'll happen is with a new QB. that's why they drafted Love. Rodgers pushed back on MLF's system from the get go. that's why the offense looked so much like MM's...because most of it was MM's. the subject keeps coming up. where there's smoke there's fire. even Packer friendly guys like Aaron Nagler (Cheesehead TV), who loves Rodgers and the Packers, have said it. Nagler expects to see a lot less "spread" offense and more quick, timing, routes/throws, and running, this season than last. more use of the middle of the field. a lot less MM/Rodgers O in other words. MLF wants more "explosive" plays. that doesn't mean "bombs." will Rodgers run that offense? Nagler thinks so. i don't see why Rodgers would since he didn't last year. what's his incentive? he knows he's not going to finish his career in GB.
again...i don't hate Rodgers. he's had some great years. it's his attitude, cap hit, age, and diminishing skills relative to that cap hit, i dislike.

I think Rodgers and LaFluer got along pretty well once they got rolling. Rodgers was able to teach him a few things, helping out the rookie head coach with only one year of play calling experience. LaFleur brought inventiveness into the scheme, especially in the red zone, that had been lacking. Perhaps they will throw more timing routes and over the middle more frequently if they can find somebody other than Adams who can run those routes in the way they need to be run. I was repeatedly surprised over two years how mediocre a route runner Graham turned out to be, some other guys worse. Play action and downfield against single high safety won't be going away, of that you can be sure.

As far as Rodgers being married to the McCarthy scheme, you have a short memory. The disagreements over how the offense should run got to fever pitch early in 2018. I think "stupid" was the word Rodgers used at one point to describe the play calling.

You'll never win with the big prize with a programmed robo-QB. None have done it yet.

I always wonder how many people actually watch the games, Packers and otherwise, vs. how many wait to have somebody tell them what they saw?

Anyway, it might well be Rodgers last season, but be careful what you wish for.

 

[Passepartout]

Yeah as really think that Rodgers is still playing on fire there. And that he says he can play a few more seasons even. Or until his contract expires!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

i predict this upcoming season is Rodgers last as a Packer. they'll take the $5m cap savings and move on to Love. i can't imagine them taking the $36m cap hit, and paying him $22m in 2021, with that cap being screwed by covid. by the end of the 2020 season Rodgers will have received all his guaranteed money and then some. no reason to delay the inevitable.
the last sentence...MLF wants to run HIS system (not a 75/25 mixture of MM's O [75 being MM's] and his own) and the only way that'll happen is with a new QB. that's why they drafted Love. Rodgers pushed back on MLF's system from the get go. that's why the offense looked so much like MM's...because most of it was MM's. the subject keeps coming up. where there's smoke there's fire. even Packer friendly guys like Aaron Nagler (Cheesehead TV), who loves Rodgers and the Packers, have said it. Nagler expects to see a lot less "spread" offense and more quick, timing, routes/throws, and running, this season than last. more use of the middle of the field. a lot less MM/Rodgers O in other words. MLF wants more "explosive" plays. that doesn't mean "bombs." will Rodgers run that offense? Nagler thinks so. i don't see why Rodgers would since he didn't last year. what's his incentive? he knows he's not going to finish his career in GB.
again...i don't hate Rodgers. he's had some great years. it's his attitude, cap hit, age, and diminishing skills relative to that cap hit, i dislike.

You might want to read this article before sounding off on Rodgers not buying into MLF's system and the team being ready to move on from the franchise quarterback once again:

https://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay...aaron-rodgers-active-role-in-virtual-planning

 

[PackAttack12]

You'll never win with the big prize with a programmed robo-QB. None have done it yet.

I always wonder how many people actually watch the games, Packers and otherwise, vs. how many wait to have somebody tell them what they saw?

Anyway, it might well be Rodgers last season, but be careful what you wish for.

Good post all around, but this last part is the crux of it.

 

[Mavster]

These forums are going to be great reads if/when Love takes over the reins of the offense.

 

[HardRightEdge]

You might want to read this article before sounding off on Rodgers not buying into MLF's system and the team being ready to move on from the franchise quarterback once again:

https://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay...aaron-rodgers-active-role-in-virtual-planning

I had not read that when I made my last post in the same spirit based on what the principals have said and done over the last year. This report of collegiality is exactly what I would have expected. When Rodgers said he cared about winning, not personnal stats, I think you'd best believe him, and that cannot happen if he does not seek a meeting of the minds.

"There’s a chance Rodgers and LaFleur sparked something more simpatico in their second year together." They looked pretty simpatico to me as last season wore on. You'd expect that to progress with any pair working together in their second year.

Perhaps the better question is whether LaFleur can mature into a full-fledged head coach, not just an uber-OC, to be simpatico with with his defensive coordinator. The question that nobody seems to ask is if LaFleur is from the SF tree, well versed in that style of offense, yada, yada, why was there zero evidence of that in the Packers defensive game plans? This notion of a Chinese wall between offense and defense is just dumb. If an offensive specialist game plans for what will work and won't against a variety of defenses, it stands to reason he might have some idea of what his own defense's counter moves should look like against a purportedly familar offensive scheme. There's no Chinese wall in New England. You can be certain of that.

Anyway, there are a couple of perspectives in this piece that capture common talking points:

• "This eventually will become LaFleur’s full-fledged offense -- a run-first, play-action system..."
• "A year ago, LaFleur’s charge was to return Rodgers to an MVP candidate..."
  
• "LaFleur’s task now is to make the offense more explosive..."
  
• "...even though Gutekunst decided against picking a receiver in a historically deep draft at that position and signed only one veteran wideout, Devin Funchess."

Any one by itself might make sense in any one moment, but reconciling them all isn't really possible.

There is a way to resolve this by actually looking at what SF did against this team if that's the model as purported. All the handwringing has been over getting torched on the ground in the playoffs. How short a memory is required to forget the previous meeting? 7 weeks, to be precise.

In that first meeting SF was a pass-first offense. After that 1st. and goal on the 2 yard line following the Rodgers fumble, a no-brainer run call, SF called pass plays on 7 or 8 of their first 11 first downs. There was a Garoppolo fumble in there which might have been a run or pass call, I can't recall. On the next possession after those first down plays, the pass D got beat on Samuel's big gainer to go up 20-0 and that's all she wrote...just play your clock-burning D the rest of the way. Garoppolo threw 20 balls all day, two TDs from long range against a bend-don't-break D that lives on stops in the red zone.

So if this Packer offense is purported to be modeled after SF, what should be your takeaway? Oh, sure, you have a general template, things you like to do, things you know you do better than others with the personnel on hand, but when it comes to game planning and in-game adjustments that goes out the window. You play the chess game. You need a variety of tools in your toolbox to exploit what is presented and to adapt to the scoreboard and the clock.

Do you think the following will work?: "This is what we do. We line up and play our game. Try to stop us." I'm not sure that has ever worked all the way to the Super Bowl since free agency and the salary cap. Maybe Philly's D in 2017. Pretty rare nonetheless and you better be not have any weak links in attempting it.

 

[jon]

You might want to read this article before sounding off on Rodgers not buying into MLF's system and the team being ready to move on from the franchise quarterback once again:

https://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay...aaron-rodgers-active-role-in-virtual-planning

As a fan I was happy to read this but... call me cynical, but given the poor handling of the Love draft pick (not even a quick head's up to Rodgers), I read a little messaging into this as well-- MLF and the GM trying to manage their team leader / MVP and how he feels about them.

 

[HardRightEdge]

As a fan I was happy to read this but... call me cynical, but given the poor handling of the Love draft pick (not even a quick head's up to Rodgers), I read a little messaging into this as well-- MLF and the GM trying to manage their team leader / MVP and how he feels about them.

Yeah, that's the chattering class at work. So how was this "heads up" supposed to work exactly? "We plan on drafting Love." Then what if you can't? You should presume it was a conditional trade not excuted until as late as #25 came off the board. After that, everybody's pretty busy for a couple more days with the die already cast.

Rodgers didn't need a heads up to know what might be coming. Gutekunst had brought in high level QB prospects for on-site interviews (or the virtual equivalent) for two years running, even inviting one more who turned him down, and then amped up the the Wolf/Thompson business about how you cannot have enough good QBs. We know you can in fact have too many depending on what you spend to get them.

I can think of two Super Bowl winning head coaches, Holmgren and Parcells, who left their winning organizations because they wanted GM authority. As Parcells famously put it, "If I'm going to be asked to cook the meal, I'd like to be able to pick the groceries." These guys won the big game while being locked out of the supermarket. And they were head coaches, not just the QB. What is the worry here? That Rodgers is a delicate flower whose sensibilities should be attended to? C'mon. Sometimes the boss asks for your input. I've been suprised a few times to see a boss make a substantial financial decision after requesting my input when where I offered were some off-the-top-of-the head impressions. Other times the same boss went off and did something without conferring with me when he knew full well I was involved and steeped in the subject matter, probably because somebody above his pay grade had his own ideas. You roll with it, live to fight another day. This is what grown ups working with grown ups do. Rodgers is a very mentally tough individual. He might get privately pissed for a little while then move on. That's where we're at. End of story.

Anyway, now that the Rodgers/LaFleur head-butting story line is losing traction, we get the following story from ESPN:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id...t-mvp-progress-report-ravens-star-expect-2020

It's a detailed exploration of, "suggestions the league might have figured out Jackson and the run-heavy Baltimore offense."

I think everybody should beat that suggestion to death. Let somebody else be the beat-to-death target of premature or unjustifed muddling for awhile.

 

[jon]

So how was this "heads up" supposed to work exactly?

It's an easy manager thing.

In the draft room, as its happening: the trade is confirmed, the player is available, and the GM calls it in. In the few minutes before the commissioner gets to the podium, a coach calls Rodgers and tells him. Done.

At its simplest, this is how a manager who is aware of and cares about how his employees feel does his job-- and it's a basic courtesy.

Deeper (and talking heads-like), if your team leader is 'prickly' and 'sensitive', you put a little effort into keeping him cool so he performs well. Yes, Rodgers is a grown up and GMs don't ask players about draft picks, but why create an opportunity for discord?

Why did they do it? Probably they just never thought about it; I can't imagine they considered it and consciously decided not to tell him. A manager can make a mistake just as a player can miss a tackle, and now they're trying to make nice (in addition to major reasons as stated for including him).

 

[gbgary]

These forums are going to be great reads if/when Love takes over the reins of the offense.

he'll be picked apart like anyone would be but if they don't go to the super bowl they'll have not done it with a qb who's super expensive and trending down. they'll actually get to see what kind of coach they have too.

 

[gbgary]

You might want to read this article before sounding off on Rodgers not buying into MLF's system and the team being ready to move on from the franchise quarterback once again:

lol...you DID read this didn't you?

This eventually will become LaFleur’s full-fledged offense -- but not without Rodgers’ say.

it's another reference to what i've been saying all long. he's bucked the system. sounds like he might give in a little this year but i want to see it with my own eyes.

 

[Do7]

he'll be picked apart like anyone would be but if they don't go to the super bowl they'll have not done it with a qb who's super expensive and trending down. they'll actually get to see what kind of coach they have too.

Gary come on. Rodgers is a high quality QB in the league and one of the best in the business. Has his skills diminished a tad? Perhaps. But getting a high quality QB of his caliber is going to cost money. Get a clue dude.

 

[Mavster]

he'll be picked apart like anyone would be but if they don't go to the super bowl they'll have not done it with a qb who's super expensive and trending down. they'll actually get to see what kind of coach they have too.

In a likelihood there will be a very small window to win a SB with Love still on his rookie deal. Either way he'll need to be paid so I don't see the point here

 

[HardRightEdge]

Deeper (and talking heads-like), if your team leader is 'prickly' and 'sensitive', you put a little effort into keeping him cool so he performs well.

You're right--that's talking-heads-like but not that deep. Rodgers' prickly and sensitive disposition is an overbaked storyline.

15 years in the league and the only time that came pointedly to the fore, besides the occasional comment you'd expect from an ego that is required for that job, was the 2018 ugliness with McCarthy. In retrospect, perhaps we should be thankful for whatever contribution Rodgers made in pushing him out the dorr. Proof in the putting and all that. Murphy's probably thankful Rodgers absorbed a lot of the public heat. He would have had his own internal heat to deal with.

McCarthy started losing the locker room in 2017 when the player leadership committee recommended that Randall be dumped after his tantrum and McCarthy said "no". Something tells me Randall had other prior baggage we don't know about. That might be the starting point of that vague "lack of accountability" as a perported reason for his firing, and perhaps the main reason besides the losing.

Then there's the Jennings (and his sister) nonsense and Finley who himself is not known for circumspection. The Packers offered Jennings $8 mil per year prior to his last season and turned it down. That was very good money at the time. What then? Recriminations that Rodgers didn't take $2 mil per year out of his own pocket for the kitty? Finley was all over the place all the time about everything. Scratch that. Driver, the most credible of the critics, said Rodgers did not cover for receivers in the room. Huh? Do your job. Prickly on the field? Yeah when a receiver runs a bad route. Not stumping for certain players to be re-signed?

I have a one word answer to all this: Brady. Or a phrase, if you prefer: it's about rings, not personality. Brady screams at teammates on the bench, and he sure wasn't saying, "C'mon guys, we can do it." He screams at coaches on the sidelines. One time I thought he might jump the guy. When you're winning that's "competitive fire". When you aren't it's is "attitude". Belichick turns over the roster like most people change their underwear, and he sure wasn't getting Brady's OK. It's good to be king, though.

I think Rodgers put it best this past season, saying he's getting a little old and cranky. In football years he's a senior citizen. That's about as far as it goes.

As for keeping his head cool so he can perform well, it's not like he'd be taking the field the next day or week. I bet Rodgers was somewhere between pissed and disappointed as the draft fell out, maybe more disappointed or pissed about not getting a WR of some substance than seeing the wanabe successor taken in the first eouns. Rodgers was pretty circumspect shortly thereafter--something like "it's a business, guys toward the end of careers often have to move on, yada, yada, but I plan to play for quite a while and hope it is here, yada, yada". Sounds about right to me.

Gutekunst has been talking about and signaling a high QB pick for two off seasons given who he had on his site visit list. The Love pick wasn't that big a shock. I think I had Love for the 3rd. or 4th. round, I can't recall which. The only shock element was where he was taken, but less of a shock after it was reported that morning that Gutekunst was calling teams about trading up in the first round. When I read that my reaction was, "He couldn't, he wouldn't. Or would he?"

Now, as a manager, do you think it prudent to address an employee immediately after disappointing or angering news was delivered by somebody else, in this case the TV? Or do you think it would be best for a little cooling off period to mitigate the chance of a knee-jerk confrontation? That's worth considering especially since the next day of work is months away. Now, according to Demovsky, there is peace in the kingdom, all's well that ends well. If one were going to put stock in the prior talking head stuff then you might as well put stock in this report.

We can now talk our heads off about how Jackson does not have what it takes to win in the playoffs or what Newton will or won't do in New England. I think I see yet another Belichick offensive scheme overhaul coming. Would that be the 5th. or the 6th.? Rodgers is now boring.

Why did they do it? Probably they just never thought about it; I can't imagine they considered it and consciously decided not to tell him.

They didn't have to "tell him". He saw it on TV. The question is what's the best time to discuss it with him. It never occured to them that Rodgers might have a reaction and also forgot about his existance for how long? One day, two days? Never. Whether it was my cooling off scenario, or they were just too d*mn busy during the most important 3 days of the year, or they were sending a message about who's boss, they knew what they were doing.

By the way, does anybody think Thompson ever worried about Rodgers "feelings" or discussed a roster move with him, or called him after a draft pick? "Hey, Roddy-Roddy, I got you Adams in the second round. You'll love him!" LOL

 

[jon]

You're right--that's talking-heads-like but not that deep. Rodgers' prickly and sensitive disposition is an overbaked storyline.

Yeah, I agree. It's way over blown. So little comes out of GB that reaches the national football press that all the talking heads talk about is celebrity gossip type stuff. Olivia Munn, anyone?

That said, no, they didn't have to give him a heads up, but I think I'll stay with the managerial awareness angle and its value to an organization's performance. I think it was a mis-step in leadership by the GM and coach.

 

[rmontro]

That said, no, they didn't have to give him a heads up, but I think I'll stay with the managerial awareness angle and its value to an organization's performance. I think it was a mis-step in leadership by the GM and coach.

They seem to want to make sure Jordan Love feels appreciated with his fully guaranteed contract. They don't seem to be that concerned with making Rodgers feel appreciated, but then he's already signed.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Yeah, I agree. It's way over blown. So little comes out of GB that reaches the national football press that all the talking heads talk about is celebrity gossip type stuff. Olivia Munn, anyone?

That said, no, they didn't have to give him a heads up, but I think I'll stay with the managerial awareness angle and its value to an organization's performance. I think it was a mis-step in leadership by the GM and coach.

That's a good point. There's plenty of Danica Patrick stuff out there which thankfully is not toxic as with that previous main squeeze. Maybe Rodgers should have been doling out more of that "football been berry berry good to me" patter wrapped around a nugget or two to give the guys something else to write or youtube about.
Why not give him a personality transplant?

As for the chatter from former players about Rodgers not being or doing this or that, Drew Brees pissed more of his teammates in one fell swoop than Rodgers did in 15 years. You can bet Brees' his quick reverse was at least in part caused by his black teammates and surely management or the Comish ringing his phone off the hook. What ensued was theater of the absurd which tends to happen when entering a certain Twitter sphere. Brees has only one ring so beat that story line--he didn't get the second ring because he does not have the locker room. Does it matter if it's true?

 

[gbgary]

In a likelihood there will be a very small window to win a SB with Love still on his rookie deal. Either way he'll need to be paid so I don't see the point here

point is they'll have the money to build a really good team around him while his cap hit is $3m-ish (lol) and maybe even get a SB out of it ala KC. we'll see if MLF is really head coach material and can develop a qb. keeping Rodgers around after this season delays all that. Love has upside. Rodgers doesn't. his window is closed. he's old, he's trending down, and most of all his cap hit beyond this season is a non-starter. he's still good enough to win a SB, with a really good team around him, but putting that team around him isn't possible with that contract. the Packers were foolish to extend him when they did (a year earlier than they had to) and before seeing how he was going to play after that shoulder injury. wait one year, see how he plays, and that contract might have been very different, $28ish, instead of $33.5...although we'd still have the same attitude, age, and skill dip issues, we see today. they're not the only team that have done foolish things with QB contracts though. QB's just eat up too much of the cap. teams have to get that under control. yes Love will have to get paid but that's 5 years from now and only if he kicks ***.

 

[HardRightEdge]

point is they'll have the money to build a really good team around him while his cap hit is $3m-ish (lol) and maybe even get a SB out of it ala KC. we'll see if MLF is really head coach material and can develop a qb. keeping Rodgers around after this season delays all that. Love has upside. Rodgers doesn't. his window is closed. he's old, he's trending down, and most of all his cap hit beyond this season is a non-starter.

Not quite. Actually, not at all.

2021

Rodgers dead cap: $31,566 + Love's cap. If you want to turn the page then there's no additional money to build around. In fact, you lose cap compared to this season pre-draft to the tune of $10 mil cap + Love's cap cost. Rodgers cap number this year is $21.6 mil. You should be aware that even with Rodgers' very manageable cap cost and what some perceived as a fairly generous amount of cap space coming in, it got substantially spent without even landing an impact free agent. So beware of cap expections regardless.

2022

Rodgers dead cap: $17,204 + Love's cap. You're still not into savings over Rodgers current cap cost.

2023

Rodgers dead cap: $2.9 mil. Now you're talking and you're into Love's 4th. season.

The only ways you'll see Love taking over in 2021 or 2022 are:

1) The Packers believe Love gives them the better chance of winning in 2021 as a first year starter in which case dead cap does not matter if Rodgers is sitting on the bench (I cannot envision that) or out the door for a draft pick or not. But you've got substially less or the same cap to work with relative to this season.

2) One subset of 1) is the Packers offense sucks in 2020 or 2021, which couldn't possibly be LaFleur's or Gutekunst's fault, resulting in a turning of the page and installing Love. With less or the sam cap compared to Rodgers currently and Love a first year starter you'd be expecting to take some lumps in either of those years.

There will not be any page turning until 2023 unless the offense falls flat or Rodgers gets hurt and Love is an immediate revelation. It's possible but not likely.

One should not pontificate about cap without even looking at the numbers.

 

[OldSchool101]

I could care less about Aaron (j/k) I just don’t want Poker to suddenly have to change his Avatar like I did with my beloved Mike Daniels. It’s a humbling experience
Bring back Big Mike!

 

[OldSchool101]

Not quite. Actually, not at all.

2021

Rodgers dead cap: $31,566 + Love's cap. If you want to turn the page then there's no additional money to build around. In fact, you lose cap compared to this season pre-draft to the tune of $10 mil cap + Love's cap cost. Rodgers cap number this year is $21.6 mil. You should be aware that even with Rodgers' very manageable cap cost and what some perceived as a fairly generous amount of cap space coming in, it got substantially spent without even landing an impact free agent. So beware of cap expections regardless.

2022

Rodgers dead cap: $17,204 + Love's cap.

There will not be any page turning until 2023 unless the offense falls flat or Rodgers gets hurt and Love is an immediate revelation. It's possible but not likely.

Question here. If GB worked a trade deal in 2022 with 2 years left on his contract they’d obviously swallow $20 mil dead. Would the new team pay in addition pay him the base Salary ($25+$25) ?
or would they take upon the full GBP Cap hit ($39.8+$28 mil. Etc..)?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Question here. If GB worked a trade deal in 2022 with 2 years left on his contract they’d obviously swallow $20 mil dead. Would the new team pay in addition pay him the base Salary ($25+$25) ?
or would they take upon the full GBP Cap hit ($39.8+$28 mil. Etc..)?

If the numbers I am looking at are correct, as well as my interpretation of said numbers ,
if the Packers traded Rodgers before the 2022 season started, they would have a cap hit of $17.204 M + his $500K Workout bonus if he earned it with GB.

The team trading for him, would be on the hook for his 2 remaining contract years of base salary ($25M/year) and any other workout, playing incentives or roster bonuses in contract.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-3745/

 

[OldSchool101]

If the numbers I am looking at are correct, as well as my interpretation of said numbers ,
if the Packers traded Rodgers before the 2022 season started, they would have a cap hit of $17.204 M + his $500K Workout bonus if he earned it with GB.

The team trading for him, would be on the hook for his 2 remaining contract years of base salary ($25M/year) and any other workout, playing incentives or roster bonuses in contract.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-3745/

Gotcha. I was just going to say Rodgers is still good enough to command multiple high draft selections. That would be another reason GB might use towards the latter part of his contract to justify a transition to Jordan.
I still believe Aaron Rodgers is worth his salt and I also believe he’s capable of being a Super Bowl leading QB. The bigger question for me is will the current Executives have what it takes to surround him with the proper personnel and utilize Rodgers strengths as he enters his twilight seasons.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

lol...you DID read this didn't you? it's another reference to what i've been saying all long. he's bucked the system. sounds like he might give in a little this year but i want to see it with my own eyes.

I have absolutely no idea how anyone can come up with a conclusion like that after the reading the article I linked to. Of course you're not a rational person when it comes to Rodgers so it shouldn't surprise me anymore.

They seem to want to make sure Jordan Love feels appreciated with his fully guaranteed contract. They don't seem to be that concerned with making Rodgers feel appreciated, but then he's already signed.

Well, Rodgers received more money in December when the Packers restructured his contract than Love will over the next four seasons. He should feel appreciated as well.

One should not pontificate about cap without even looking at the numbers.

gbgary doesn't care about facts when taking shots at Rodgers.