Time to "blow up the roster"

[Poppa San]

My good buddy Jack Daniels came out tonight and we did some thinkin' together. He ran out after a while and was followed by his partner Johnny Walker Black. We did some more thinkin' about football. Before I ferget what we decided ,...
It seems the Packers are soon to be up against the wall in salary cap problems. Overpaid underperforming untradeable players populate the team salary chart per these dudes. Of the top 11 cap hits, only four are realistically marketable. Five others have performance issues (my wife wouldn't know about that ) for their salary and two would be negative cap friendly. Three of the tradeable and two of those with performance issues would not really gain much as their functional replacements would cost about as much as you'd save. Which leaves not many Gute options. Per many on this board and the media talking heads, we are in a semi rebuild mode anyhow. Go all in and strike while you can.
#1: chop off Cobb and Jordy (caps 2 & 3) along with the kicker. They are gone next season and you'll get their replacements in stepsix.
#2: GB just picked up a 2nd "veteran QB with starting experience" to compete for the backup slot. Both are still on cheap rookie deals.
#3: QB1 is quite marketabkle and sits atop the team salary chart and is looking for a substantial raise in this off season or the next. Probably somewhere close to 18-20% of the team toatl cap.
#4: Buffalo has 5 of the top 65 picks and 6 total in the first 3 rounds. They also are in the market for a QB1.
#5: (-- this'll get the disagrees, I'm sure of it) Trade Rodgers to Buffalo for their first three rounds in this draft. Let them handle his break the bank contract. Let our two backups plus whoever we snag with the accumulated 3 first round picks (trade up?) duke it out for the throne.
6#: If they want to keep a pick in round 2 or 3, let them throw in a player like Benjamin who is on his $8m option year IIRC. Heck I'd even give them back their pick for McCray.

This immediately clears about $40m off the books. Jordy only has value if Rodgers is at the helm. Gute can wheel, deal, draft to his hearts content with 10 (less players returned) of the top 101 picks. And 16-18 total. Can rebuild an entire roster to be ready to go in roughly the same amount of time as the partial rebuild crap that some have called for. #50-60m in cap space over the next three seasons would go quite a ways in FA to build a defense that can carry an average QB to the promised land. Lookin at you Peyton v2 and Dilfer (thought I'd forgot about you) and Eli. Unfortunately salary cap hell will strike when all these draftees want to be paid in 2022 but then that is a year or two before the expected end of Rodgers' next break the bank and defer the cap hit contract anyway.

#7: If it was this easy, Buffalo or Cleveland would do it.

Hmm seems like I said this last year to someone about Cleveland's picks. Must like the floggings I guess.

 

[LambeauLombardi]

The only thing you would accept Rodgers for is Cleveland's #1 and 4 overall picks, Miles Garrett and probably their 33rd pick. This way Green Bay could hand pick the QB they want and you have two other studs in Miles Garrett and the #4 pick to build around. Any other trade for Rodgers would be crap.

 

[sschind]

I'm going to give you the same advice I would give to a lot of these suddenly millionaire young professional athletes "son you need to get some different friends"

Seriously though, I almost posted a similar proposal for trading Rodgers only I used Cleveland instead of Buffalo. I didn't realize Buffalo had that many picks.

In fact, here is the post I was gong to make. Didn't realize it saved it.

Trade Rodgers to Cleveland for their 6 top 65 picks which give us 9 in the top 76. Draft Barkley #1 take the best QB at #4 AND #14 and let them fight it out. Sign someone like Fitzpatrick or Moore or McCown for a year or two or go with the rookie from day one if he looks OK. Then load up on players with the rest of the draft. Maybe even trade the #14 and two second rounders to move up into the top 10 and draft a different playmaker (CB, Edge WR, whoever) and take a second QB with a round 2 pick. OK, it's not going to happen but you have to admit it would be very interesting. I'd consider giving up Rodgers for a a draft like that.

With the trade for Taylor they no longer have the 65th pick but they also have a slightly less need for a QB so its still a wash. I say we make the deal. After thinking about it I'd change my draft strategy though. I'd still take Barkely #1 then Chubb or Fitzpatrick at #4 and then depending on how the other QBs fall I'd trade he #14 and whatever it took to move up and get one who is left if its worth it. if not I'd look at Jackson at #14.

 

[FaninColorado]

A Rodgers trade would require multiple draft picks this year, a player or two, and probably their #1 next year.

 

[elcid]

And even then Id rather not see this happening. But enlightening thoughts nonetheless.

 

[7thFloorRA]

Very interesting stuff to think about. Rodgers' contract negotiations would really influence how close I would be to wanting to pull the trigger on something like this. Him getting 30 per year is going to decimate this team. They will be a 9-7/10-6 1 and done team for the eternity of that contract at best. It also kind of burns my *** that he has to have the highest paid wr group in the league. There is no reason you need 3 of them in the 10+ per year category. I love Jordy and am here nor there on Cobb but they both need to go. I don't care what they have left in the tank, I care what the Pack has left in the bank and it is not much thanks to them. Give 12 some young blood and tell him to deal. The "best" qb in the league should be able to get results out of marginal talent kind of like a certain guy in NE.

 

[PackerDNA]

I don't get why so many people think that Rodgers getting what he's going to get will ruin the team. He's gonna end up with the same percentage of the cap; the cap will continue to go up; there will be more cap room for the team, with more options to create more in multiple ways.
The alternative is don't pay him. Trade him or whatever, then go with Hundley/Kizer at QB and see how that works out for your chances.

 

[The Big Fella]

Finally someone who is making some sense. The cap will keep going up, the high end QB’s will still get paid, and if we deal Rodgers we’ll be talking about how we need to find the next Rodgers. All this drinking isn’t good for you. It tears down your body and causes all kinds of social issues.

 

[RepStar15]

I see the thought process, but I think trading out Rodgers this year would be a massive detriment to the organization for at least a decade. You need Rodgers to groom his sucessor first. He will still be great trade bait in 4 years, because he’s Aaron Rodgers. What do you think Jacksonville, the Giants or Denver would give up to get Tom Brady right now. I think NE made a massive mistake by dealing Jimmy Goroppolo out of their organization, they should have traded away Brady. Right now is NOT the time to deal Rodgers, but that time is in the pipeline in the next 4-5 years. If we have learned anything in the past decade we have had #12, is that no Rodgers, no winning. He is the only player on the field that can consistently give this team a chance to win. There are only a handful of players like that in the NFL. We have him, we need him to develop the next Aaron rodgers to give this organization a future.

 

[OldSchool101]

No flogging here I think we look at options with every last contract. #12 included.
Regarding the current #1 pick is worth 3000 points. A proven HOF QB who not yet 35 is still extremely valuable. They say a bird in hand is worth 2 in the bush but Aaron is an endangered species Bald Eagle. I’m not sure how to value that without going completely overboard.

I’d be open to all suggestions as long as each has a solid replacement plan with the bigger contract player contingencies going 5 deep.

 

[Poppa San]

I see the thought process, but I think trading out Rodgers this year would be a massive detriment to the organization for at least a decade. You need Rodgers to groom his sucessor first. He will still be great trade bait in 4 years, because he’s Aaron Rodgers. What do you think Jacksonville, the Giants or Denver would give up to get Tom Brady right now. I think NE made a massive mistake by dealing Jimmy Goroppolo out of their organization, they should have traded away Brady. Right now is NOT the time to deal Rodgers, but that time is in the pipeline in the next 4-5 years. If we have learned anything in the past decade we have had #12, is that no Rodgers, no winning. He is the only player on the field that can consistently give this team a chance to win. There are only a handful of players like that in the NFL. We have him, we need him to develop the next Aaron rodgers to give this organization a future.

You won't get 4-5 top 75 draft picks for Rodgers in 4-5 years. Meanwhile the team is in a "hit the right guys" mode and stay healthy to have a chance otherwise its round 2 exits every year. More of the same. Use the value of the GOAT on the market and retool the roster to surround a decent QB with a TEAM like the Giants did with Eli or Baltimore with Flacco. Seattle with Wilson. Denver and Peyton? Is Brady Brady without the top 10 defenses that have been with him?

 

[7thFloorRA]

Am I correct in thinking that there is no way the Packers can tag Rodgers after his contract expires?

 

[Mondio]

why couldn't they?

and anytime someone mentions trading a generational player for draft picks I just scratch my head. how many generational players have been chosen since Rodgers was picked by the Packers? In any round at any position? There may come a time when trading him becomes an option, but at this point we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces, or something.

 

[7thFloorRA]

This isn't about a 34 year old QB either. He will be 37 IIRC in the first year of this "new" deal. I am skeptical of paying a guy who has been pretty banged up the largest salary of all time for years 37-42 or whatever it is.

 

[RepStar15]

You won't get 4-5 top 75 draft picks for Rodgers in 4-5 years. Meanwhile the team is in a "hit the right guys" mode and stay healthy to have a chance otherwise its round 2 exits every year. More of the same. Use the value of the GOAT on the market and retool the roster to surround a decent QB with a TEAM like the Giants did with Eli or Baltimore with Flacco. Seattle with Wilson. Denver and Peyton? Is Brady Brady without the top 10 defenses that have been with him?

I just don’t think 4-5 top 75 draft picks of players that aren’t proven in the NFL are worth giving up a franchise player for.

 

[ARPackFan]

The current reigning and undefeated champion - Time.
As has been pointed out, Aaron will be 37 at the end of his current contract and there are no guarantees he even make it to the end of that. His highest trade value is right now. Can the Packers contend in the next two to three with Rodgers on the roster or has too much damage been done? My opinion is that there isn't enough talent beyond a handful of players and the team requires a major over-hall. No TE, the OL needs help, the WR core needs more speed, thin in the secondary, no legitimate backup QB, and much of the roster filled with "talent" not good enough to be drafted. Add to that McStubborn needs to redesign the offense to get the ball out of our aging QBs hands much quicker. It only took about 4 years to realize Capers needed to be fired so I figure the offense gets a makeover about 2021.

Talent wise, Aaron Rodgers cannot be replaced but trading him may be the quickest way to contend for a SB.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

This reminds me a bit of the talk in regards to cutting players because they aren't producing up to their contracts, it all sounds great on the front end, but what about the backend? So you trade AR for a bevy of picks, now what? How many of those picks actually work out? Who takes AR's place and how much do you pay this player? Any free agent QB worth starters money is going for $15M on up and few of those couldn't carry AR's jockstrap on Sundays. Sure you can get lucky and draft a Dak Prescott or Russell Wilson, but you can also get unlucky and draft the other 75% or more of guys that don't pan out.

This would all would make sense if the Packers were the Cleveland Browns or the Bears and in full rebuild mode, but they aren't. With #12 at QB and some smart FA's signing and draft picks, they can continue to compete for the next 5 years. Trade Rodgers away and this team probably looks a lot like the team we saw play for most of last year.

This team has holes due to some failed draft picks and a substandard defense, not because of #12 getting paid too much now or in the future.

 

[rmontro]

#3: QB1 is quite marketabkle and sits atop the team salary chart and is looking for a substantial raise in this off season or the next. Probably somewhere close to 18-20% of the team toatl cap.

And no team has ever won the Super Bowl with the QB taking up more than 13.1% of the salary cap (Steve Young).

Ted Thompson apologists have been saying for years that Rodgers' window for winning a Super Bowl is wide open and nowhere near closing. Unfortunately, the clock is ticking, Rodgers gets hit a lot and isn't getting any younger, and he's going to be getting paid more money. Which leaves less money to sign other talent. The concern is that the Packers have waited too long to realize there was a problem.

 

[Poppa San]

why couldn't they?

and anytime someone mentions trading a generational player for draft picks I just scratch my head. how many generational players have been chosen since Rodgers was picked by the Packers? In any round at any position? There may come a time when trading him becomes an option, but at this point we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces, or something.

How many generational QBs carried a substandard team to a Lombardi? Rarely does one get that far with an average or less defense. Whereas a kick butt, take no prisoners defense can carry an average QB to the trophy. I really don't want to wait longer but 5 years from now I don't want to look back and see more wasted seasons. We seem to be in the same situation now as we were in 2000 with Brett. I don't have enough years left for another decade of close but no cigar. With MM still here, I don't see any trade but if he had been canned?

 

[Mondio]

How many generational QBs carried a substandard team to a Lombardi? Rarely does one get that far with an average or less defense. Whereas a kick butt, take no prisoners defense can carry an average QB to the trophy. I really don't want to wait longer but 5 years from now I don't want to look back and see more wasted seasons. We seem to be in the same situation now as we were in 2000 with Brett. I don't have enough years left for another decade of close but no cigar. With MM still here, I don't see any trade but if he had been canned?

how many solid teams without QB win the Super Bowl? In the past 10-20 years it's been won almost exclusively by teams with a very good QB. It's hardly a plug and play with a QB. Maybe the Giants and Ravens qualify and even then, when they were winning their QB's were having career years, Denver with an old Manning, but then they only won 1 and have done ****all since let alone a 10 year run of sustained success. People could say the Eagles and I'd agree, though I think the timing for them worked out perfectly. 8 weeks of Foles and I think teams have him figured out. He played out of his mind in the stretch, but I'd consider that an outlier, not the norm. Kind of like when we had to face Dallas and Seattle one year with our great QB on one leg and came up short. Things happen sometimes good and sometimes bad.

You could trade Rodgers for 10 picks and probably not get a player that has anywhere near the impact he does on the field. and for as "great" as guys like Wilson and Dak have been, and this does prove to your point, it's the greatness of guys around them that help them along. But then again, what exactly have they won? and now that Wilson's defense is going away now what? and Take Elliot away from Dak and he's what? QB is a position where you can have longevity, stability, and careers for the good ones are long. Health isn't assured, but it seems to be more so than other positions.

If Rodgers were 38-39 he'd still have value, but I think it's crazy to try and trade him now and would you consider them "wasted years" to wait 2,3,4 years for the newly drafted guys to develop and watch Rodgers win 2 more championships with someone else? That's a pretty possible scenario.

 

[rmontro]

I understand the sentiment, but if we're taking a vote, I'm against trading Rodgers. It's possible that we could trade Rodgers, get in a bunch of young talent, and win a Super Bowl, but it's just as possible we wouldn't. Rodgers + nobody got this team to several NFCCGs. I'm the first to say that's not good enough, but: I'd rather take my chances with Rodgers, and trying to fit some better talent around him. That may not work either, but we have one good horse, may as well ride him.

 

[Veretax]

why couldn't they?

and anytime someone mentions trading a generational player for draft picks I just scratch my head. how many generational players have been chosen since Rodgers was picked by the Packers? In any round at any position? There may come a time when trading him becomes an option, but at this point we'd be cutting off our noses to spite our faces, or something.

Now that's a bit of a stretch isn't it. Generational? Rodgers EPICLY fell down the draft board. Alex Smith I think is the only other QB from that draft still starting, and I wouldn't call him great.

Yes I agree Rodgers is great, I have him ranked #1 right now in the league, with brady 2nd, and Brees 3rd. However, generational? He did sit a year or two behind favre right? I'm not sure I have the same definition for the term 'generational player'.

I certainly don't remember any one calling him that before the 05 draft.

(and I'm a big fan of Rodgers, I like him a lot)

 

[Mondio]

there are arguably 1-2 players maybe that have affected games like Rodgers has. Call him great, call him generational I don't care. The point is, you could have 5 top 10 picks and still not get what he brings to the game collectively.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Now that's a bit of a stretch isn't it. Generational? Rodgers EPICLY fell down the draft board. Alex Smith I think is the only other QB from that draft still starting, and I wouldn't call him great.

Yes I agree Rodgers is great, I have him ranked #1 right now in the league, with brady 2nd, and Brees 3rd. However, generational? He did sit a year or two behind favre right? I'm not sure I have the same definition for the term 'generational player'.

I certainly don't remember any one calling him that before the 05 draft.

(and I'm a big fan of Rodgers, I like him a lot)

Mondio isn't the first nor the last to call #12 a "Generational Player". Of course he wasn't thought to be that instantly, but just like the GOAT designation, it has to be earned and is very subjective. In the case of Roders, I think he has earned it.

http://www.nbcsports.com/video/packers-aaron-rodgers-proves-hes-once-generation-talent

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/b...-rodgers-nfl-green-bay-quarterback-statistics

 

[OldSchool101]

This isn't about a 34 year old QB either. He will be 37 IIRC in the first year of this "new" deal. I am skeptical of paying a guy who has been pretty banged up the largest salary of all time for years 37-42 or whatever it is.

Aaron just turned 34yrs old 4 months ago. He won't turn 36 until towards the end of the 2019 season, as he will
technically still be 36 about a month from the 2019 playoffs. One possibility is him being released, in which case teams would be making him offers for the 2020 season and beyond. He will be 37 in the offseason and it is unlikely anyone signs him for more than 3 years at the top QB salary range at that given time. If that number is 30-35M annual average. He's staring at around 90-100M give or take for 3 years. Anything past that is likely to be a 1-2 year extension at most and so on.

One possibility is that if he stays and signs in GB that this will be an extension contract (no reason to be in a hurry to lose his current lower price tag just yet) and it is doubtful that extension would be greater than 4-5 years tops. IF we agree to a 4-5 year extension, it is mainly to spread his contract monies out in a cap friendly way (as friendly as 30M a year can be!) and get an lower average per year and also use as a closing tool that we want him to retire with us. We may also restructure his contract which would enable us to go longer such as 5-6 years and we could use the fact that one of those years (the first year or two depending on how eager we are to get this done) just got a substantial increase. We might actually get a more reasonable deal this way in the long run and the longer contracts allow us to play with the yearly payouts in a variety of ways, thus enabling us to take a smaller cap hit this year and free up some space to sign FA's in our mini-rebuild.

My best hypothesis is if he gets an extension contract it would be in the 110M floor range to 125M ceiling range. I think it will be around 4yr/115M.
If that guess is accurate, Aaron Rodgers will be playing 75% of the very last year of that extension while he is 39 years old, the same age Drew Brees is today.

I'm pointing this out, not trying to correct you or to say I somehow know what salary he will command, (I can't tell the future any better than anyone else in here) but moreover to state how very reasonable it is to play at that age in this era of football. Obviously my Opinion is that if we see him fully recover this year from his surgery and stay relatively healthy all year, he will be worth every penny of that new deal