What do you REALLY think Rodgers would garner in a trade?

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
28,399
Reaction score
5,742
Location
Madison, WI
Thanks Ty. Doesn't sound like a lot! Everything is relative I guess. I

And 2028 would be the year to start that, allowing for all the current contracts to expire (if it would even take that long, or maybe that's when the CBA expires). But it's as easy as you say - what you pay a player goes against the cap that year, period. No more signing bonuses or performance bonuses or bonuses just for showing up. Play and get paid, just like everyone else in America!
Pretty much, but it will never happen. Players want the guarantees and the owners want to the flexibility to cut players free when they aren't living up to their contract.
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
127
Reaction score
19
I would think that he would garner at the very least two 1st and 2nd rounders, and a 3rd pick in the draft. Isn't that what was included in the Stafford trade? Probably 1 quality starter. Hopefully we could get a couple of players if we tagged and traded Adams as well.
 
OP
OP
tynimiller

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
10,495
Reaction score
2,854
I would think that he would garner at the very least two 1st and 2nd rounders, and a 3rd pick in the draft. Isn't that what was included in the Stafford trade? Probably 1 quality starter. Hopefully we could get a couple of players if we tagged and traded Adams as well.

Why ask a question that was outlined in the OP? I’m confused lol
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
Star players dictate all the time, however I can't say I've ever heard the compensation being dictated because they didn't want to hurt their new team.

I never ever said Rodgers would "dictate" the exact compensation the Packers would theoretically receive...i just said hes smart enough not to create a bidding war situation by dictating ONE team he is willing to play for...which inherently would reduce his value compared to said bidding war
 

Firethorn1001

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
838
Reaction score
423
I never ever said Rodgers would "dictate" the exact compensation the Packers would theoretically receive...i just said hes smart enough not to create a bidding war situation by dictating ONE team he is willing to play for...which inherently would reduce his value compared to said bidding war

So... he says one team so he makes sure that the one team won't give as much for him. Sounds like dictating compensation to me.

Po-tay-toe. Po-tah-toe.
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
So... he says one team so he makes sure that the one team won't give as much for him. Sounds like dictating compensation to me.

Po-tay-toe. Po-tah-toe.

Dictating compensation would be if Rodgers said ill only agree to a trade to the broncos for a 3rd round pick

Limiting the compensation would be agreeing to be traded to only one team
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
28,399
Reaction score
5,742
Location
Madison, WI
Dictating compensation would be if Rodgers said ill only agree to a trade to the broncos for a 3rd round pick

Limiting the compensation would be agreeing to be traded to only one team
The 2 are not independent events. If Rodgers makes it public that he will only play for the Broncos, why would the Broncos offer anything more than say a 3rd round pick?
 
OP
OP
tynimiller

tynimiller

Cheesehead
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
10,495
Reaction score
2,854
Rodgers and Gute are in a good place, should Rodgers decide he wants to go elsewhere he isn’t going to do anything that ******. Dude is arrogant but not a POS
 

Toad

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 25, 2021
Messages
143
Reaction score
71
Yes so how come the “Dumb Packers “ couldn’t beat Him in their playoff game in Green Bay yet?!!! There is something wrong here why the Packers ALWAYS fade in playoff games. I say shame on the whole Packer team and organization. No excuse for this to keep happening!
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
28,399
Reaction score
5,742
Location
Madison, WI
With Rodgers at QB, the Packers are 11-10 in the Post season.

Of the 10 losses, three came in overtime, four in conference championships and five on the final play.

Bad luck? 1 play or player short?
 
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
127
Reaction score
19
Why ask a question that was outlined in the OP? I’m confused lol
I don't know what we would get if it was just Rodgers, but I agree with you on what we could expect at a minimum.

If Adams is included, I think we get a promising quality starter on a rookie contract.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
11,023
Reaction score
3,410
Rodgers won’t force the Packers to trade him to a specific city. They’ll be several options (suitors) and he’d pick.

Rodgers won’t refuse a massive contract in GB only to force his way into camp this Spring unless that’s the direction GB wants to go. Period. Don’t think they GB wouldn’t play hardball and it would destroy Aaron’s reputation. Look around. He’s already on the hot seat with his own fans. If he takes this out any further I predict it’ll destroy his legacy if he keeps his fan base hostage.

While notable athletes have some degree of bargaining power, ultimately those players don’t dictate future terms (if their Employer is past negotiations).

Many of these arguments are unrealistic. The Packers Organization ultimately holds the marbles in making personnel decisions. It’s not Aaron Rodgers decision to make.

Lastly none of these scenarios are going to happen. He’ll either restructure or get traded or retire like everyone else.

I’m going to reformulate my trade guess. He goes to someone other than Denver. We get
2022 1st round
2022 2nd round
2022 swap their 4th for our 5th
2023 1st Round
2023 3rd Round
2024 1st Round
 
Last edited:

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
Rodgers won’t force the Packers to trade him to a specific city. They’ll be several options (suitors) and he’d pick.

Many of these arguments are unrealistic. The Packers Organization ultimately holds the marbles in making personnel decisions. It’s not Aaron Rodgers decision to make.

That is literally no different than what I said. And would limit the compensation the Packers would recieve in a trade as there would be no bidding war. Im assuming "he" is Rodgers

The Packers FO does not "hold the marbles" Because Rodgers currently has the highest cap number of any player ever. The Packers cannot realistically keep him at that number if he refuses to sign a contract extension
 
Last edited:

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
28,399
Reaction score
5,742
Location
Madison, WI
That is literally no different than what I said. And would limit the compensation the Packers would recieve in a trade as there would be no bidding war. Im assuming "he" is Rodgers
I think what you aren't taking into consideration is that the Packers have reportedly had quite a few teams contact them about trading for Rodgers. If there is a possibility of that happening, then I am sure Gute is saying to those teams "What is your offer?" After getting all the offers together, the Packers would go to Rodgers and say "here is a list of teams that want to trade for you, any of them jump out at you as a place you want to go?"

The Packers aren't going to first say "Hey Aaron, give us the name of the 1 and only team you would play for. We will contact them, let them know that you have decided on them and only them and see if maybe they will toss us a 3rd rounder and a couple of cases of beer for you."
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
I think what you aren't taking into consideration is that the Packers have reportedly had quite a few teams contact them about trading for Rodgers. If there is a possibility of that happening, then I am sure Gute is saying to those teams "What is your offer?" After getting all the offers together, the Packers would go to Rodgers and say "here is a list of teams that want to trade for you, any of them jump out at you as a place you want to go?"

The Packers aren't going to first say "Hey Aaron, give us the name of the 1 and only team you would play for. We will contact them, let them know that you have decided on them and only them and see if maybe they will toss us a 3rd rounder and a couple of cases of beer for you."

I agree that this would be the way gute would try to go about it...but thats assuming Rodgers or his agent hasnt had any conversations with other teams to gage interest in the case that Rodgers desires a new start via trade...and i get there are tampering rules but if you don't think they are clandestinely broken all the time, its my opinion that youre a bit naive

And i dont mean you specifically

"Russini also reported this week that Rodgers will "soon" inform the Packers of his decision, and multiple teams have already placed trade offers on the table. At this time, it remains unclear whether the 38-year-old will play for Green Bay, take his talents elsewhere, or hang up the cleats. But with an average annual value of $50 million, Rodgers would surpass Patrick Mahomes ($45 million)."
 
Last edited:

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,813
Reaction score
1,113
That is literally no different than what I said. And would limit the compensation the Packers would recieve in a trade as there would be no bidding war. Im assuming "he" is Rodgers

The Packers FO does not "hold the marbles" Because Rodgers currently has the highest cap number of any player ever. The Packers cannot realistically keep him at that number if he refuses to sign a contract extension
Wait a minute. You said Rodgers would name one team he would be willing to go to. Old school says there will be several options and Rodgers will pick and you say they are literally the same thing. Your idea of the same thing is different than mine apparently.
 

Pugger

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
404
Location
N. Fort Myers, FL
Those are not facts, those are your opinions on 2 fictional scenarios. You assume that Rodgers would only do what you think he should, as well as you are assuming that the Packers would bend a knee and do it. Packers can trade Rodgers to whomever they want. My opinion will be that if it happens, it is to a team that Aaron is willing to play for, at a trade price that the Packers are willing to trade him for.

Nothing has happened yet, you are just having a hard time with the fact....that I disagree...with your opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.
Yes, back in 2007 Favre probably wanted the Packers to trade him to MN after he muscled his way back into town but TT shipped his tail to the Jets instead.
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
Wait a minute. You said Rodgers would name one team he would be willing to go to. Old school says there will be several options and Rodgers will pick and you say they are literally the same thing. Your idea of the same thing is different than mine apparently.

Explain to me how thats different?

Rodgers is picking ONE team, lets say the broncos...from a handfull of teams who are interested

Thats been the scenario and it avoids the bidding war that would surely in ensue if Rodgers said im willing to play for any of these 3 teams...broncos, bucs, or dolphins
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
Yes, back in 2007 Favre probably wanted the Packers to trade him to MN after he muscled his way back into town but TT shipped his tail to the Jets instead.

Haha yeah and that was a huge mistake because where did Favre end up after 1 season in NY? Minnesota, without the vikings giving up a single draft pick or player. The vikings had reportedly offered 3 first round picks...obviously the packers should of taken that as they only got a late 2nd and kept favre from the vikings for just 1 season
 

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
28,399
Reaction score
5,742
Location
Madison, WI
Explain to me how thats different?

Rodgers is picking ONE team, lets say the broncos...from a handfull of teams who are interested

Thats been the scenario and it avoids the bidding war that would surely in ensue if Rodgers said im willing to play for any of these 3 teams...broncos, bucs, or dolphins
You are not acknowledging the timing and logistics of such a trade.

Your "theory" assumes that the Broncos are notified that they will be the "finalist" for the trade, BEFORE they make any trade offers. I believe you are incorrect. From what we are hearing, teams have already made offers.

Your theory would make these offers look something like this:

Raiders: 2022 1st, 2nd, 3rd round and Derek Carr.

Browns: two 1sts and a player

WTF: 2 1st rounds, 2nd round

Broncos: 3rd rounder and a bag of peanuts.
 

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
You are not acknowledging the timing and logistics of such a trade.

Your "theory" assumes that the Broncos are notified that they will be the "finalist" for the trade, BEFORE they make any trade offers. I believe you are incorrect. From what we are hearing, teams have already made offers.

Your theory would make these offers look something like this:

Raiders: 2022 1st, 2nd, 3rd round and Derek Carr.

Browns: two 1sts and a player

WTF: 2 1st rounds, 2nd round

Broncos: 3rd rounder and a bag of peanuts.

First of all...all of this is dumb becas its not happening. Rodgers is gonna become the highest paid player in the nfl and its gonna be with GB

But second of all...i think what youre not acknowledging is tampering happens constantly between coaches/players/FO execs/agents. And very very rarely does an organization get penalized for it
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
4,813
Reaction score
1,113
Explain to me how thats different?

Rodgers is picking ONE team, lets say the broncos...from a handfull of teams who are interested

Thats been the scenario and it avoids the bidding war that would surely in ensue if Rodgers said im willing to play for any of these 3 teams...broncos, bucs, or dolphins
This is what OldSchool said
Rodgers won’t force the Packers to trade him to a specific city. They’ll be several options (suitors) and he’d pick.

This is what you said
i just said hes smart enough not to create a bidding war situation by dictating ONE team he is willing to play for.

Old school said he won't force them to trade him to a specific city. You said he will force them to trade him to a specific city.

I don't consider won't and will to be essentially the same. In fact I consider them to be pretty much the exact opposite.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
11,023
Reaction score
3,410
Haha yeah and that was a huge mistake because where did Favre end up after 1 season in NY? Minnesota, without the vikings giving up a single draft pick or player. The vikings had reportedly offered 3 first round picks...obviously the packers should of taken that as they only got a late 2nd and kept favre from the vikings for just 1 season
The point we are arguing isn’t which team Rodgers will retire with later on.
We are arguing which team GB will trade him to.
I think that Jets-Favre trade scenario that Poker eluded to was as close as an equivalent example as we can find as to the trade control level given to the player. Favre obviously didn’t choose NY and your point of how quickly Favre moved on to MN lends credence to the fact Favre had to play his hand by succumbing to the Packers wishes.
BTW. Why didn’t Favre just show up at Packers camp and demand to be the starter and his full pay check?? Because Brett couldn’t and that scenario is not happening here.

If Rodgers stays? He’ll restructure and have term extended out, possibly even 3 seasons past this one. He obviously knows this is his last biggie fries
 
Last edited:

thequick12

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
2,762
Reaction score
358
The point we are arguing isn’t which team Rodgers will retire with later on.
We are arguing which team GB will trade him to.
I think that Jets-Favre trade scenario that Poker eluded to was as close as an equivalent example as we can find as to the trade control level given to the player. Favre obviously didn’t choose NY and your point of how quickly Favre moved on to MN lends credence to the fact Favre had to play his hand by succumbing to the Packers wishes.
BTW. Why didn’t Favre just show up at Packers camp and demand his full pay check??

The packers let their compensation dip from 3 first round picks to a single 2nd rounder...and all they got was keeping favre from the vikings for one season

Not at all worth it the right move was to trade him to the vikings like he had asked...so yes they exerted theur control but it was clearly an error
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
11,023
Reaction score
3,410
The packers let their compensation dip from 3 first round picks to a single 2nd rounder...and all they got was keeping favre from the vikings for one season

Not at all worth it the right move was to trade him to the vikings like he had asked...so yes they exerted theur control but it was clearly an error
I’m not arguing I would or would not try to get more trade value. I agree that’s low. Point being GB decided where he was headed and Favre likely didn’t pick the destination or have any control whatsoever in forcing his way back into the building and somehow making them pay for their decision to move on. Move on they did.

The only point I’m trying to make is that the team has more leverage than the player. Whatever they allow the player to do or not to do is more in the teams’ interests. Possibly to a small degree the Packers bend a little in a trade scenario to accommodate a guy who has played his entire career here and played valiantly as well. I doubt the Packers want to intentionally create more animosity. If the trade deals are similar between 2-3 destinations? I think they’ll let him choose out of common courtesy.

I like that Miami scenario I saw. Whereas they gave TWO 2023 Day 1 selections (part of earlier SF trades)
2022 Day 1: Day 2
2023 2-Day 1’s: Day 2

Miami also has the $$ to back a trade offer. I have zero idea if they have been in the running in any way, shape or form. But I like that destination from a trade perspective and Conference change. GB would easily have a choice of one of the 2 best QB’s in the 2023 draft if needed.
 
Last edited:
Top