View Full Version : at what point do we look for A-rods replacement?
one of the best things, if not the best thing, TT ever did was to have the balls to draft rodgers, even though favre still had plenty left in the tank
favre was 35, the same age that rodgers is now
one big difference was that favre had been talking about retirement for a few seasons already when we drafted a-rod. so far aaron has not retired then un-retired once yet
now i'm not saying we need to draft a guy to replace him ASAP, but getting to sit and learn for a couple years sure is nice, and the way i would prefer things to go
so when do we realistically start scouting QB's and looking for the next star?
and no, i'm not talking about taking some 4th or 5th round flyer on a guy. i'm talking about a 1st or 2nd round pick
i'm thinking not this coming draft, but probably the 2021 draft is when our window should start to open, and we start to think about drafting a guy high
mraynrand
11-09-2019, 04:31 PM
ASAP. If the guy you like is near to your draft spot next April/ May, go get ‘em. Don’t break the draft bank though.
ASAP. If the guy you like is near to your draft spot next April/ May, go get ‘em. Don’t break the draft bank though.
i'm watching LSU and joe burrow. thats what got me thinking about all this
that guys good
so rand, you would be fine with another favre situation where we might have to release a HOF QB before his time is done in order to get the new guy on the field?
it sucks to think about, if we want to be good for the next decade, its something that will probably need to happen at some point
mraynrand
11-09-2019, 04:45 PM
Yeah I don’t care about. Favre situation. In fact, that’s the optimum because it means you have a guy coming in who you think is just as good. If you’re wrong maybe you suffer for a couple years but if you’re right you get another decade or so of great football.
MadtownPacker
11-09-2019, 05:07 PM
Damn Red, you sober up for a day?
Now is the answer. I think Rodgers would have fizzled out had he gotten thrown to the wolves right away like so many other talented QBs.
He may not talk retirement but his body speaks plenty. He damn sure isn’t going to get more durable with age.
TT gets way too much credit for drafting him. When the slide started playing out that draft TT HAD to take him. I was calling it from the couch. It paid off and he gets some credit but hardly a genius move.
Will this become Rodgers “living legend” thread? It’s definitely time to start one.
Damn Red, you sober up for a day?
Now is the answer. I think Rodgers would have fizzled out had he gotten thrown to the wolves right away like so many other talented QBs.
He may not talk retirement but his body speaks plenty. He damn sure isn’t going to get more durable with age.
TT gets way too much credit for drafting him. When the slide started playing out that draft TT HAD to take him. I was calling it from the couch. It paid off and he gets some credit but hardly a genius move.
Will this become Rodgers “living legend” thread? It’s definitely time to start one.
sometimes i forget to drink
pbmax
11-09-2019, 06:31 PM
Now.
pbmax
11-09-2019, 06:32 PM
sometimes i forget to drink
Self healing.
MadtownPacker
11-09-2019, 07:35 PM
What the hell PB??? Now that you an admin you gonna start making shitty, non-informational post like me? :lol:
Joemailman
11-09-2019, 07:43 PM
Is it possible to drink so much that you forget to drink?
George Cumby
11-09-2019, 07:53 PM
The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago.
IMO, they should have started last draft or even the draft before.
pbmax
11-09-2019, 07:54 PM
Is it possible to drink so much that you forget to drink?
If by forget you also mean "can't".
pbmax
11-09-2019, 07:55 PM
What the hell PB??? Now that you an admin you gonna start making shitty, non-informational post like me? :lol:
I thought that was the positive spin.
When you project him to have 2 really good years left before a major drop off. Gives the next guy 2 years to learn and a 3rd to fight for a job.
MadtownPacker
11-09-2019, 08:29 PM
Is it possible to drink so much that you forget to drink?Based on my experience, if you visit Wisconsin then yes.
Fucking gimlets...:glug:
Cheesehead Craig
11-09-2019, 09:09 PM
I'd rather wait another year if you're talking first rounder. We need a WR and is rather get that position shored up before bringing in the heir apparent.
texaspackerbacker
11-09-2019, 10:26 PM
Yet another thread full of stupid shit from ingrates disrespecting the GOAT QB?
4 or 5 years from now, about the time he reaches 40 or so would be about right. That should give the new guy - who is probably in Junior High about now - enough years of seasoning as Rodgers' understudy to be ready.
call_me_ishmael
11-09-2019, 11:11 PM
My guess is they do it this year if one of the top QBs drops to bottom of round one, otherwise they'll do it next year or the year after. It really depends on the value and talent of player available.
Anti-Polar Bear
11-09-2019, 11:53 PM
Yet another thread full of stupid shit from ingrates disrespecting the GOAT QB?
4 or 5 years from now, about the time he reaches 40 or so would be about right. That should give the new guy - who is probably in Junior High about now - enough years of seasoning as Rodgers' understudy to be ready.
Yep. Draft Xavier Favre in the 1st round after the GAB retires. Kid’s gonna be good. Has Favre and African blood.
mraynrand
11-10-2019, 01:05 AM
No disrespect Tex. The best time to draft a QB is before you need ‘em probably sooner than later - unless they go to two hand touch (relax Harlan). Because you’re gonna need ‘em. But it’s limited by draft position anyway. If someone you like falls to you, you have to make the pick. Maybe this time around the Packers’ luck runs out and they have to draft a guy at 1-5 because Rodgers is done in whatever 4-5 years.
texaspackerbacker
11-10-2019, 01:32 AM
No disrespect Tex. The best time to draft a QB is before you need ‘em probably sooner than later - unless they go to two hand touch (relax Harlan). Because you’re gonna need ‘em. But it’s limited by draft position anyway. If someone you like falls to you, you have to make the pick. Maybe this time around the Packers’ luck runs out and they have to draft a guy at 1-5 because Rodgers is done in whatever 4-5 years.
Yes, but not so much before that you reach or come close to the end of the guy's rookie contract before he needs to move in as a starter. We had that very stressful situation with Rodgers after Favre. The whole point is, Rodgers has a helluva lot more productive time left than the detractors and negativists in here seem to think.
Another way to go in this picture: Nowadays, almost all the time there are several quality veteran QBs coming up for free agency. For example, if (heaven forbid), Rodgers had a career ending injury or premature retirement after this season, we might go after Cam Newton - just an example. About 2025 or so, when the time finally comes, undoubtedly somebody good will be available - an immediate proven player as opposed to the hope for lightning to strike a third time and have us blessed with drafting a third GOAT.
pbmax
11-10-2019, 07:10 AM
Yet another thread full of stupid shit from ingrates disrespecting the GOAT QB?
4 or 5 years from now, about the time he reaches 40 or so would be about right. That should give the new guy - who is probably in Junior High about now - enough years of seasoning as Rodgers' understudy to be ready.
If you could identify future Pro Bowl QBs well, then waiting might make some sense. But since its less than a 50/50 proposition, you need one every other year. I could also see every third.
But it has to be more regular than their current draft pattern because the backups have been poor.
Joemailman
11-10-2019, 07:43 AM
It's not a given you have to use a 1st round pick on a QB:
Tom Brady - 6th round
Russell Wilson - 3rd round
Drew Brees -2nd round
Dak Prescott - 4th round
Kirk Cousins - 4th round
Nor do I think you need to groom a guy for 3 years before he starts. This offense is I think designed so that an inexperienced QB can execute the offense because you're not asking him to change plays at the line.
I don't think you draft the next starter before 2021.
George Cumby
11-10-2019, 07:58 AM
Those who are in favor of waiting are banking on Rodgers to stay healthy for two or more seasons. IDK if that's wise.
I’m changing my answer. You draft a guy after the first retirement. Maybe the second.
MadtownPacker
11-10-2019, 09:22 AM
Detractors??? Hahaha! I love those post! Feeling the nostalgia of classic TPB terminology from the JSO days.
Which leads me to believe all the pro-NOW people are right. Cuz Tex said the same stuff back in 2005!
Patler
11-10-2019, 10:02 AM
QB is so important, that they should draft a guy they think can be a starter whenever one is available to them as a mid to late first round pick, or later. Then they would have him if (when) Rodgers goes out again. If the new guy approaches the end of his contract, trade him and get value back, or send Rodgers out and play the heir apparent. In the mean time, hopefully you have a guy who can win if forced to play.
Rodgers may want to play another 5 years, but that doesn't mean he will be able to. Athletes can get old over an off season. Many have described ending one season feeling like they can still do what they always have, then, when trying to crank it up again at the start of the next season, finding that it's not all there. That's when they decide the coming season will be their last.
The Packers should plan as if Rodgers will not be the starter in 2022. It is easy to deal with having an extra starter-quality QB. It is hard to play without one.
texaspackerbacker
11-10-2019, 10:36 AM
Detractors??? Hahaha! I love those post! Feeling the nostalgia of classic TPB terminology from the JSO days.
Which leads me to believe all the pro-NOW people are right. Cuz Tex said the same stuff back in 2005!
Back to the Future hahahahaha. Did I actually say bad things about drafting Rodgers in the first round? I don't recall. I just don't want to have that conflicted feeling again like when it came down to letting Favre go or not re-signing Rodgers beyond his rookie contract.
Patler, if your post was modified to say "mid to late round pick", I'd agree with you - get a Brunell or Brooks, then if they get good before they are needed, trade 'em for a nice draft pick.
Myself, I'm still expecting Rodgers to be the starter in 2025, maybe even a couple years after that.
Radagast
11-10-2019, 11:42 AM
GB's current backup QBs, IMO, are not there as some day replacement/s for Aaron Rodgers. AR has more years to play, but even he will someday retire too.
The question is when to accelerate the QB search for Rodgers replacement. Do you trade your treasure (draft picks and/or player trade/s) for a Draft pick where you grab a top 3 draft pick from a top college program like LSU, Alabama, Clemson, or Oklahoma? Do you wait for the 2021 or 2022 draft? Do you try to lure Mahomes with large money when he becomes a FA? Do you keep your treasure and take your chance with a late 1st round pick with the hope that you will get very lucky like you did with A.Rodgers?
I say be always ready to pull the trigger, but patient enough to know when it is the right player/deal. It would not be public knowledge, but GB's management and Rodgers must know how long Rodgers feels that he can play at a winning performance level. Will he play into his 40's and if so for how long? IMO, taking a QB in the 2020 draft is too early, but trying for a top college QB in 2021 or 2022 would gine the new QB time to grow into Rodgers heir. I'd like to see a smoother transition than the Favre to Rodgers transition. How it will actually play out will be a big story when it does take place. Until then let's win with Rodgers now as much as possible.
RashanGary
11-10-2019, 12:30 PM
If one falls, grab him. And constantly rifle through undrafted flyers. Hopefully we get one before AR is done. Three in a row would be nice. Would put Gute in the Wolf/TT conversation.
Guiness
11-10-2019, 03:09 PM
The Packers should plan as if Rodgers will not be the starter in 2022. It is easy to deal with having an extra starter-quality QB. It is hard to play without one.
Reading through this thread thinking of my response, guess I'm not surprised Patler expressed it.
Under the new CBA, I think it's more than smart to draft a QB first or second if you think the guy is a future starter. If Rodgers continues to play well, they have a sense of security and a capable backup that can win a few games if needed, and not like it's hard to recoup the draft capital down the road - see: Garappolo, Jimmy. There are a couple examples couple closer to home - the first traded Favre, or the move up in the fist and a third the Pack got for Hasselbeck. If they guess right, it will pay off one way or the other.
gbgary
11-10-2019, 06:46 PM
no need just yet. just make him run the O as designed. short and intermediate routes only. make him a game manager...after all, all he wants to do is win games now. right?
mraynrand
11-10-2019, 06:48 PM
no need just yet. just make him run the O as designed. short and intermediate routes only. make him a game manager...after all, all he wants to do now is win games...now.
God damned negativists! Packers would have won by 30 today if they’d let Rodgers fling it around the yard! The running game just controls the clock for the other team!!!
pbmax
11-10-2019, 06:49 PM
God damned negativists! Packers would have won by 30 today if they’d let Rodgers fling it around the yard! The running game just controls the clock for the other team!!!
I would wholly endorse this position if he hit more than 2 deep balls our of the 8 or so he threw.
no need just yet. just make him run the O as designed. short and intermediate routes only. make him a game manager...after all, all he wants to do now is win games...now.
he's proven time after time that he isn't going to do that, he'll do things his way
i'm with patler and guiness and the others. do it now. you have 4 or 5 years before the guy would actually start costing any real money. and you can always trade him if you have too
but i'm thinking the end of rodgers is approaching faster then we think
gbgary
11-10-2019, 06:53 PM
God damned negativists! Packers would have won by 30 today if they’d let Rodgers fling it around the yard! The running game just controls the clock for the other team!!!
ok tex. lol
MadtownPacker
11-10-2019, 07:57 PM
God damned negativists! Packers would have won by 30 today if they’d let Rodgers fling it around the yard! The running game just controls the clock for the other team!!!How did PB miss the TPB impression?
pbmax
11-10-2019, 08:00 PM
How did PB miss the TPB impression?
I was agreeing with doppelgänger tex.
Hughes brings some thump to the Vikings secondary.
esoxx
11-10-2019, 08:19 PM
Hughes brings some thump to the Vikings secondary.
Take it to the Other Games thread.
No wonder you were replaced as moderator.
Take it to the Other Games thread.
No wonder you were replaced as moderator.
Shhhhhhit
texaspackerbacker
11-11-2019, 07:56 AM
I've got nothing against the running game - in moderation. Aaron Jones is beginning to look like Jonathan Taylor, and at times, Carolina made the Packers O Line look like the Badgers.
Prediction: Speaking of replacements, 15 or 20 years from now, Rodgers will be Aikman's replacement, and he'll be as much better a commentator than Aikman as he is a better QB.
pbmax
11-11-2019, 09:33 AM
Shhhhhhit
esoxx is like a closer. He's not here all the time, but he does damage when present.
MadtownPacker
11-11-2019, 09:54 AM
I've got nothing against the running game - in moderation. Aaron Jones is beginning to look like Jonathan Taylor, and at times, Carolina made the Packers O Line look like the Badgers.
Prediction: Speaking of replacements, 15 or 20 years from now, Rodgers will be Aikman's replacement, and he'll be as much better a commentator than Aikman as he is a better QB.15-20 years? Seems like a long time. Is that going to be after Danica crashes into his bank account and it ends in a fiery, disastrous divorce?
3irty1
11-11-2019, 10:36 AM
I don't think it matters. It's not the players that are special its the station of Greenbay Packers starting quarterback that is the source of their hall of fame powers. When a successor is needed, the secret ceremony committee of the board of directors will perform the esoteric ritual needed to imbue their new champion with talent and the team will have another decade of top shelf QB play. Spend a 1st rounder if you want, at least their rookie contract will be longer but a UDFA will be just as effective.
I know it sounds silly and superstitious but I hope they spend the 2nd round pick on a WR this year.
texaspackerbacker
11-11-2019, 01:13 PM
15-20 years? Seems like a long time. Is that going to be after Danica crashes into his bank account and it ends in a fiery, disastrous divorce?
I said 15-20 because I expect him to play for maybe 7 or 8 more years, and it undoubtedly takes a few years to build up to the top broadcast team - although come to think of it, Romo went straight to the top. So let me revise and amend my remarks and say 7-10 years.
I would think Danica is as rich as Brady's super model, so we ought to get a discount on Rodgers' contract like the Pats get for Brady, right? And regarding that wealth also, alimony and community property works both ways in these liberated times hahahahaha.
Our first and second rounders this year better go for D Line and O Line.
George Cumby
11-11-2019, 02:41 PM
I said 15-20 because I expect him to play for maybe 7 or 8 more years,
WTF are you smoking?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.