Again, we need the Love Machine

[Vincenzo]

Where’s the short clip of the guys in pinks suits singing the Love Machine?
We need this for Packer therapy now.

[Joemailman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyABcyYluyw

[bobblehead]

Joe Flacco has had two 300 yard games since Rodgers last had one.

[call_me_ishmael]

He looked damn good I thought!

[Tony Oday]

I am the first one to hate on Love but he looked like he posessed the brain and arm for an NFL QB in limited action, I really hope I was wrong and he is the future.

[red]

this is the first time i've really been impressed by him

[Joemailman]

I believe in Love.

[bobblehead]

I believe in Love.

15 years from now I'm gonna bump this with a cher video.

[King Friday]

Love’s performance in Philly was impressive. He was decisive. We knew his arm was strong, but it was Favre-like last night. He scrambled at the right times. Most importantly, his accuracy was deadly.

I also loved his demeanor getting ready to come into the game. You could see the focus and confidence. He’s been waiting for this opportunity, and he grabbed it by the balls last night. Rodgers played OK last night, yet Love showed you why the NFL will always be a young man’s game. He looked fresh, strong and able…something Rodgers hasn’t shown much this year even when healthy.

[Teamcheez1]

From PFT:
Rodgers said his status for the game against the Bears will be determined later in the week.

“As long as I check out fine tomorrow I expect to play this weekend,” he said. “I might not be able to go Wednesday, but as long as there’s no major structural damage, I’ll try to get back out there.”

[King Friday]

Another item of note from last night was how excited the team was for Love to get his chance. Numerous receivers talking to him on the sidelines, MiLF getting hot and bothered by the nice start. Rodgers has always seemed to be a very unapproachable guy on the sideline. He stands around, but rarely is involved talking to anyone. Seeing guys actually talking to the QB on the sidelines was a nice change of pace.

[Fritz]

From PFT:
Rodgers said his status for the game against the Bears will be determined later in the week.

“As long as I check out fine tomorrow I expect to play this weekend,” he said. “I might not be able to go Wednesday, but as long as there’s no major structural damage, I’ll try to get back out there.”

Ummm...you're hurt dude. Worse than you think. We don't want to cause any long-term issues, so for your own good we're going to sit you.

I have wondered often on this site why so many of you were so down on Love. He's never had any extended playing time at all, yet people were writing him off as a bust.

We won't know until the guy gets to play for several games. I've been on board with him - he is in only his third season and his first was a washout because of Covid. Plus Arod sat for three years too.

So now's the time to find out. It's time for this organization to show some balls and shut down Rodgers. If Love works out, great. If he doesn't work out, then you ship them both out (at this point could you get maybe a second for Rodgers? What a mistake not to trade him last offseason).

But do you want Rodgers coming back next season? Any more than you want Joe Barely back?

Tex would call me a fool and worse for suggesting such heresy, but I notice that since this season went south Tex and his loudmouth black-and-white bullshit have been notoriously absent from Packerrats. I do hope it's out of shame and that nothing bad has happened to him personally.

I suppose the other option is to kowtow to Rodgers so he doesn't cause trouble, then trade him in the offseason anyway. But you can only really do that if you're confident that you already know whether Love is or is not your QB of the future.

[King Friday]

I don’t have any issues with Rodgers wanting to play. This is entirely on MLF now to be very clear and decisive. There is no reason to continue trotting Rodgers out there. If he has any plans to play in 2023, he is going to need some extended R&R. It is now the time for the team to get a good chance to look at Love. This shouldn’t be about a doctor’s decision…this is about the future for the franchise and gaining clear understanding on a roster asset. Even if Rodgers is technically okay to play next week from a health perspective (not likely) it should still be Love under center.

[texaspackerbacker]

I've consistently been a detractor of Love, but I now see a shred of hope after Rodgers. But even if Love is good, he's no Rodgers. I still say, Rodgers is the best hope teh team has for success going forward - ideally a lot of seasons. But if he's gone, well, it might not be a total shitstorm.

[George Cumby]

Another item of note from last night was how excited the team was for Love to get his chance. Numerous receivers talking to him on the sidelines, MiLF getting hot and bothered by the nice start. Rodgers has always seemed to be a very unapproachable guy on the sideline. He stands around, but rarely is involved talking to anyone. Seeing guys actually talking to the QB on the sidelines was a nice change of pace.

Not unlike 2007 when Rodgers took over for Bert.

[Jaire]

Ummm...you're hurt dude. Worse than you think. We don't want to cause any long-term issues, so for your own good we're going to sit you.

I have wondered often on this site why so many of you were so down on Love. He's never had any extended playing time at all, yet people were writing him off as a bust.




For me, it's how he has carried himself in pressers. Hopefully, he matures. We'll see. I too would like to see him get more playing time this year, and wish him the best.

[Teamcheez1]

The Packers have a 1.1% chance of earning a wild card berth, per Sportsline projections.

[Joemailman]

The Packers have a 1.1% chance of earning a wild card berth, per Sportsline projections.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM

[Fritz]

For me, it's how he has carried himself in pressers. Hopefully, he matures. We'll see. I too would like to see him get more playing time this year, and wish him the best.


I'm curious as to what you saw that you didn't like.

I confess I never watched the guy in a press conference, so I am wondering what you saw there.

[run pMc]

The Packers aren't going to make the playoffs. They have lost too many tiebreakers such that even if they win out, 9 wins probably doesn't get them in. Going 1-3 against the NFCE hurts them, especially since the entire NFCE is in the playoff hunt.

If Rodgers has broken ribs or an oblique injury that impacts his throwing motion you sit him. He already has a broken thumb that some reports claim will need surgery. How's he going to throw downfield if he can't torque his body or grip the ball in cold weather? Throw left handed instead?

I'm fine with giving Love a chance to play and show what he's got.
If Rodgers wants to come back and play next year you let him. Dude is enough of a psycho where I could see him wanting to return with a vengeance just as easily as him wandering off into the wilderness to trip balls on ayahuasca. (I also think he doesn't want to retire same year as Brady and have to share the stage and limelight with him in Canton.)

There's not a lot left to play for, maybe some pride against the Rams and the NFCN teams...but playing for the postseason is a pipe dream. They don't have much to lose by playing their young players to see if they are any good. They will need to know if Love is any good, and they won't know if he doesn't get extended playing time.

[bobblehead]

Ummm...you're hurt dude. Worse than you think. We don't want to cause any long-term issues, so for your own good we're going to sit you.

I have wondered often on this site why so many of you were so down on Love. He's never had any extended playing time at all, yet people were writing him off as a bust.

We won't know until the guy gets to play for several games. I've been on board with him - he is in only his third season and his first was a washout because of Covid. Plus Arod sat for three years too.

So now's the time to find out. It's time for this organization to show some balls and shut down Rodgers. If Love works out, great. If he doesn't work out, then you ship them both out (at this point could you get maybe a second for Rodgers? What a mistake not to trade him last offseason).

But do you want Rodgers coming back next season? Any more than you want Joe Barely back?

Tex would call me a fool and worse for suggesting such heresy, but I notice that since this season went south Tex and his loudmouth black-and-white bullshit have been notoriously absent from Packerrats. I do hope it's out of shame and that nothing bad has happened to him personally.

I suppose the other option is to kowtow to Rodgers so he doesn't cause trouble, then trade him in the offseason anyway. But you can only really do that if you're confident that you already know whether Love is or is not your QB of the future.

Whats funnier yet is those who tore their hair out over him being an epic flop (I was NOT one of them), are now totally amped over 2 drives against prevent D in which the big play was Watson's speed, not anything Love did.

[bobblehead]

I'm curious as to what you saw that you didn't like.

I confess I never watched the guy in a press conference, so I am wondering what you saw there.

Jaire has been an ARid apologist all year. What he saw was "not rodgers" and he didn't like it.

[Joemailman]

Love has handled his situation with nothing but class the last 3 years. But I would think he has to be getting into the "play me or trade me" phase once this season is over. He has progressed enough that he deserves a chance to show he can be a starter QB in the NFL. It's not happening in Green Bay as long as Rodgers is here.

[Teamcheez1]

From MLF presser today:

When asked the “Rodgers or Love” question, LaFleur said, “We’ve got a lot of faith in both of those guys, but Aaron’s the starting quarterback. He’s battled through a lot over the course of his career. I think it’s well-documented and I think he’s been able to play at a pretty high level through a lot of different situations.”

He also reiterated that if Rodgers can start, he will start. Despite Rodgers’ comments about pushing through injury until at least the team is out of playoff contention completely, LaFleur claimed, “We have not even gone down that road.” When asked if there was any potential for Love to start games should the Packers be eliminated from the postseason race, the fourth-year head coach said the team is taking a “one game at a time” approach to the situation.

So even if AR needs a walker to take the field, he’s playing.

[Jaire]

Jaire has been an ARid apologist all year. What he saw was "not rodgers" and he didn't like it.

While an AR apologist, that wasn't it. It began with his wearing the Laker's hat. That might have been after the KC game. LIS, maybe just immaturity: I overestimate the 'maturity' and how much is needed for NFL QB, I think.

[Teamcheez1]

I know if we trade Love his contract is minimal.

If we trade Rodgers, assuming he played for two more years, what does the team we trade him to have to pay for 2023 & 2024? I’m not suggesting we trade him, but the sports talk shows today kept referencing the huge contract a team would inherit trading for AR. I thought we shouldered most of the burden with his signing bonus.

[Sparkey]

JL - All throws in week 12 game.

https://youtu.be/iu-xeb0BF5M

His throwing is tighter and quicker. I remember it looking long and exaggerated.

The back shoulder throw to Jones was perfect.

Note:. Watch Watson run the route on his td. #22 did not expect the quick turn inside and how quickly he accelerated.

I want to see Love in a whole game. How he handles himself as the game plays out. I liked what I saw.

[NewsBruin]

In Love's first appearances, he threw only short and to the side, like he was afraid of getting picked off. I'm happier now that I see him taking real downfield shots.

[NewsBruin]

If we trade Love in March 2023, we'll eat $1.64 million of his remaining signing bonus. The other team gets a year of him at $2.3 million and the fifth-year option in 2024 (at the average 2023 salary of the 3rd-25th highest-paid QB), if we offer it to him this this offseason. Both years are guaranteed.

[Fritz]

If we trade Love in March 2023, we'll eat $1.64 million of his remaining signing bonus. The other team gets a year of him at $2.3 million and the fifth-year option in 2024 (at the average 2023 salary of the 3rd-25th highest-paid QB), if we offer it to him this this offseason. Both years are guaranteed.

Trade Love and you're trading someone a young QB with a future. Trade Rodgers and you're in sal cap hell but you're not saddled with an aging, over-the-hill QB who still thinks his shit don't stink, ala Favre and all those other HOF QB's who just can't see the signs, even when everyone else can.

I say dump Rodgers and take the cap hit. Keep Love.

[King Friday]

Based on how the team held onto Amari Rodgers, Love isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

[Joemailman]

Trade Love and you're trading someone a young QB with a future. Trade Rodgers and you're in sal cap hell but you're not saddled with an aging, over-the-hill QB who still thinks his shit don't stink, ala Favre and all those other HOF QB's who just can't see the signs, even when everyone else can.

I say dump Rodgers and take the cap hit. Keep Love.

They can't cut him. If they cut him before June 1, he has a cap hit of about of about 100 million. They would have to destroy the team. The best scenario according to OTC would be to trade him after June 1. That would result in a cap hit of 15.8 million in 2023 and 24.5 million in 2024. The best target in a trade would be Las Vegas. There's been talk of Raiders wanting to dump Carr. Rodgers might want to be reunited with Adams. Another possibility would be Seattle. Pete Carroll has that team in contention with Geno Smith at QB. He might want to see what he can do with Aaron Rodgers.

https://overthecap.com/looking-ahead-to-the-packers-options-with-aaron-rodgers


Rodgers currently has a salary cap charge of $31.6 million in 2023. $59.465 million of his $59.515 million salary for the year is already guaranteed. The Packers have the option to pay that salary out as a $58.3 million option bonus and a $1.165 million salary in order to drive his cap charge to the $31.6 million figure. The timing of the option works in the Packers favor for both trades and/or potential retirement as the official option decision does not have to happen until the start of the 2023 regular season.

What Happens in Aaron Rodgers Retires?

If Rodgers were to walk away he would forfeit all his rights to the $59.465 million in guaranteed salary for next year. In order to best accommodate the hit on the salary cap my assumption would be that the Packers and Rodgers would sign a new contract where the option bonus was eliminated and just a $1.165 salary remained. That would reduce Rodgers salary cap charge to $16,998,750 and they would carry him on the roster as a procedural move until June 2nd. At that point they would put him on the retired list. The salary cap charge in that case would be $15,833,570 in 2023 and $24,480,000 in 2024.


If they did not do that and processed the retirement right away they would take a salary cap hit of $40,313,570 in 2023 but none in 2024. The Packers have no cap space next year so it would seem more likely that they take the first approach.

What Happens if the Packers Trade Aaron Rodgers?

Rodgers does not have a no trade clause in his contract so he could be traded to a team as well. The timing of the option should give the Packers all the way until the end of training camp to move him. The cap charge here would depend on when he was traded. If Rodgers were to be traded prior to June 1st the Packers would take on a $40,313,750 cap hit in 2023. If he was traded after June 1st it would be a $15,833,570 cap hit in 2023 with $24,480,000 due in 2024. This assumes that the Packers did not exercise the option before the trade. If the option is exercised then the trade number spikes to nearly $100 million. There should be no need to exercise the option until the last possible day.

For the team acquiring Rodgers they would be on the hook for the salary for the year. The cap charge would be $59,515,000 if they do not exercise his option and $15.79 million if they were to exercise the option. Rodgers has an injury guarantee of $49.25 million for 2024 but that does not become fully guaranteed until 5 days after the 2023 Super Bowl. If Rodgers was cut after 2023 it would cost the team $43.725 million on the 2024 cap. If he retired they could split that as $14.575 million in 2024 and $29.15 million in 2025 using a similar June 2nd date as mentioned above in the retirement option.

Can Aaron Rodgers be Cut?

No that is not a feasible option. Because his salary next year is fully guaranteed the Packers would take on over $99 million in dead money. While they could officially pick up the option and split that across 2023 and 2024 it would be about $31 million in dead money in 2023 and then $68.2 million coming in 2024.

[texaspackerbacker]

All during my moratorium on Packer posting, I was boiling mad over the stupidity being posted about trading Aaron Rodgers and idiotic regret over his contract. That contract was obviously designed to keep Rodgers in Green Bay for three years. As has been said, it is damn near impossible to trade him or cut him without horrible dead money. I SAY THAT IS A GOOD THING!!!

As for Love, he played good against the Eagles, and supposedly, that wasn't an aberration. We now have better prospect of getting something decent for him in trade OR as somebody said, we could keep him even beyond his rookie contract and make him the eventual successor to Rodgers. That kinda depends on if he'd stay and be the backup, though. Either of those two options would be fine with me. I just don't want to see Rodgers gone next season or for as far as possible beyond that.

[George Cumby]

After this season, IDK who would want to trade for an aging and entitled Aaron Rodgers, especially with that contract.

Best bet was Denver last off season.

Maybe there's a sucker out there.

[Joemailman]

After this season, IDK who would want to trade for an aging and entitled Aaron Rodgers, especially with that contract.

Best bet was Denver last off season.

Maybe there's a sucker out there.

2 best bets are Raiders and Seahawks. Both close to California. I could see Raiders wanting Rodgers over Carr, or Seattle wanting Rodgers over Geno Smith. Packers play at Vegas in 2023. Could possibly have Seattle at home in 2023.

[George Cumby]

2 best bets are Raiders and Seahawks. Both close to California. I could see Raiders wanting Rodgers over Carr, or Seattle wanting Rodgers over Geno Smith. Packers play at Vegas in 2023. Could possibly have Seattle at home in 2023.

Make it happen, Gute!

[bobblehead]

After this season, IDK who would want to trade for an aging and entitled Aaron Rodgers, especially with that contract.

Best bet was Denver last off season.

Maybe there's a sucker out there.

Its easy actually. The packers trade him in a way where we eat the cash and cap hit mostly. I promise someone gives you minimum of a first in that scenario. Then you clean the cap in a season if possible. Be ready to win again in 2024.

[George Cumby]

I hope you're right, Bobs.

I think the team's got solid foundation of talent.

[bobblehead]

I hope you're right, Bobs.

I think the team's got solid foundation of talent.

I'm right it can be done, whether or not the Packers brass has the brass balls to do it is another issue. There was only one TT and God broke the mold.

[Fritz]

I'm right it can be done, whether or not the Packers brass has the brass balls to do it is another issue. There was only one TT and God broke the mold.

I hope Gute learned that lesson well - that when it's time to make an unpopular decision for the good of the team and franchise, you just suck it up and do it and weather the storm that follows.

Joe, you responded to my earlier post about how much it would cost if the Packers simply cut Rodgers. But I was not clear: when I wrote they should "dump" Rodgers, I did not mean cut him. I meant trade him. I used the word "dump" because I think his value has dropped significantly.

So, to be clear: if it works best to trade him after June 1st, then do that. Get what you can. Unless it's a third. Then just ask for two fourths or something. Cuz this franchise doesn't know what to do with a third round pick. But get what you can, and move on.

[flamacue]

It will require more than a quarterback to right the ship. It will take a really good coach to reset the team. The defense is a dumpster fire. The offense is pretty much inconsistent. I don’t look for much improvement next year under this leadership. I will be pleasantly surprised if there is any significant improvement where they can contend for the nfc north title.

[bobblehead]

It will require more than a quarterback to right the ship. It will take a really good coach to reset the team. The defense is a dumpster fire. The offense is pretty much inconsistent. I don’t look for much improvement next year under this leadership. I will be pleasantly surprised if there is any significant improvement where they can contend for the nfc north title.

I admit to not having seen your previous 7 posts, so I don't know much about your overall thought process so I will dare to ask a couple questions if you will indulge me.

Why do you think a roster that is largely similar to last year and even the year before is hopelessly beyond quick turnaround? We did just win more games in 3 seasons than any other team and for all I can remember, more than any team in like 50 years. How did we pull that off with "leadership" you seem to think is beyond turning it around, and talent that you seem not impressed with? Where on this roster do you think its so deficient that we can't win 12+ games next season if things bounce a little better?

[bobblehead]

Since you are new and probably haven't seen much of my stuff I'll throw in how I see it.

We have a pretty good coach who runs the best offensive system in the game. A system that has stood the test of time going back decades and has spawned a ton of successful coaches.

We have talent across all 3 levels of the defense, and although I do think a new D coordinator is in order, I don't think a major overhaul of the talent is necessary.

On offense we have a good young QB and the 2020 and 2021 MVP. We have an OL that is proving that if they can stay healthy and put the preferred 5 on the field together is really good and young so probably improving even.

We have 2 RBs both in their prime, ages 24 and 27. We have seen enough of the 2 new WR to be encouraged. In Lazard we have a nice safety net. We could use a better TE to stretch the middle of the field, but thats just a luxury.

I just don't see structural lack of talent and leadership. If we didn't have Rodgers hurt his throwing thumb in week 3, and then have OL and WR in and out of the lineup every week on top of it I think this team would probably have its record flipped at a minimum right now.

[texaspackerbacker]

It will require more than a quarterback to right the ship. It will take a really good coach to reset the team. The defense is a dumpster fire. The offense is pretty much inconsistent. I don’t look for much improvement next year under this leadership. I will be pleasantly surprised if there is any significant improvement where they can contend for the nfc north title.

It depends what you mean by righting the ship. Rodgers - assuming he is maybe 70% healthy right now, is probably better at that 70% than 90% of the QBs in the league. Getting him back to near 100% will make him better than near 100% of the QBs in the league. You're right, though, the ship has not been right most of the season, and hardly because of Rodgers. The defense has stunk, and the O Line has continued the mediocre level that has been good enough to win 13 or 14 games the past few years. Also, the WRs have been less than adequate due to injuries and inexperience.

The WRs we have staying healthy and the mediocre O Line not getting any worse should be enough to get the team back to that level of the past few years if we can get rid of Barry - the D personnel being probably above average in the league. That return to last year and the year before level would be righting the ship in my book.

[bobblehead]

It depends what you mean by righting the ship. Rodgers - assuming he is maybe 70% healthy right now, is probably better at that 70% than 90% of the QBs in the league. Getting him back to near 100% will make him better than near 100% of the QBs in the league. You're right, though, the ship has not been right most of the season, and hardly because of Rodgers. The defense has stunk, and the O Line has continued the mediocre level that has been good enough to win 13 or 14 games the past few years. Also, the WRs have been less than adequate due to injuries and inexperience.

The WRs we have staying healthy and the mediocre O Line not getting any worse should be enough to get the team back to that level of the past few years if we can get rid of Barry - the D personnel being probably above average in the league. That return to last year and the year before level would be righting the ship in my book.

Tex, you really do ignore reality. The defense has not stunk all season. They are the only reason we have most of the wins we do. Rodgers has stunk on ice. No 2 ways about it.

[Joemailman]

Average points scored in NFL has been 21.9 in 2022. Offense has been better than that 5 times, worse 7 times.

Defense has been better than that 3 times, worse than that 9 times.

Packers are 21st in points scored, 27th in points allowed.

Defense has been hit by injuries late, but offense was hit by injuries early at OL and WR.

Neither unit has been good enough. But when you take into account free agency losses on offense, and the number of 1st round picks on defense, it sure seems like the defense has underachieved more.

[bobblehead]

Average points scored in NFL has been 21.9 in 2022. Offense has been better than that 5 times, worse 7 times.

Defense has been better than that 3 times, worse than that 9 times.

Packers are 21st in points scored, 27th in points allowed.

Defense has been hit by injuries late, but offense was hit by injuries early at OL and WR.

Neither unit has been good enough. But when you take into account free agency losses on offense, and the number of 1st round picks on defense, it sure seems like the defense has underachieved more.

No real argument here, but you have to factor in the sheer number of 3 and outs the offense had. The 3 pick game by Rodgers. The fact we coudn't sustain a drive. I've said 100x its a big picture thing. An offense that gets stuck on the sideline by a bleeding defense will have trouble finding a rhythm. A defense put right back out there time after time will get tired and start to miss tackles and make mistakes. Neither unit has been great by any means, but early on the offense was a problem. Last 2 games I'll blame the defense more.

[texaspackerbacker]

Tex, you really do ignore reality. The defense has not stunk all season. They are the only reason we have most of the wins we do. Rodgers has stunk on ice. No 2 ways about it.

Are you kidding? The defense in fact has stunk all season. We won some games early on anyway, but it still under-performed the talent. And yes, you can blame the injuries for making the situation worse as well as blaming other aspects of the team, but the solid fact is, Joe Barry is primarily to blame for the badness.

Rodgers? Yeah, he hasn't played up to his own GOAT standard, but even with the minor injuries to him and the WRs, he's been better than most QBs around the league - no 2 ways about that hahahaha.

[run pMc]

I don't the defense has stunk ALL season, but it's rarely if ever been able to have a good game at the same time the offense does.
They held Detroit -- who was averaging 30+ points a game at home -- to 15, while Rodgers threw 3 picks. The held the Bears and Bucs to 10 and 12 points respectively.
There were other games where they kept the team in the game, but overall they haven't played well this year and I would say have significantly underperformed expectations. Maybe those expectations were unrealistic, but given all the money and draft capital (and hype) spent there you would expect better.

Rodgers has cracked 246 yards in 4 games this year, not a single game has he thrown for 300+. That's not great. If you went by his performance just this year, he might crack the top 15 QBs. Barely. So yeah, technically 14th out of 35 is better than most, but that also means there are a lot playing better than him. This roster needs him to play well and elevate the rookies/lesser lights on offense.

It can be both Offense and Defense being the reason. (There's also Amari's fumble in the WAS game, where the defense held them to 3 points in a 2 point loss, but that's another story)

I don't think Rodgers is washed up. I think if he wants to come back and play next year they should absolutely want him back. I also think after the bye they should play Love to see what they have in him.
This team isn't making the playoffs and if they do they aren't winning a WC game.

[bobblehead]

Are you kidding? The defense in fact has stunk all season. We won some games early on anyway, but it still under-performed the talent. And yes, you can blame the injuries for making the situation worse as well as blaming other aspects of the team, but the solid fact is, Joe Barry is primarily to blame for the badness.

Rodgers? Yeah, he hasn't played up to his own GOAT standard, but even with the minor injuries to him and the WRs, he's been better than most QBs around the league - no 2 ways about that hahahaha.

Sorry tex. According to total QBR (which is a guide, not the bible) Rodgers is ranked 27th. He is behind Zach Wilson who might lose his job, and behind Matt Ryan who cost his coach his job. But the good news is he beats out stellar QBs like Davis Mills and Carson Wentz.

Edit: I will allow that a lot of the reason he has sucked is his thumb and having a revolving OL and
WR group. I will not allow that he hasn't sucked though.

edit 2: Joe Flacco has still had multiple 300 yard passing games since Rodgers last had one. Stellar indeed.

[Joemailman]

One reason that Packers might want to continue playing Rodgers even if eliminated: What if Love were to start games and really light things up? Rodgers is 27th in QBR, 13th in passer rating, 21st in completion percentage. There is a possibility Love could put up numbers better than that. Packers could have a legitimate quarterback controversy. But they can't just move on from Rodgers like they did from Favre because of Rodgers' contract.

[bobblehead]

One reason that Packers might want to continue playing Rodgers even if eliminated: What if Love were to start games and really light things up? Rodgers is 27th in QBR, 13th in passer rating, 21st in completion percentage. There is a possibility Love could put up numbers better than that. Packers could have a legitimate quarterback controversy. But they can't just move on from Rodgers like they did from Favre because of Rodgers' contract.

Certainly they can. As a matter of fact at some point they will have to. Even if he played it out as written they get tagged hard. The only choice in moving on from Rodgers is when and how they get hit. But get hit they will.

If they trade/cut him at the right time they can simply add void years right beforehand to smooth out the hit. They over paid him to make him happy when he had the leverage. If Love is incredible don't think they won't move on one way or another just becuase it accelerates when they take the hit.

And to tex and APB this doesn't mean you can ALWAYS cook the cap. The hit will still be felt. The mets probably thought they were smart when they manipulated the numbers with Bobby Bonilla too. But eventually you have to pay.

[run pMc]

I think that's absolutely in Rodgers' calculations about playing or not. Also think he wanted to play the Bears because they suck and it would likely help pad his stats and for the legacy of it. No way is he going to let Jordan Love play for the all time lead in wins...plus he owns the Bears and will do everything he can to prove it.

I think he plays against the Rams because his thumb/ribs will be better and they also suck.
After that he'll go to Miami and the defense will get torched, by which time there are just two division games left and they're out of the playoff picture. I expect SEA/NYG/WAS to have enough wins in 3 weeks to push GB out of contention. At that point Love probably gets a look. 2 games is probably just enough to give Love some game snaps but not quite enough to make him look like the heir apparent and push Rodgers out the door.

This offseason will be very interesting... I think Rodgers will come back for the money if nothing else. Gute and MLF says they want him back, but of course they're going to say that.
They will be facing some decisions re: the rest of the roster, but I think Barry has to go. That alone might give the defense a bump.

I think with another solid draft and at least an average level DC they could bounce back. They should have an easier schedule and some of their young players could make a jump. This year they had a lot of bad bounces and there should be some regression to the mean also... that might already be happening over the last 4 games tbh.

At the risk of being Captain Obvious, next season comes down to managing the cap, drafting well, and replacing Barry with a better DC.
They have some good pieces under contract they can win with.
If next season turns into a tirefire then you start selling off some of your older but still good players like the Bears did with Roquan and Quinn to eat the dead money and gain future draft picks and cap space. They are probably going to have a really really bad year in the near future, but that will let them reset and then bounce back. (By then your old-but-good players won't be good -- they'll just be old.)

[NewsBruin]

If they trade/cut him at the right time they can simply add void years right beforehand to smooth out the hit. They over paid him to make him happy when he had the leverage. If Love is incredible don't think they won't move on one way or another just becuase it accelerates when they take the hit.

I don't think this is right. As I understand it, "void years" are to prorate a signing bonus against the cap through the length of the contract while the player is under contract (up to five years). A three-year contract means 33% of the signing bonus is counted each year, 25% for a 4-year contract, or 20% for the first five years.

But as soon as the player is cut or traded, the rest of the signing bonus immediately counts against the cap (or you can split it halfsies if you do it over the summer). Brees and Rodgers both had years added to cut down the annual signing bonus amount, but --unless I misunderstand-- their team can't keep that signing bonus split up for multiple years after the player is gone, no matter how many years were on fhat contract.

The Ringer had this article (https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2021/3/16/22334000/nfl-free-agency-tom-brady-taysom-hill-voidable-years), which I think tries too hard to be funny, but has all the points right.

[call_me_ishmael]

I truly, 100%, believe this team is much better than they represented themselves this year and if they run it back I expect them to be in the NFCC chase next year. Thus, ARod returns.

Run it back with Amos, punt on the other shitty safety, draft a WR, OT, TE, and S and you got a stew going.

[bobblehead]

I don't think this is right. As I understand it, "void years" are to prorate a signing bonus against the cap through the length of the contract while the player is under contract (up to five years). A three-year contract means 33% of the signing bonus is counted each year, 25% for a 4-year contract, or 20% for the first five years.

But as soon as the player is cut or traded, the rest of the signing bonus immediately counts against the cap (or you can split it halfsies if you do it over the summer). Brees and Rodgers both had years added to cut down the annual signing bonus amount, but --unless I misunderstand-- their team can't keep that signing bonus split up for multiple years after the player is gone, no matter how many years were on fhat contract.

The Ringer had this article (https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2021/3/16/22334000/nfl-free-agency-tom-brady-taysom-hill-voidable-years), which I think tries too hard to be funny, but has all the points right.

But the team has 50+ contracts to play with, not just Rodgers
Money is fungible. You simply convert your 5 highest contracts (that will play this year) to bonus and add void years. Voila you are borrowing against future caps, but you can cut arod. It does however handicap future caps.

[texaspackerbacker]

bobblehead, have you suddenly seen the light about the salary cap? Or is this just more of your stupid sarcasm?

Good Post, CMI. The Packers coulda/woulda/shoulda been way better this year, and whatever they are going forward, they will be way better with Rodgers than with Love.

About the needs you cited, yeah, pretty much, but not necessarily in that order. I think the O Line is pretty solid right now - Tom looked better to me than I ever remember Bakhtiari looking, although it was only the Bears they were playing. Jenkins is back where he should be, Guard. Yes, even with Watson and Doubs and Toure and probably keeping Lazard, we could use a WR, but probably late in the draft. TE probably. I thought Tonyan would be like he was before the injury, but it kinda depends on whether they think he still will be or if they see him as damaged goods. Safety, for sure, probably even first round. You left out OLB/Outside Pass Rusher. You also left out Kicker. I'd like to see them go as high as 5th or even 4th round to get a really good one.

[bobblehead]

bobblehead, have you suddenly seen the light about the salary cap? Or is this just more of your stupid sarcasm?
.

No tex, I haven't "seen the light". And I am not being sarcastic. I have always said you can kick the can down the road. You also have to pay for that down the road. Its a trick you can use for a few years while competitive to keep the band together. Once used you are simply kicking it down the road to pay for past kicking and you gain zero advantage in doing so. Why do I feel like I'm repeating very clear and exacting explanations that you seem not to understand.

[run pMc]

No tex, I haven't "seen the light". And I am not being sarcastic. I have always said you can kick the can down the road. You also have to pay for that down the road. Its a trick you can use for a few years while competitive to keep the band together. Once used you are simply kicking it down the road to pay for past kicking and you gain zero advantage in doing so. Why do I feel like I'm repeating very clear and exacting explanations that you seem not to understand.

This is true.
There's also the part where you can only kick the can on any given contract so much. They've converted a good number of salaries to bonuses in years past so they only have a few left where they can do that. Stretch your cap however you want, there is a limit to that flexibility however.

At some point they won't have Rodgers but they will have a very large amount of dead cap, along with a FBS level roster because they'll barely have enough usable cap space to field a team.

[texaspackerbacker]

No tex, I haven't "seen the light". And I am not being sarcastic. I have always said you can kick the can down the road. You also have to pay for that down the road. Its a trick you can use for a few years while competitive to keep the band together. Once used you are simply kicking it down the road to pay for past kicking and you gain zero advantage in doing so. Why do I feel like I'm repeating very clear and exacting explanations that you seem not to understand.

Interesting/ You acknowledge that kicking the can down the road can go on indefinitely, but you say at some point, the team will have to pay, and it will bite them in the ass.

At what point, would you expect that to happen? What would trigger the disaster you foresee? I could maybe see something like that if they decreased the cap or maybe even just kept it static, but that IMO is extremely unlikely. And even then, a LOT of teams would suffer - all but the very very few who aren't living on the edge cap-wise. Just in the normal progression of things, I'd say it can go on forever. Why/How do you think otherwise?

runPmc, There only would be all that dead money if Rodgers was cut or traded before the end of the contract. As I have said, doing that would be bonehead stupid regardless of cap considerations and more so with that.

[run pMc]

I don't think he'll be playing until the end of his contract. He'd be 43 going on 44 and I think (a) he'd be in considerable physical decline to play QB and (b) he doesn't want to play that long. He's been doing the retirement talk shuffle in interviews, and I don't think he's going to drag it out like Favre.

I do think at a minimum they will keep him through next year, after which time I suspect he'll hang it up. The young WRs might give him incentive to play longer, but not by a lot.

The dead cap hit isn't as bad after the 2023 season but would still be in the neighborhood of 10% of their total cap space.
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-3745/

The contract basically gives him a LOT of control and influence on the team in terms of cap space and roster management.

It also puts Jordan Love and the team in a tough spot - the team wants to see if he can be Rodgers' successor, but he won't get to play many/any games under his rookie contract. I was fine with the idea of them drafting a QB - I just thought they did it a year early. It did get the team 2 years of MVP play so maybe that's worth a R1 pick.

With the team basically out of playoff contention, I'm hoping Love gets a couple of games as starter. I think Rodgers should and will be the starting QB next year though. He'll be hungry and feel due for a bounce back season and won't want to go out this way.

[texaspackerbacker]

You're referring to Rodgers - who just turned 39 and is nearing the end of the first year of a three year contract? Your math (age 43 or 44) doesn't add up. I WISH he would be under contract until then hahahaha, and I'm pretty sure he'll be more than able to physically to do that.

That "control" you mention is the beauty of that contract. It virtually assures that Rodgers will be here until the end of it - unless, heaven forbid, HE decides it's time to quit.

The "deterioration" this season is not some long term sign of aging, IMO. It is minor injuries that will heal as well as circumstances with the rest of the team - Barry's D as well as WR and O Line injuries.

I read that the Packers are likely to pick up Love's fifth year option - a good thing IMO. He's a more than adequate backup QB now, and if he's around long enough, he may even be an adequate successor. It's questionable,though, whether he would be willing to wait enough years for Rodgers to be gone.

When/if the Packers are actually mathematically out of it this season, as I have said, I'm thinking they will treat it a lot like preseason games, Rodgers starting but Love getting a quarter or two. It's a positive if Love plays good whatever the future is - trade value, backup status, or starter at some point. And if he doesn't play good, better to find out sooner than later.

[ThunderDan]

When/if the Packers are actually mathematically out of it this season, as I have said, I'm thinking they will treat it a lot like preseason games, Rodgers starting but Love getting a quarter or two. It's a positive if Love plays good whatever the future is - trade value, backup status, or starter at some point. And if he doesn't play good, better to find out sooner than later.

Well, you are half right. It will be like a preseason game except Love with be starting. Arod hasn't taken a snap in preseason in years.

[bobblehead]

Interesting/ You acknowledge that kicking the can down the road can go on indefinitely, but you say at some point, the team will have to pay, and it will bite them in the ass.

At what point, would you expect that to happen? What would trigger the disaster you foresee? I could maybe see something like that if they decreased the cap or maybe even just kept it static, but that IMO is extremely unlikely. And even then, a LOT of teams would suffer - all but the very very few who aren't living on the edge cap-wise. Just in the normal progression of things, I'd say it can go on forever. Why/How do you think otherwise?

runPmc, There only would be all that dead money if Rodgers was cut or traded before the end of the contract. As I have said, doing that would be bonehead stupid regardless of cap considerations and more so with that.

Read slowly. Carefully. When you kick it, any further kicking it is simply to pay for previous kicking. At that point you ARE paying for the kicking. Once you have kicked the entire cap into the future you can only pay 53 guys minimum wage because you are stuck with an entire cap full of dead money. At that point you can keep kicking it, but you also continue, year after year to have an entire roster of minimum wage players.

[texaspackerbacker]

There you go again with static analysis. There might be a particle of truth to what you say if the cap was static/never went up, but obviously it does.

[Sparkey]

There you go again with static analysis. There might be a particle of truth to what you say if the cap was static/never went up, but obviously it does.

Look past the "right now". Of course the cap goes up, but players salaries also rise each year which means that those carry over cap hits decrease the value your available dollars. How, you say? Well lets start first with resigning your own free agents. As the cap rises, so to does the allotment of that cap that goes to new/extended player contracts. So the OLB that was valued at 18 million a year is now valued at 21. So what you say? Well, lets say they offer Gary a 4 year deal that averages 21 a year and but with a year one cap hit of 7 mil. He says no. Normally you have the franchise tag, but because of the escalating cap, that tag # also rises and if you tag him, his cap hit is 21 million. Suddenly you start having issues resigning you important players and have to let some good players walk because you have 14 million less cap space. So now you have to let some solid players leave.

Usually, this doesn't affect your star players, but it weakens the quality of depth on the roster. As soon as injuries start to remove some starters, the play of the team degrades more than it normally would. Close wins become close losses and the playoffs become an after thought.

[texaspackerbacker]

Let me know when any of that crap actually happens hahahahahaha. Your example about Gary, what player in his right mind is gonna turn down a contract simply because it is team friendly - when that team friendliness benefits the player even more than a team, the cap-beating process generally being large bonuses? Yeah, injuries can screw things up, but that is the case whatever way the cap is handled.

[sharpe1027]

It's pretty simple to me. Teams complete for the same free agents with the same cap limit. A team that has dead money because they kicked the can down the road will have less money available relative to a team that hasn't done this.

That's the trade-off.

[texaspackerbacker]

That probably is true to some extent, but the "kicking the can down the road" thing is arguably for the sake of retaining proven excellence while the free agent signing thing arguably brings in something a little less proven. If, however, a particular FA is deemed worth it, you can, of course, kick the can even farther down the road and go after him anyway. At worst, you just need to pick and choose a little better, as the Packers have pretty much done for several decades now.

The thing that detractors of this cap manipulation/kicking the can idea are in denial of is that it has gone on for a long time, generally with great success for those doing it - similar to the economic situation in general.

[sharpe1027]

The trade-off is real. Every team can kick the can, so the amount you can spend relative to every other team is directly impacted by your past actions of pushing spend to later years.

Bottom line, you'll be at a disadvantage trying to sign players realtive to other teams. Net result is another team will get first choice because they can spend more.

[bobblehead]

The trade-off is real. Every team can kick the can, so the amount you can spend relative to every other team is directly impacted by your past actions of pushing spend to later years.

Bottom line, you'll be at a disadvantage trying to sign players realtive to other teams. Net result is another team will get first choice because they can spend more.

And if you are the Rams you got a ring, but you got no money and no draft capital....and no QB atm.

[texaspackerbacker]

The Rams are a combination of bad luck and bad decisions. Pushing the cap to the limit/kicking the can is not the reason they are in trouble.

[Joemailman]

The cap situation impacted the Packers this year. It would have been nice to have Billy Taylor and Lucas Patrick when Bakhtiari was out and Newman was playing terrible. It would have been nice to have MVS as a deep threat while waiting for Watson to become a factor.

[texaspackerbacker]

Billy TURNER was so unimportant that you forgot his name hahahahaha.

And arguably, the cap had nothing to do with any of that.

[run pMc]

Turner was let go because of failing his physical, then signed with Denver and is playing for them. Was. He was on IR to start the season because of his knee, started a few games and hurt the knee again and is back on IR. My guess is GB could've kept him but didn't want to carry 3 starting-level OL on IR (including Bahktiari, Jenkins). The cap relief from releasing him wouldn't hurt either. Had he been healthy I think they would have kept him and he would have been a big upgrade of Royce Newman at RT to start the season. In fact, keeping Hanson on the bench and having Newman-Turner on the right side might have won them a game. I think Hanson-Newman tandem were bad enough to at least cost them several possessions in a loss, and thus contribute to it.

So I'd argue Turner was not unimportant, nor was the cap ramifications.

Not sure what this has to do with the topic of this thread, but whatever. Play Jordan Love at least the last 2 games.

[Teamcheez1]

Read in the Wilde interview that Jordan Love would likely request a trade rather than sit behind AR any longer. I tend to side with Love on this even if it’s to the detriment of the Packers.

[Rastak]

Read in the Wilde interview that Jordan Love would likely request a trade rather than sit behind AR any longer. I tend to side with Love on this even if it’s to the detriment of the Packers.


I guess it really depends on the overall plan by the Packers brain trust. Plus they do not have to grant a trade. Be interesting to see what happens with Rodgers. They might get something for Love.

[Joemailman]

If the Packers keep Rodgers and trade Love, they could be one year away from not knowing who the hell their starting quarterback is. If that happens, it will be torches and pitchforks.

[call_me_ishmael]

Joe, it doesn't matter though if the Packers don't think Love is the guy. If they don't think he is a top tier guy, then I'd prefer to move on then settle for Jared Goff or something.

[run pMc]

If Rodgers comes back (which I think he will, he has 59.3 million reasons) for another year I'm ok with trading Love assuming they can get a decent pick for him. I don't think that will happen. Love is going to need some assurances to want to stay though -- he's been on the bench 3 years and has to be itching to play, especially with all the rumblings in social media to play him with the Packers a very very longshot to make the playoffs anyway. Thing that worries me is if they exercise the 5th year AND have Rodgers; that's a lot of cap set aside for two players, only one of whom will play.

I think Love can be an average level starter, but he's got to show a lot of improvement to make me think he's an elite QB. He hasn't had a lot of chances and I'd bet Gute/MLF want to find out if he's good as a starter in a few regular season games or not.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'm about 50/50 with trading or keeping Love. As somebody said, just because he requests a trade, that doesn't mean they have to trade him.

Joe, or whoever, how much does it cost to exercise that 5th year option? And is it correct to assume doing that makes his trade value higher?

I don't want to see Love on the field unless or until the Packers are mathematically out of it. Then, grudgingly, I'd say play him - mainly to showcase him for a trade. On the other hand, if he did stay around until Rodgers is gone - a LONG time, I very much hope, he has shown enough to maybe be the successor.

[Joemailman]

I'm about 50/50 with trading or keeping Love. As somebody said, just because he requests a trade, that doesn't mean they have to trade him.

Joe, or whoever, how much does it cost to exercise that 5th year option? And is it correct to assume doing that makes his trade value higher?

I don't want to see Love on the field unless or until the Packers are mathematically out of it. Then, grudgingly, I'd say play him - mainly to showcase him for a trade. On the other hand, if he did stay around until Rodgers is gone - a LONG time, I very much hope, he has shown enough to maybe be the successor.

5th year option for Love would be about 20 million, all guaranteed. Don't know if a team has ever used 5th year option on a player and then traded him.

[sharpe1027]

Billy TURNER was so unimportant that you forgot his name hahahahaha.

And arguably, the cap had nothing to do with any of that.

Arguably? I suppose that's technically true. Not a very good argument, but here we are.

[Fritz]

If Rodgers comes back (which I think he will, he has 59.3 million reasons) for another year I'm ok with trading Love assuming they can get a decent pick for him. I don't think that will happen. Love is going to need some assurances to want to stay though -- he's been on the bench 3 years and has to be itching to play, especially with all the rumblings in social media to play him with the Packers a very very longshot to make the playoffs anyway. Thing that worries me is if they exercise the 5th year AND have Rodgers; that's a lot of cap set aside for two players, only one of whom will play.

I think Love can be an average level starter, but he's got to show a lot of improvement to make me think he's an elite QB. He hasn't had a lot of chances and I'd bet Gute/MLF want to find out if he's good as a starter in a few regular season games or not.

This is the problem - they really need to see what they've got over the last few games, but Rodgers clearly wants to play. They've put themselves in a tough spot. I wonder if they can pay Aaron Donald a little extra to break Rodgers's thumb again.

[bobblehead]

This is the problem - they really need to see what they've got over the last few games, but Rodgers clearly wants to play. They've put themselves in a tough spot. I wonder if they can pay Aaron Donald a little extra to break Rodgers's thumb again.

Again I will say, remember Ryan Grant. Guys that pull attention grabbing selfish moves usually get their way in the short run, but if management believes they can win an Owl with Love they will trade Rodgers. The window to get max value may have passed, but he is still under contract and they can force the issue. A tough spot doesn't mean they have no options.

[run pMc]

I think Wilde's story is true. You don't train like crazy your whole life to sit on the bench.

How many QB in the 2023 draft are better than Love? Would he be the #2 or #3 ranked QB in this class? He's about the same age as Kenny Pickett, so he's still young and has benefitted from being the backup. He's probably getting past the point of riding the pine -- he either has to play and prove if he's a starter or a backup, probably for another team. Would be nice to see him play and know what they have... I suspect they know from practices, but practices vs. games is a different story. I want to see him play under live fire. Hopefully he gets to play at least the last two games, but honestly the "mathematically eliminated" quote from Rodgers could mean Love never sees the field... a 0.1% chance of making the playoffs is still a chance.

Being able to exercise the 5th year option is a nice selling point for a team -- gives the team more time to evaluate and negotiate a long-term extension. If they want to keep Love AND Rodgers, it's going to be very difficult.

Would you take Indy's R2 pick for Love if they offered it?

[texaspackerbacker]

I doubt it would be that difficult to keep both. Talk of trading Rodgers is all out bonehead STUPID. Yes, I would take Indy's second for Love - in a heartbeat.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Again I will say, remember Ryan Grant. Guys that pull attention grabbing selfish moves usually get their way in the short run, but if management believes they can win an Owl with Love they will trade Rodgers. The window to get max value may have passed, but he is still under contract and they can force the issue. A tough spot doesn't mean they have no options.

What about Ryan Grant? I don’t recall Handsome Grant being a “attention grabbing selfish” diva.

Grant was already 25 when he was acquired by the Polar Bear prior to the 2007 season. With the great Deshawn Wynn, Packers couldn’t run the rock til Grant’s beakout game on Monday Night Football against the Broncos. Eventually earned a 4 years $30M contract. Injury ruined his Super Bowl season, but the dude rushed for 1,200+ yards twice. Played out his contract; was not re-signed b/c the Packers felt he was too old. Eventually made his way back to Green Bay for another season.

Grant was nothing but a class act. Fast; was a home run threat each time he touched the rock. Did I mention that the dude was handsome?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

5th year option for Love would be about 20 million, all guaranteed. Don't know if a team has ever used 5th year option on a player and then traded him.

Love’s still under contract for at least one more season. No need to execute the 5th year option. If Butte doesn’t return in 24, tag Love. If Butte wins MVP again in 23 and returns, let love walk. If Love proves to be legit as a free agent, Pack will get a nice compensation pick for him (2-3 rounder).

[run pMc]

They have to make a decision by May 2023 on the fifth year option for Love. A little over 5 months from now -- that's the deadline.

[Fritz]

I doubt it would be that difficult to keep both. Talk of trading Rodgers is all out bonehead STUPID. Yes, I would take Indy's second for Love - in a heartbeat.

Packers would be better off right now had they traded Rodgers last offseason. They'd have a boatload of picks and would know by know if Love is the guy going forward. They'd be way ahead of where they are right now, in terms of the organization.

They should STILL trade Rodgers after next June 1. He's toast. Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on.

[Joemailman]

I doubt it would be that difficult to keep both. Talk of trading Rodgers is all out bonehead STUPID. Yes, I would take Indy's second for Love - in a heartbeat.

A lot of people said the same thing about trading Favre in 2008. And Favre was coming off a better year than Rodgers is having this year. Yet 3 years later Rodgers was the Super Bowl MVP and Favre was out of football.

[texaspackerbacker]

Packers would be better off right now had they traded Rodgers last offseason. They'd have a boatload of picks and would know by know if Love is the guy going forward. They'd be way ahead of where they are right now, in terms of the organization.

They should STILL trade Rodgers after next June 1. He's toast. Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on.

That's just wrong. Aside from the fact that there is still a chance this season, the Packers will still be right there at the top assuming Rodgers is still the QB next year and well beyond that. If Rodgers is gone, mediocrity and the middle of the pack is the high end estimate for the foreseeable future - with Love or anybody else we'd have a chance to get other than Rodgers.

I say again, trading Rodgers last summer, next summer, ever would be all out idiotic - and that's for reasons above and beyond the contract/dead money thing.

And Joe, at the time of the Favre trade, 3 things: Rodgers is way better now than Favre in his last Packer year, Love is nowhere near as good now as Rodgers was then, and the dead money assbite from trading Favre was nowhere near what Rodgers' is now.

[Teamcheez1]

Favre’s last year with GB (2007):

4155 yds 28 TD 15 Int QB Rating 95.7

AR (so far in 2022)
2864 yds 22 TD 9 Int. QB Rating. 92.4

They look about the same in this comparison. As far as longevity, I think it’s no sure thing that AR will do better next year.

[George Cumby]

Packers would be better off right now had they traded Rodgers last offseason. They'd have a boatload of picks and would know by know if Love is the guy going forward. They'd be way ahead of where they are right now, in terms of the organization.

They should STILL trade Rodgers after next June 1. He's toast. Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on.

THIS.

[Joemailman]

Favre’s last year with GB (2007):

4155 yds 28 TD 15 Int QB Rating 95.7

AR (so far in 2022)
2864 yds 22 TD 9 Int. QB Rating. 92.4

They look about the same in this comparison. As far as longevity, I think it’s no sure thing that AR will do better next year.

Come on. It's easier to pass now because of the way quarterbacks and receivers are protected from hard contact. Favre was 6th in both passer rating and QBR in 2007. Rodgers is 13th and 28th.

[run pMc]

Favre's last year (2007) was the year that ended with the bad INT in that brutally cold NFCCG OT loss to NYG. Favre basically said "fuck it, I'm cold and throwing this no matter what".
The next year they went 6-10 with Rodgers. A lot of people were complaining that GB made a mistake.

As for this year, Rodgers has not been as good as Favre was in 2007. Not even close. That year the offense had numerous 30+ point games and went 13-3 and looked like a SB contender. This team hasn't played a single game that tells me they are worthy of the playoffs or contenders. It's been a good half of football here or there, along with occasionally beating up on a shitty Bears team.

I can understand why they gave Rodgers the extension -- he wanted one and was coming off back to back MVP seasons. I don't know many sane non-homers who didn't think the offense would take time to figure itself out with no Adams and 2-3 rookie WRs. I wasn't expecting another 13 win season, but they were still the NFCN favorites. I was expecting the defense to play better, and win (or keep them in) a few games. They haven't done that enough, and the defense is both overall and individually worse this year.

Yes Rodgers has been hurt, and yes the early OL with Hanson-Newman was bad. They were supposed to lean on the run game and forgot it (or RPO'd out of it). The things that have been most troubling to me are the poor (or lack of) reads, and his accuracy and zip aren't what they were 5 years ago. No surprise - dude is approaching 40. I think it's possible Rodgers has a better year next year. He needs to go back to working thru progressions and working on his footwork as well.

It's likely he's the QB for GB and they try to "run it back" as they have the last few years. Thing is, to keep doing that they need to rack up more on the cap space credit card each year... so Rodgers will have to do it with less proven talent each year as he eats up more cap space. Meanwhile they have a younger, cheaper QB on the bench that they need to make a decision on.

If a coach is concerned with the current team and the next game, then a GM is concerned with the roster construction and long term. Extending Rodgers focused on the former at the expense of the latter, which makes me wonder if Murphy stepped in to intervene or if assurances were made in 2020-2021.

The fact the Rodgers is paid like a top 5 QB but isn't playing anywhere near one is a problem. Next year is it for him one way or the other... I don't think he will be mentally or physically able to play up to his own standards atter the 2023 season. Father Time gets everyone. Personally, I wouldn't trade him unless someone made a knockout offer. If Rodgers is back, I'd consider giving him a quarter of preseason time so he gets used to being in a game and at least preseason speed. Say what you want about preseason games, but this year it took Rodgers a few games to look like a quality QB.

In the meantime, I'd name Love the starter for the last two games of this season to see what to do with him for the future.

[run pMc]

Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on

The list of QB with even "good" (not great) years is very short.
Favre, Manning, Rivers, Testaverde, Brees all did not look good their final years. Seems like just yesterday we were joking about Brees arm strength.

Brady is the exception to QB arguments, not the rule.
Assuming Rodgers will be another exception is betting on long odds. This year's performance does little to suggest he'll beat those odds.

[George Cumby]

The Divisional Game against SF last year, Rodgers looked like Favre in his final game against the Giants, old, cold and disinterested.

[bobblehead]

What about Ryan Grant? I don’t recall Handsome Grant being a “attention grabbing selfish” diva.

Grant was already 25 when he was acquired by the Polar Bear prior to the 2007 season. With the great Deshawn Wynn, Packers couldn’t run the rock til Grant’s beakout game on Monday Night Football against the Broncos. Eventually earned a 4 years $30M contract. Injury ruined his Super Bowl season, but the dude rushed for 1,200+ yards twice. Played out his contract; was not re-signed b/c the Packers felt he was too old. Eventually made his way back to Green Bay for another season.

Grant was nothing but a class act. Fast; was a home run threat each time he touched the rock. Did I mention that the dude was handsome?

He held out after basically doing nothing in the NFL for 2 years and then having like 10 good games with us. I said at the time TT wouldn't forget it. After he played out the deal everyone here was convinced they would bring him back. I was the lone voice saying he was gone.

If the packers think Love is for real Rodgers MIGHT get one more year.....but he also might be traded/cut next year before the season starts.

[Fritz]

That's just wrong. Aside from the fact that there is still a chance this season, the Packers will still be right there at the top assuming Rodgers is still the QB next year and well beyond that. If Rodgers is gone, mediocrity and the middle of the pack is the high end estimate for the foreseeable future - with Love or anybody else we'd have a chance to get other than Rodgers.

I say again, trading Rodgers last summer, next summer, ever would be all out idiotic - and that's for reasons above and beyond the contract/dead money thing.

And Joe, at the time of the Favre trade, 3 things: Rodgers is way better now than Favre in his last Packer year, Love is nowhere near as good now as Rodgers was then, and the dead money assbite from trading Favre was nowhere near what Rodgers' is now.


As usual, your boner for Rodgers blinds you to the truth. Have you, uh, looked at the Packers' record this year? With your boy as the starter? "Mediocre" would be an upgrade from where they are now.

Now you can cue up the excuses, which I am sure you will, yet you also have argued an offensive line isn't that important because Rodgers is so good. So throw that excuse out. The defense sucks? Sure. But they've sucked in the past and had that ol' 10 - 6 record. Special teams? No worse than last year, maybe a tick better. Running backs? Best tandem in GB since McArthur Lane and John Brockington. Recievers? You also have said they don't matter so much since Rodgers is so damn good.

So maybe, just maybe, Rodgers is losing his skills as he ages, and it would've been best to trade him last offseason, and, since they didn't, maybe they ought to trade him after June 1 of next year.
deesaaQ

[texaspackerbacker]

Can you seriously claim Rodgers is primarily responsible for the shitty record - with Barry's underperforming D, injuries, and the WR situation for most of theseason? And whatever less than GOAT-like performance by Rodgers likely is due to the thumb injury rather than age. I'd say even with all of that, he has still performed better than all but a handfull of QBs. The decreased stats also are the result of an improved run game.

If Rodgers is bad the rest of the way - with a closer to healthy thumb and Watson and Doubs and Lazard and Cobb all apparently healthy, then maybe you've got a point about him deteriorating, but I doubt that happens.

[Teamcheez1]

I think you’ve got it backwards. Only a handful of QB’s didn’t perform better than Rodgers this year.

[MadtownPacker]

Texxy, I would say Rodgers is responsible for two losses. That alone is the difference in the season besides the other malfunctions of the squad. We have all seen Rodgers missing passes, throwing passes in the dirt and looking noodle armed sometimes. I don’t think his thumb because it’s not really the accuracy it’s just the overall strength. Somewhere along the line Rodgers got a old on us. I’m not even sure how it happened. 20 years from now will probably blame Olivia Munn.

I can see by your second paragraph you are beginning to prepare yourself for the inevitable. I know it is hard mi compa but we will have to put ole Yeller down someday. Bobble will be here for you to tell he is an ingrate. You will be partially correct.

[MadtownPacker]

I think you’ve got it backwards. Only a handful of QB’s didn’t perform better than Rodgers this year.
The one that matters, Love, also performed better than him.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

He held out after basically doing nothing in the NFL for 2 years and then having like 10 good games with us. I said at the time TT wouldn't forget it. After he played out the deal everyone here was convinced they would bring him back. I was the lone voice saying he was gone.

If the packers think Love is for real Rodgers MIGHT get one more year.....but he also might be traded/cut next year before the season starts.

Grant was the Pack’s only legitimate rushing attack in 2007, rushing for 956 yards and 8 TD, most of the productions came after he took over as starter after the Broncos game. Rushed for 1203 in 2008. That’s “basically nothing”?

I don’t recall Grant holding out, but if he indeed did, that doesn’t necessarily mean he was a “attention grabbing selfish” ass. Would proud, pompous Bobblehead accept a gig paying $50,000/yr when his education and work history indicate that he’s worth $500,000/yr?

Btw: Grant was 29 when his 4 year contract ended. NFL decision makers are agists. 29 is greybread for a RB, at least in the eyes of NFL decision makers. Thus, Polar Bear allowed Grant to walk the walk of life.

[bobblehead]

Can you seriously claim Rodgers is primarily responsible for the shitty record

Why not, you have claimed for a decade he is the ONLY reason for the good records.

[bobblehead]

Grant was the Pack’s only legitimate rushing attack in 2007, rushing for 956 yards and 8 TD, most of the productions came after he took over as starter after the Broncos game. Rushed for 1203 in 2008. That’s “basically nothing”?

I don’t recall Grant holding out, but if he indeed did, that doesn’t necessarily mean he was a “attention grabbing selfish” ass. Would proud, pompous Bobblehead accept a gig paying $50,000/yr when his education and work history indicate that he’s worth $500,000/yr?

Btw: Grant was 29 when his 4 year contract ended. NFL decision makers are agists. 29 is greybread for a RB, at least in the eyes of NFL decision makers. Thus, Polar Bear allowed Grant to walk the walk of life.

I'll 'grant' you that you're mostly dead on. At the time we were split on the holdout. Most sided with Grant, I said he needed to put in an actual full season before holding out (technically he wasn't holding out, he wasn't under contract, he was exclusive rights). TT also figured he needed to do it for another year before earning that big contract and when his usefulness to GB ended, the packers showed him the same loyalty he showed them.

Rodgers usefulness is nearing the end. If the brass feels good about Love they could easily show him the same loyalty he showed when he leveraged his situation to completely redo the deal he had 4? years left on.

[run pMc]

I thought Grant was a good player. Don't recall a holdout or contract issue, but I know they had Starks by the time Grant was gone, and you don't sign RBs to multi-year contracts at age 29. History shows the production falls off on RBs around age 30, and Ted was a big believer that it's better to let a player go a year early than keep than a year too long. Could argue Gute doesn't do that enough.

FWIW, I remember thinking Grant probably still had something in the tank -- I don't know that he had a lot of wear on his treads -- but they likely just wanted to go younger and cheaper

[bobblehead]

I thought Grant was a good player. Don't recall a holdout or contract issue, but I know they had Starks by the time Grant was gone, and you don't sign RBs to multi-year contracts at age 29. History shows the production falls off on RBs around age 30, and Ted was a big believer that it's better to let a player go a year early than keep than a year too long. Could argue Gute doesn't do that enough.

FWIW, I remember thinking Grant probably still had something in the tank -- I don't know that he had a lot of wear on his treads -- but they likely just wanted to go younger and cheaper

If I was super saavy at digging up old threads I'd like to dig that one up. Hoosier (who butts heads with me in FYI) actually posted my avatar and called me a genius when they parted ways with Grant. I would like to see the thread because some of the details escape me.

[run pMc]

The one that matters, Love, also performed better than him.

Rodgers has been outplayed by the opposing QB on numerous occasions this season. Being outplayed by Love had to annoy him too.

Rodgers has not been a top 10 QB using the eye test, or basic or advanced stats. I'd argue he's closer to a top-of-3rd-quartile QB. Is he playing better than Goff this season? Cousins? Look around the NFL - Brock flipping Purdy has played better than Rodgers.

Football is a team game, I wouldn't say he is solely responsible for their record. He contributes mightily to a win or a loss by the nature of the NFL and being a QB. Is it a stretch to say the team goes as he goes?

[MadtownPacker]

If I was super saavy at digging up old threads I'd like to dig that one up. Hoosier (who butts heads with me in FYI) actually posted my avatar and called me a genius when they parted ways with Grant. I would like to see the thread because some of the details escape me.
I tried to find it but there are too many threads that you called yourself a genius. :lol:

[MadtownPacker]

Rodgers has been outplayed by the opposing QB on numerous occasions this season. Being outplayed by Love had to annoy him too.

Rodgers has not been a top 10 QB using the eye test, or basic or advanced stats. I'd argue he's closer to a top-of-3rd-quartile QB. Is he playing better than Goff this season? Cousins? Look around the NFL - Brock flipping Purdy has played better than Rodgers.

Football is a team game, I wouldn't say he is solely responsible for their record. He contributes mightily to a win or a loss by the nature of the NFL and being a QB. Is it a stretch to say the team goes as he goes?The Purdy showing from the last two weeks has only intensified the curiosity to see a young quarterback come in and have no fear of a defense. Getting the team to rally behind his energy is what I would like to see with the Packers. Last night you could see it on the Niners faces, they believe they’re going to the Super Bowl now. When Love got in his energy was obvious also. Maybe it is the human nature of being excited by something new but it translated to the field.

[texaspackerbacker]

Texxy, I would say Rodgers is responsible for two losses. That alone is the difference in the season besides the other malfunctions of the squad. We have all seen Rodgers missing passes, throwing passes in the dirt and looking noodle armed sometimes. I don’t think his thumb because it’s not really the accuracy it’s just the overall strength. Somewhere along the line Rodgers got a old on us. I’m not even sure how it happened. 20 years from now will probably blame Olivia Munn.

I can see by your second paragraph you are beginning to prepare yourself for the inevitable. I know it is hard mi compa but we will have to put ole Yeller down someday. Bobble will be here for you to tell he is an ingrate. You will be partially correct.

2 out of 8? Yeah, I'll buy that, and playing injured most of the season too.

That second paragraph? You know me - I will acknowledge the other side's view, then finish up by saying I doubt it hahahahaha. I refer you to my post about Faith in FYI.

[bobblehead]

I tried to find it but there are too many threads that you called yourself a genius. :lol:

I should be offended or feel insulted, but I don't. Aside from Alan Babre I'll put my genius against anyone.

But I dish it, I can take it. And I need you to reality check me sometimes. Lord knows the guys in FYI aren't up to the task.

[texaspackerbacker]

A true genius would be able to spell Barbre right hahahahaha.

[bobblehead]

A true genius would be able to spell Barbre right hahahahaha.

Not true....only a fool spells his name that way. And that goes more to memory of insignificant things. I leave that to you.

[MadtownPacker]

Not true....only a fool spells his name that way. And that goes more to memory of insignificant things. I leave that to you.
Dammmmn Tex, take it easy!! You leveled Bobble to the point he had to come back with a "I know you are but what am I" kinda reply. :lol:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Ne5Lb2SiFHg/SLWli_APtOI/AAAAAAAAP2o/TLKA5IHpv7U/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/pee+wee.png

[MadtownPacker]

I should be offended or feel insulted, but I don't. Aside from Alan Babre I'll put my genius against anyone.

But I dish it, I can take it. And I need you to reality check me sometimes. Lord knows the guys in FYI aren't up to the task.We all gotta check ourselves before we wreck ourselves at time.

[texaspackerbacker]

Why not, you have claimed for a decade he is the ONLY reason for the good records.

You're confusing ONLY with PRIMARY.

[texaspackerbacker]

Not true....only a fool spells his name that way. And that goes more to memory of insignificant things. I leave that to you.

Just trying to carry on the legacy of dear departed Mraynrand hahahaha.

[Fritz]

The Purdy showing from the last two weeks has only intensified the curiosity to see a young quarterback come in and have no fear of a defense. Getting the team to rally behind his energy is what I would like to see with the Packers. Last night you could see it on the Niners faces, they believe they’re going to the Super Bowl now. When Love got in his energy was obvious also. Maybe it is the human nature of being excited by something new but it translated to the field.

That's why ol'Aaron keeps cycling through new girlfriends every couple of years.

[NewsBruin]

"We've been together a while, and I see you as more than a friend, or even a casual relationship. I see us as family."

"Oh, Aaron!"

"Which means I'm cutting off all contact and erasing you from my phone. Bye now."

[Fritz]

Good one!

[MadtownPacker]

That's why ol'Aaron keeps cycling through new girlfriends every couple of years.
Let’s all be honest, we feel like Rodgers has underperformed when it comes to the ladies. Especially being from California you think he would’ve gotten a hot Latina or some instagrams model at one point or another. He picks all these homely chicks that are barely hot. Yeah he is a funky, hippy looking dude but his wallet isn’t. Homeboy was Super Bowl champ and league MVP for fucks sake! He need to go hang out with Leonardo to see how it’s done. Shit at this point Pete Davidson could teach him a thing or two about making some deep completions!