Rodgers out of the insider plans??? Told to keep quiet...

[packers11]

POSTED 8:59 p.m. EDT, March 15, 2007

RODGERS TOLD NOT TO COMMENT ON TRADE

Although Packers G.M. Ted Thompson describes as "wild speculation" a report from Mike Felger of the Boston Herald of a coming trade between the Packers and Raiders that would send quarterback Aaron Rodgers to Oakland for receiver Randy Moss, Jason Wilde of the Wisconsin State Journal has dug up some details that, to us, make it seem more likely than not that the deal will go down, eventually.

Writes Wilde: "Rodgers said when reached on his cell phone that he had been advised not to comment. But Rodgers did say no one from the Packers called him Thursday to reassure him he was not going to be traded, and that the only calls he received were from 'interested friends.'"

Although it appears that the deal isn't going to go down in the immediate future, it looks like it's just a matter of time

[packers11]

fishy story... NO one on the packers assured him... VERY weird...

This story only gets weirder by the minute...

[The Shadow]

Don't believe that the Packers trade a 1st round QB that has not even yet had a chance to demonstrate his skills.
The rumors that include him as part of a 'package' all sound fishy.

[Rastak]

Don't believe that the Packers trade a 1st round QB that has not even yet had a chance to demonstrate his skills.
The rumors that include him as part of a 'package' all sound fishy.


Where there is smoke there is fire......it's obvious something is going on behind the scenes......I said the same thing when Harris missed OTA's and my good friend on the forum said "where there is no smoke there is no fire"....LOL....I got the last laugh so to speak.


All joking aside, I'm guessing the deal is being worked on still and it must be close....I would also guess it could still fall through if Randy hasn't agreed on a restructured package. I can't see TT paying 9 mil for a guy declining.....I also can't see Randy saying, "sure I'll take a pay cut!"

[SD GB fan]

imagine the money the press makes out of all this. we hate rumors; they love it, eat it right up.

[Joemailman]

If McCarthy regards Ingle Martin highly, they may prefer trading Rodgers over giving up a 1st day draft pick.

[MadtownPacker]

If I was Rodgers I would be in favor of being traded cuz at this point he isnt gonna be the starting QB for the Pack for likely 2 more season. By then his contract is up right?

By going to the raiders he has a chance to start and doesnt have to worry about filling the shoes of a living legend.

[Joemailman]

Plus, he gets to throw to Calvin Johnson.

Mad, what's with the 139 X 139 avatar. I thought that was against the rules!

[retailguy]

Plus, he gets to throw to Calvin Johnson.

Mad, what's with the 139 X 139 avatar. I thought that was against the rules!

Rules don't apply to the "Godfather".

[Guiness]

Anyone get the feeling this might not happen just because TT is getting his back up over the rumors?

He can prove them all wrong and make them doubt their sources just by not doing it...

[MJZiggy]

That would be a crazy thing to do if he really wants Moss. Yeah, he'd get the last laugh, but to pass on a receiver he believes can help the team to spite a bunch of reporters would be nuts.

[Guiness]

I know, it would be nuts. But I can't shake the idea.

How big of an ego does TT have? By his actions, it's obvious he prides himself in playing it close to the vest. How deep would it cut him if these Rodgers for Moss rumors were bang on?

[ND72]

Rodgers has been told to stay quite cause he's been working on his music career :lol:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=4am_XNob174


don't make fun of the song, it's one of my favorites....but Jeremy Camp looks like Rodgers in this video I think.

[retailguy]

I know, it would be nuts. But I can't shake the idea.

How big of an ego does TT have? By his actions, it's obvious he prides himself in playing it close to the vest. How deep would it cut him if these Rodgers for Moss rumors were bang on?


I just don't see this trade happening. Everything Ted has done indicates that he doesn't care how long the plan takes, or that he's willing to deviate from it.

the closest comparison to this deal is the signing of Woodson. But, I truly can't see him parting with a draft pick. I can see him trading Rodgers, he doesn't get "attached" to players. He also believes that ANYONE is replaceable.

making this trade is the first indication I've seen that he wants to win now. But if that's the case, why get rid of Green over $2m bucks. That's like "happy meal" money.

I just don't understand it.

You bring in that much money and firepower with an uncertain run game? It just doesn't make sense. This trade just doesn't work in what we know about Ted's plan. It doesn't seem to match what we know about Ted either.

[pbmax]

If McCarthy regards Ingle Martin highly, they may prefer trading Rodgers over giving up a 1st day draft pick.

If McCarthy regards Martin that highly after what little I saw, he needs to be committed to Favre's favorite treatment facility. :)

[CaliforniaCheez]

In practical terms, What comment by Aaron Rodgers could be helpful? None.

There is no reason to say anything about some hoax trade.

[Merlin]

Don't believe that the Packers trade a 1st round QB that has not even yet had a chance to demonstrate his skills.
The rumors that include him as part of a 'package' all sound fishy.

Nothing "fishy" about Rogers. He was a first round mistake and believe it or not, TT, Sherman and McCarthy were/are not impressed with Rogers in any way. What they tell the media and what is reality is seldom ever the same.

Rogers for Moss seems to me like a very fair trade. We get rid of someone who has shown NOTHING in two seasons. He has had ample opportunity to show his skills. Playing in a regular season game is not when you "show your skills". Playing in a regular season game is a reward for "showing your skills" during all other facets. He doesn't practice well, his pre-season performances were a joke and he has shown that he can't read defenses, can't throw well and can't lead the team when called upon. For that we get a player that everyone says is on the down side of his career. Seems more then fair. We won't get anything for Rogers. There is a reason we have him, EVER OTHER SCOUT IN THE NFL DIDN'T WANT HIM IN THE FIRST ROUND. They knew he was a joke and the only reason TT took him was because he thought he could get Favre out sooner.

[Scott Campbell]

They knew he was a joke and the only reason TT took him was because he thought he could get Favre out sooner.


So now they took a crappy player on purpose just to get Brett to retire?

:P

I guess the consipiracy theories have officially reached Lee Harvey Oswald proportions.

[Packnut]

Rodgers was a stupid pick that was not needed at the time. Had Favre retired at the time, there were quite a few FA QB's that could have filled the void. That's why I laugh every time someone here posts how great a draft guy Teddy is.

Frank Gore picked in the early 3rd was a much better pick than Rodgers in the late 1st. :idea:

[Merlin]

They knew he was a joke and the only reason TT took him was because he thought he could get Favre out sooner.


So now they took a crappy player on purpose just to get Brett to retire?

:P

I guess the consipiracy theories have officially reached Lee Harvey Oswald proportions.

Don't misunderstand the logic behind taking an over-hyped QB in the first round. I am sure that TT THOUGHT Rogers was a steal, however as I stated, there was a reason he fell and a reason Alex Smith was taken before him. TT didn't do his homework, if he did he would have looked at WHY other teams passed.

And BTW, Oswald was a scapegoat. Never let reality interfere with your logic my friend.

[ND72]

All of you are missing the real reason A-Rod fell....no team NEEDED a QB. Did we NEED? no...but what if Brett had retired? Don't give me the bs free agent QB stuff...you need one of your own. It was well viewed at draft time if either Rodgers or Smith wasn't drafted by #10, he would fall to Green Bay...everyone reported that. from 11-23, everyone had a set QB. We needed to look to the future just in case. So don't give me all this BS...TT was covering his butt incase his Franchise QB quit on him.

[Scott Campbell]

Frank Gore picked in the early 3rd was a much better pick than Rodgers in the late 1st. :idea:


Gee, do you think so? Perhaps Barry Sanders would have been a better pick than Tony Mandarich?

[Packnut]

All of you are missing the real reason A-Rod fell....no team NEEDED a QB. Did we NEED? no...but what if Brett had retired? Don't give me the bs free agent QB stuff...you need one of your own. It was well viewed at draft time if either Rodgers or Smith wasn't drafted by #10, he would fall to Green Bay...everyone reported that. from 11-23, everyone had a set QB. We needed to look to the future just in case. So don't give me all this BS...TT was covering his butt incase his Franchise QB quit on him.

Rodgers fell because several GM's believed he was a product of the system he played in. There was over-whelming proof that similiar QB's in that system did not translate their success into the NFL level. Good Lord, every "expert" and their brother wrote about that. As far as needing one of your own, tell that to the Saints just to name 1 example.

As for Favre quitting, may-be drafting someone who could have been viewed to HELP him , might have been a better idea than drafting someone to replace him! :shock:

Arguing about Rodgers is point-less until there comes some tangible proof one way or another. Right now it's nothing but opinion............

[Packnut]

Frank Gore picked in the early 3rd was a much better pick than Rodgers in the late 1st. :idea:


Gee, do you think so? Perhaps Barry Sanders would have been a better pick than Tony Mandarich?

Perhaps.

[ND72]

Rodgers fell because several GM's believed he was a product of the system he played in. There was over-whelming proof that similiar QB's in that system did not translate their success into the NFL level. Good Lord, every "expert" and their brother wrote about that. As far as needing one of your own, tell that to the Saints just to name 1 example.



I remember lots of articles also written about Smith being a product of hte system as well....AND, lots of people have said the same thing about Leak..."productive QB with the same skills as Alex Smith, but he is a product of the "Urban" system"....So does that mean Leak is gonna be decent as well? PLUS, I still don't think Alex Smith is that good. He had about 5 "good" games last year that I can remember. But you're right, nobody can say anything about Rodgers, because we don't know yet. BUT...lots of "experts" on these forums already seem to know how good he is.

[retailguy]

Rodgers for Moss is probably fair, but why do you want the headache?

It's really funny how everyone here talks about Green being on the "wrong side of his career", yet Moss is "ready to step in".

Yeah, I get the differences between RB & WR, please don't discount on that basis, but look at Moss versus Green. Also, didn't Emmitt Smith play well into his 30's? there's another guy who was always ready to play and always in shape. He lengthened his career by a few years with that mindset, didn't he?

Malcontent who takes plays off by his own admission versus a guy who was always in shape and gave his all every play.

I'm supposed to believe that Thompson wants the malcontent but didn't want the team player? I just can't see this trade. If it goes down, I'll really question if Ted has a plan, and how this puzzle piece fits in.

Everything about the acquisition of Moss would indicate "winning NOW". Everything about Thompson indicates "follow the plan EVEN IF you don't win now..."

I'm really puzzled by this.

[woodbuck27]

I'll never forget the moment that Ted Thompson chose Aaron Rodgers.

I felt it certainly was a possibility,seeing him fall. That TT might choose him, despite the fact that Craig Nall did very well as a backup (and I don't want to open up an old can of worms here. . LOL.)

I felt we had more needs than at QB ie on the OL. I didn't believe before the Packers drafted Aaron Rodgers that any Brett Favre retirement issue was a top concern.

Was Ted Thompson prepared for a possible Aaron Rodgers free fall? I'm thinking that was a surprize to Ted Thompson on draft day. In any case this brings into question whether or not the Packers had adequately scouted Aaron Rodgers?

To cut to the chase. Isn't t that moot today? Should the debate be based on his value to the Packers based on his progress to date?

I feel even this doesn't require attention because he's not going anywhere.

Sticking with the rumor a better question might be:

Would Ted Thompson trade his first number one draft pick for a 30 year old WR, with signs he's on the decline, with a very high price tag and a need of considerable guranteed money in a 4-5 year contract?

I say NO !

If I was an NFL GM. I'd want at least a third round draft pick fr. Oakland to take Randy Moss and his large contract off their hands and books.I wouldn't give up anyone from my roster unless that move certainly helped me balance my books.

Now KGB comes to mind but not Aaron Rodgers.

[Packnut]

Rodgers fell because several GM's believed he was a product of the system he played in. There was over-whelming proof that similiar QB's in that system did not translate their success into the NFL level. Good Lord, every "expert" and their brother wrote about that. As far as needing one of your own, tell that to the Saints just to name 1 example.



I remember lots of articles also written about Smith being a product of hte system as well....AND, lots of people have said the same thing about Leak..."productive QB with the same skills as Alex Smith, but he is a product of the "Urban" system"....So does that mean Leak is gonna be decent as well? PLUS, I still don't think Alex Smith is that good. He had about 5 "good" games last year that I can remember. But you're right, nobody can say anything about Rodgers, because we don't know yet. BUT...lots of "experts" on these forums already seem to know how good he is.


Yeah, but the difference in your analysis is that Tedford had a track record when it came to his system QBs in the NFL. Meyer did not have that same record so how can you compare the 2? Smith look's like he's turned the corner and I think his play this season will prove that.

As for evaluating Rodgers, we've seen him play in pre-season and you can make a minor judgement based on that. He has "happy feet" and like most
in-experienced QB's locks onto his primart target. He just does'nt seem to do any one thing well.

I thought Campbell was a better QB than Rodgers. Had a better arm and his pocket presence was a bit more pollished. I gues we'll find out about him this season.

[ND72]

As for evaluating Rodgers, we've seen him play in pre-season and you can make a minor judgement based on that. He has "happy feet" and like most
in-experienced QB's locks onto his primart target. He just does'nt seem to do any one thing well.



So lets do all of our evaluating on preseason games. That whole 1-2 quarters a game sure shows me a lot. Smith had happy feet his entire first season. it's called experience, of which rodgers has non. and to say you can see things from preseason games and whatever, is ludacris.

[Scott Campbell]

I'm really puzzled by this.

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~btribble/stupid-guy.jpg

[The Shadow]

Don't believe that the Packers trade a 1st round QB that has not even yet had a chance to demonstrate his skills.
The rumors that include him as part of a 'package' all sound fishy.

Nothing "fishy" about Rogers. He was a first round mistake and believe it or not, TT, Sherman and McCarthy were/are not impressed with Rogers in any way. What they tell the media and what is reality is seldom ever the same.

Rogers for Moss seems to me like a very fair trade. We get rid of someone who has shown NOTHING in two seasons. He has had ample opportunity to show his skills. Playing in a regular season game is not when you "show your skills". Playing in a regular season game is a reward for "showing your skills" during all other facets. He doesn't practice well, his pre-season performances were a joke and he has shown that he can't read defenses, can't throw well and can't lead the team when called upon. We won't get anything for Rogers. There is a reason we have him, EVER OTHER SCOUT IN THE NFL DIDN'T WANT HIM IN THE FIRST ROUND. They knew he was a joke and the only reason TT took him was because he thought he could get Favre out sooner.

Let me get this straight :
a.Playing in a regular season game - with your starters against opponent starters - is NOT when you "show your skills".
b. Rodgers can't read defense, throw well, or lead a team. Based on, I assume, the many chances he never had....?
c. Everyone, including his own mother, hates the player most scouts had rated #1 or #2 at the QB position. The scouts all thought that pretending to think highly of his abilities was a terrific joke to play on the Packers.
d. Ted Thompson wanted to "get Favre out". In other words, Teddy, from the first, has been trying to get himself fired by wrecking the Packers in his secret, burning vendetta against Brett Favre.

Thanks for the concise, logical analysis.[/i]

[motife]

what does this guy know about Aaron Rodgers?

He calls him a "gel-haired prick" and "the biggest douche bag in the NFL".

What evidence is there for this charge?

http://bugsandcranks.com/milwaukee-brewers/a-pictures-worth-a-thousand-words/

"Boston media sources are reporting that it’s all but a done deal that Randy Moss will be traded to the Pack in exchange for ”the gel-haired prick” a.k.a. Aaron Rodgers, and a 7th round pick in 2008. Oh yeah, we also fill another need by getting Raiders tight end Courtney Anderson as part of the deal. I know he’s no pro-bowler, but this might be one of the best deals the Pack has made since Old Man Wolf traded for Favre.

Say what you will about Moss, who is perhaps best known for mooning the Lambeau faithful during one of the lowest moments in franchise history, but I get chills thinking about Moss, Driver and Jennings lining up with Favre for one last hurrah. When Koren “Smokey” Robinson gets back from his suspension, it’s gonna get even more sick. So to recap, the Pack gets one of the greatest receivers in the history of the league, while getting rid of one of the biggest douchebags in the league."

[Scott Campbell]

I remember lots of articles also written about Smith being a product of hte system as well....AND, lots of people have said the same thing about Leak..."productive QB with the same skills as Alex Smith, but he is a product of the "Urban" system"....So does that mean Leak is gonna be decent as well?


Urban didn't install the same offense at FL that he ran at Utah.

[ND72]

I remember lots of articles also written about Smith being a product of hte system as well....AND, lots of people have said the same thing about Leak..."productive QB with the same skills as Alex Smith, but he is a product of the "Urban" system"....So does that mean Leak is gonna be decent as well?


Urban didn't install the same offense at FL that he ran at Utah.

In an interview on espn this past year, I vividly remember him saying "we put in a mini version of the Utah offense so Chris Leak could learn it quick enough to run it in his 2 years, but the full offense will be in for Teabow, and that every year they've installed little by little more. He has in fact installed the same offense. He lives on that offense. He's ran it for 15 years, why would he change now?

[Patler]

For two years BEFORE Rodgers was drafted, the "experts'" listed QB as one of the Packers biggest draft needs. There were rumors every year of them trading to move up to pick a QB. Have you all forgotten that Losman was pretty well a forgone conclusion to be drafted by the Packers until Buffalo jumped ahead of the Packers to take him? The year before there was a lot of talk about the Packers going after Chris Simms on the first day.

As for Rodgers, I don't recall a single draft expert who thought it was a bad choice. All thought it was the best for both Rodgers and the Packers. He could serve as a backup, then take over when he was ready in 2 or 3 years. As for his skills, he impressed the scouts beyond expectations at his private workout. All pretty much agreed that his workout was as good as Smith's. Many questioned his ability to throw deep until he showed that he could.

As ND said, it was predicted well before the draft that only 2 or 3 teams at most before GB would even consider taking a QB, so the chance of Rodgers or Smith falling to GB was always considered a real possibility.

As for Rodgers' "happy feet", apparently many of you do not remember the young Brett Favre (and most any young QB) who for several years as a starter would look to one receiver, then either throw to him even if he was covered or take off and run the ball. One of Favre's weaknesses for quite a while was that he did not read defenses well. It takes time.

With Favre waffling for years about his intentions, the Packers needed a fall back plan, a plan for the future. However, no QB that follows him will ever be good enough for far too many fans.

[Merlin]

Rodgers fell because several GM's believed he was a product of the system he played in. There was over-whelming proof that similiar QB's in that system did not translate their success into the NFL level. Good Lord, every "expert" and their brother wrote about that. As far as needing one of your own, tell that to the Saints just to name 1 example.



I remember lots of articles also written about Smith being a product of hte system as well....AND, lots of people have said the same thing about Leak..."productive QB with the same skills as Alex Smith, but he is a product of the "Urban" system"....So does that mean Leak is gonna be decent as well? PLUS, I still don't think Alex Smith is that good. He had about 5 "good" games last year that I can remember. But you're right, nobody can say anything about Rodgers, because we don't know yet. BUT...lots of "experts" on these forums already seem to know how good he is.

The "experts" seems to be the ones who think Rogers hasn't been given a chance. Rogers has been given EVERY opportunity to show what he has and he HAS YET to SHOW ANYTHING. Anyone who thinks that what he shows in a regular season game is proof needs to stop posting ANYTHING to do with the NFL. He did not impress in any training camp or any time he played in anything resembling a game. After two years of less then mediocrity it's time to admit it was a mistake, trade him, and move on. Craig Nall was ten times the QB Rogers was yet we parted ways with him because of Rogers. Ingle Martin HAS impressed in training camp and the very few snaps with the scrubs he has played. Rogers on the otherhand gets the first team every time he touches the ball and looks like shit. So let's keep grooming him? I don't think so. If ANY team is willing to trade us someone with Moss's talents then you TAKE IT because he won't be worth a damn if anyone ever gets to see the guy pplay a full game. We will be stuck with him and eventually have to release or cut him for NOTHING.

As ar as trading KGB for Moss, I would only do that if it did something to free up our cap which I am not to sure it would do. Otherwise, Rogers is the obvious trade here. KGB is a proven, effective pass rusher when he is only in the game limited downs. Is he over paid? Not if he get's 12-15 sacks a season he isn't. In fact, in comparison to other DE's in the league who are paid more and get less sacks, he would be under paid. It's worth keeping him IF he can get back to the DE he was before Sherman bone-headedly made him an every down DE and finaly a coach with a clue said it isn't working. I won't say "I told you so" because evidently I am no expert. Just someone who sees reality for what it is and applies logic.

[Scott Campbell]

Urban didn't install the same offense at FL that he ran at Utah.

In an interview on espn this past year, I vividly remember him saying "we put in a mini version of the Utah offense so Chris Leak could learn it quick enough to run it in his 2 years, but the full offense will be in for Teabow, and that every year they've installed little by little more. He has in fact installed the same offense. He lives on that offense. He's ran it for 15 years, why would he change now?

Well Urban was only at Utah for 2 years, so I'm not sure what the difference was between Leak's 2 years and Smith's 2 years. I watched a lot of both teams play. The mini version didn't look much like what he ran at Utah.

I feel sorry for SEC Defensive Coordinators if they get the full offense in for Teabow. Dan Mullen is going to make a helluva great coach in the very near future.

[Scott Campbell]

Urban didn't install the same offense at FL that he ran at Utah.

In an interview on espn this past year, I vividly remember him saying "we put in a mini version of the Utah offense so Chris Leak could learn it quick enough to run it in his 2 years, but the full offense will be in for Teabow, and that every year they've installed little by little more. He has in fact installed the same offense. He lives on that offense. He's ran it for 15 years, why would he change now?

Not sure where you're getting 15 years.

Years Title Location
2005-Present Head Coach Florida
2003-2004 Head Coach Utah
2001-2002 Head Coach Bowling Green
1996-2000 Wide Receivers Coach Notre Dame
1990-1995 Wide Receivers Coach & Quarterback Coach Colorado State
1988-1989 Passing Game Coach & Outside Linebacker Coach Illinois St.
1986-1987 Assistant Coach Ohio State

[The Shadow]

"The "experts" seems to be the ones who think Rogers hasn't been given a chance."

I suppose I'm an "expert", then.
Gee, I've never been accused of that before.

[The Shadow]

"Rogers has been given EVERY opportunity to show what he has and he HAS YET to SHOW ANYTHING. Anyone who thinks that what he shows in a regular season game is proof needs to stop posting ANYTHING to do with the NFL."

Damn! One minute an "expert" - then I am barred from posting anything about the NFL.

[KYPack]

The "experts" seems to be the ones who think Rogers hasn't been given a chance. Rogers has been given EVERY opportunity to show what he has and he HAS YET to SHOW ANYTHING. Anyone who thinks that what he shows in a regular season game is proof needs to stop posting ANYTHING to do with the NFL. He did not impress in any training camp or any time he played in anything resembling a game. ic.

Merlin, me boyo, you need to take a LOOOOONG pull on that Leinie you've got in yer avatar

Rodgers has never started an NFL game. This is his 3rd year. It takes time to brew a starting NFL QB. Most guys struggle at least 3 years before the light bulb goes on. Terry Bradshaw was one of the worst rated QB's of all time for his first 5 seasons. Vinny Testaverde didn't have a decent year until his 7th season.

You can go on and on, but the crux of the matter is Rodgers hasn't even gotten his chance yet. Wait until he does to pass judgement.

Second, for you to denigrate other posters for their opinion about an untested player is totally foolish.

[Partial]

Urban didn't install the same offense at FL that he ran at Utah.

In an interview on espn this past year, I vividly remember him saying "we put in a mini version of the Utah offense so Chris Leak could learn it quick enough to run it in his 2 years, but the full offense will be in for Teabow, and that every year they've installed little by little more. He has in fact installed the same offense. He lives on that offense. He's ran it for 15 years, why would he change now?

Well Urban was only at Utah for 2 years, so I'm not sure what the difference was between Leak's 2 years and Smith's 2 years. I watched a lot of both teams play. The mini version didn't look much like what he ran at Utah.

I feel sorry for SEC Defensive Coordinators if they get the full offense in for Teabow. Dan Mullen is going to make a helluva great coach in the very near future.

more like teabag. Boo gators yay badgers!

[Partial]

Rodgers fell because several GM's believed he was a product of the system he played in. There was over-whelming proof that similiar QB's in that system did not translate their success into the NFL level. Good Lord, every "expert" and their brother wrote about that. As far as needing one of your own, tell that to the Saints just to name 1 example.



I remember lots of articles also written about Smith being a product of hte system as well....AND, lots of people have said the same thing about Leak..."productive QB with the same skills as Alex Smith, but he is a product of the "Urban" system"....So does that mean Leak is gonna be decent as well? PLUS, I still don't think Alex Smith is that good. He had about 5 "good" games last year that I can remember. But you're right, nobody can say anything about Rodgers, because we don't know yet. BUT...lots of "experts" on these forums already seem to know how good he is.

The "experts" seems to be the ones who think Rogers hasn't been given a chance. Rogers has been given EVERY opportunity to show what he has and he HAS YET to SHOW ANYTHING. Anyone who thinks that what he shows in a regular season game is proof needs to stop posting ANYTHING to do with the NFL. He did not impress in any training camp or any time he played in anything resembling a game. After two years of less then mediocrity it's time to admit it was a mistake, trade him, and move on. Craig Nall was ten times the QB Rogers was yet we parted ways with him because of Rogers. Ingle Martin HAS impressed in training camp and the very few snaps with the scrubs he has played. Rogers on the otherhand gets the first team every time he touches the ball and looks like shit. So let's keep grooming him? I don't think so. If ANY team is willing to trade us someone with Moss's talents then you TAKE IT because he won't be worth a damn if anyone ever gets to see the guy pplay a full game. We will be stuck with him and eventually have to release or cut him for NOTHING.

As ar as trading KGB for Moss, I would only do that if it did something to free up our cap which I am not to sure it would do. Otherwise, Rogers is the obvious trade here. KGB is a proven, effective pass rusher when he is only in the game limited downs. Is he over paid? Not if he get's 12-15 sacks a season he isn't. In fact, in comparison to other DE's in the league who are paid more and get less sacks, he would be under paid. It's worth keeping him IF he can get back to the DE he was before Sherman bone-headedly made him an every down DE and finaly a coach with a clue said it isn't working. I won't say "I told you so" because evidently I am no expert. Just someone who sees reality for what it is and applies logic.

In the words of former Packer Gary Ellerson, quit smoking crack.

[swede]

You don't hear any of the players or coaches say anything bad about Rodgers.

But, other than the usual yada yada about what a hard worker he is you don't hear them say anything that suggests that he couldn't be replaced by the first QB to get off the Free Agent bus the year after Favre retires.

I'm still stunned that the guy breaks a foot bone in the first chance he gets to mop up.

I'm not hatin' on him. I just wouldn't ever regret trading him if the opportunity came at any time for any player or any pick high 3 or better.

[HarveyWallbangers]

s for evaluating Rodgers, we've seen him play in pre-season and you can make a minor judgement based on that. He has "happy feet" and like most in-experienced QB's locks onto his primart target. He just does'nt seem to do any one thing well.

Yet, he was one of the highest rated QBs in the 2006 preseason. He went 22 for 38 for 323 yards with 3 TDs and 1 interception. Yet, many people perceive that he sucked. If he were a 6th round pick like Matt Hasselbeck, people would applaud his effort in the preseason. Perception is a hard thing to overcome.

He probably had "happy feet" because he was playing behind a young OL that was learning a new scheme who just completely sucked in the preseason. Remember how poor Daryn Colledge looked in the preseason. He got no protection. I'd think his "happy feet" will subside once he feels comfortable with the offense and confident in his OL.

I didn't want him to drop to us, and I didn't like the pick. However, I noticed tangible improvement from him from year 1 to year 2. I'm not ready to write him off. He's in a no-lose situation though. He'll always be the guy who is "no Brett Favre."

[retailguy]

Too soon to write him off and I'm not a fan of his either...

Why do we spend so much time discussing something that is not happening, but largely ignore the things that are happening?

Is speculation really that much more fun?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Yet, he was one of the highest rated QBs in the 2006 preseason. He went 22 for 38 for 323 yards with 3 TDs and 1 interception. Yet, many people perceive that he sucked. If he were a 6th round pick like Matt Hasselbeck, people would applaud his effort in the preseason. Perception is a hard thing to overcome.

He probably had "happy feet" because he was playing behind a young OL that was learning a new scheme who just completely sucked in the preseason. Remember how poor Daryn Colledge looked in the preseason. He got no protection. I'd think his "happy feet" will subside once he feels comfortable with the offense and confident in his OL.

I didn't want him to drop to us, and I didn't like the pick. However, I noticed tangible improvement from him from year 1 to year 2. I'm not ready to write him off. He's in a no-lose situation though. He'll always be the guy who is "no Brett Favre."

Listen to this guy.

[Tony Oday]

Well he hasn't show his dick to Jen yet