Teammates 'moving forward' with Favre

[Gunakor]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Becuase Rodgers now has no incentive to stay. Why should Aaron believe what M3 says anymore as it has proven to be a sham?

Every pro athlete knows that the only thing separating them from the second team or the waiver wire is their performance. Not commitments from the coach, general manger or anyone. Their performance.

YOu might have merit if Rodgers was actually being given a shot to keep the job he was given.

Open competition means Rodgers DOES have a shot to keep the job. Just as Favre shouldn't be just handed the job, neither should Rodgers. It can't be forgotten that Rodgers has never had to compete for his job either...

[cpk1994]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Becuase Rodgers now has no incentive to stay. Why should Aaron believe what M3 says anymore as it has proven to be a sham?

Like most athletes, Rodgers probably will go where the biggest contract is.

I'd feel more comfortable with it if TT would just extend his contract now and give him what he'd be making as a starter this year even if he's the backup. Ordinarally I would not support a move like this, but seeing that Rodgers had been told by management that he'd be starting this year I only think it's fair if they pay him as if he were the starter even if Favre wins the job. It would do alot of help in keeping Rodgers happy, and would probably make him more accepting of one more year behind Favre.

Rodgers isn't going to sign an extension. And he should't. He should tell TT that if "you wan't me, play me."

[Patler]

YOu might have merit if Rodgers was actually being given a shot to keep the job he was given.

What makes you think he won't have?

Becuase McCarthy is a gutless coward.

....and you know this how????

[cpk1994]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Becuase Rodgers now has no incentive to stay. Why should Aaron believe what M3 says anymore as it has proven to be a sham?

Every pro athlete knows that the only thing separating them from the second team or the waiver wire is their performance. Not commitments from the coach, general manger or anyone. Their performance.

YOu might have merit if Rodgers was actually being given a shot to keep the job he was given.

Open competition means Rodgers DOES have a shot to keep the job. Just as Favre shouldn't be just handed the job, neither should Rodgers. It can't be forgotten that Rodgers has never had to compete for his job either...

Favre shouldn't get the job at all as he RETIRED. If they want an open competition, it should be between Rodgers Brohm and Flynn ONLY, the guys who have been committed from the start and have put in all the work.

[Ballboy]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Untrue. Rodgers is unrestricted when his contract expires. He'll have 5 years accrued service in teh NFL. He can sign with anyone he chooses and Green Bay has no way to stop him.

PER PFT:
RODGERS IS SIGNED THROUGH 2009
Posted by Mike Florio on August 4, 2008, 12:20 p.m.
We’ve gotten several e-mails and seen more than a few comments regarding the contractual status of Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Though some believe that 2008 is the final year of Rodgers’ rookie deal, NFLPA records indicate that he is signed through 2009.

Absent a salary cap in 2010, Rodgers would be eligible only for restricted free agency after his current deal expires, since he’d have only five years of service.

Rodgers’ rookie deal contains extensive incentives based on playing time, and Rodgers already has lost a shot to earn millions of dollars based on the fact that Brett Favre didn’t retire after the 2005 or 2006 seasons. Now that Favre is back, and if Favre wins the starting job and stays healthy, Rodgers will make only $680,000 this year.

If Rodgers is the starter in 2008 and 2009, he’ll make an extra $2.2 million. If he’d gotten the job in 2006 and held it through 2009, Rodgers would have earned $8.25 million in additional pay.

So Rodgers needs to play to get paid. And thus he’ll be screwed if Favre is the starter in 2008.

The best solution for Rodgers would be a trade to a team where he’d be the starter. But since the Packers delayed for several weeks the realization that Favre might be the better option in Green Bay, Rodgers would be seriously behind the curve if he were to land in a new city at some point in the next couple of weeks.


Unless I'm reading what they have written wrong!!!

[Patler]

Favre shouldn't get the job at all as he RETIRED. If they want an open competition, it should be between Rodgers Brohm and Flynn ONLY, the guys who have been committed from the start and have put in all the work.

Now I think you are just trying to be controversial.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think Florio is wrong. I believe players are eligible for UFA after 5 years of accrued service. Patler? Some rookies sign 4 year deals. Some 5 years. A few have signed 6 year deals. That 5 years of accrued service is the bone of contention between many agents and teams.

[Gunakor]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Becuase Rodgers now has no incentive to stay. Why should Aaron believe what M3 says anymore as it has proven to be a sham?

Every pro athlete knows that the only thing separating them from the second team or the waiver wire is their performance. Not commitments from the coach, general manger or anyone. Their performance.

YOu might have merit if Rodgers was actually being given a shot to keep the job he was given.

Open competition means Rodgers DOES have a shot to keep the job. Just as Favre shouldn't be just handed the job, neither should Rodgers. It can't be forgotten that Rodgers has never had to compete for his job either...

Favre shouldn't get the job at all as he RETIRED. If they want an open competition, it should be between Rodgers Brohm and Flynn ONLY, the guys who have been committed from the start and have put in all the work.

Favre is NOT retired anymore. He sent in his request to be reinstated and it was approved by Rodger Goodell. He is now an active member of the NFL. I don't agree with his decision to unretire either, but there's nothing that can be done about that now. It's not about personal beef with me, it's about team success. If the team can be successful with Favre, then I have no problem with Favre starting - as long as they've talked with Rodgers and have given him assurance that he will get his shot, and have gotten an assurance from him that he will stick around to take advantage of it. We don't know what Rodgers is going to do. I don't want to lose him, but if he's agreeable to this then I have no problem with a competition.

[cpk1994]

Favre shouldn't get the job at all as he RETIRED. If they want an open competition, it should be between Rodgers Brohm and Flynn ONLY, the guys who have been committed from the start and have put in all the work.

Now I think you are just trying to be controversial.

NO im not, I am serious. If McCarthy truely believes in the "team commitment" Than Favre should rot on the bench as the 4th string. Lets those that were truely committed from the start reap the rewards of their hard work. If Lord Favre doesn't like it he can go home.

[Gunakor]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Untrue. Rodgers is unrestricted when his contract expires. He'll have 5 years accrued service in teh NFL. He can sign with anyone he chooses and Green Bay has no way to stop him.

PER PFT:
RODGERS IS SIGNED THROUGH 2009
Posted by Mike Florio on August 4, 2008, 12:20 p.m.
We’ve gotten several e-mails and seen more than a few comments regarding the contractual status of Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Though some believe that 2008 is the final year of Rodgers’ rookie deal, NFLPA records indicate that he is signed through 2009.

Absent a salary cap in 2010, Rodgers would be eligible only for restricted free agency after his current deal expires, since he’d have only five years of service.

Rodgers’ rookie deal contains extensive incentives based on playing time, and Rodgers already has lost a shot to earn millions of dollars based on the fact that Brett Favre didn’t retire after the 2005 or 2006 seasons. Now that Favre is back, and if Favre wins the starting job and stays healthy, Rodgers will make only $680,000 this year.

If Rodgers is the starter in 2008 and 2009, he’ll make an extra $2.2 million. If he’d gotten the job in 2006 and held it through 2009, Rodgers would have earned $8.25 million in additional pay.

So Rodgers needs to play to get paid. And thus he’ll be screwed if Favre is the starter in 2008.

The best solution for Rodgers would be a trade to a team where he’d be the starter. But since the Packers delayed for several weeks the realization that Favre might be the better option in Green Bay, Rodgers would be seriously behind the curve if he were to land in a new city at some point in the next couple of weeks.


Unless I'm reading what they have written wrong!!!

No, you are reading it right. What is written is wrong. That article is not accurate. After 5 years of service a player is eligible for unrestricted FA, whether they started or not, whether that contract is a rookie contract or not. Whoever wrote this article has not done thier homework. The current CBA is valid through 2011, so Rodgers would still fall under the current FA rules.

[cpk1994]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Becuase Rodgers now has no incentive to stay. Why should Aaron believe what M3 says anymore as it has proven to be a sham?

Every pro athlete knows that the only thing separating them from the second team or the waiver wire is their performance. Not commitments from the coach, general manger or anyone. Their performance.

YOu might have merit if Rodgers was actually being given a shot to keep the job he was given.

Open competition means Rodgers DOES have a shot to keep the job. Just as Favre shouldn't be just handed the job, neither should Rodgers. It can't be forgotten that Rodgers has never had to compete for his job either...

Favre shouldn't get the job at all as he RETIRED. If they want an open competition, it should be between Rodgers Brohm and Flynn ONLY, the guys who have been committed from the start and have put in all the work.

Favre is NOT retired anymore. He sent in his request to be reinstated and it was approved by Rodger Goodell. He is now an active member of the NFL. I don't agree with his decision to unretire either, but there's nothing that can be done about that now. It's not about personal beef with me, it's about team success. If the team can be successful with Favre, then I have no problem with Favre starting - as long as they've talked with Rodgers and have given him assurance that he will get his shot, and have gotten an assurance from him that he will stick around to take advantage of it. We don't know what Rodgers is going to do. I don't want to lose him, but if he's agreeable to this then I have no problem with a competition.

THe probelm is they can't give Rodgers assurances because they can't assure that Favre won't pull this same shit next year. They want to give Rodgers assurance, release Favre immediately.

[Ballboy]

Favre shouldn't get the job at all as he RETIRED. If they want an open competition, it should be between Rodgers Brohm and Flynn ONLY, the guys who have been committed from the start and have put in all the work.

Now I think you are just trying to be controversial.

NO im not, I am serious. If McCarthy truely believes in the "team commitment" Than Favre should rot on the bench as the 4th string. Lets those that were truely committed from the start reap the rewards of their hard work. If Lord Favre doesn't like it he can go home.

In recent memory, Brett has just merely showed face at OTA's and Mini-Camp over the past few years. He may have been putting in the same amount of "hard work" this year as in the past.

[cpk1994]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Untrue. Rodgers is unrestricted when his contract expires. He'll have 5 years accrued service in teh NFL. He can sign with anyone he chooses and Green Bay has no way to stop him.

PER PFT:
RODGERS IS SIGNED THROUGH 2009
Posted by Mike Florio on August 4, 2008, 12:20 p.m.
We’ve gotten several e-mails and seen more than a few comments regarding the contractual status of Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Though some believe that 2008 is the final year of Rodgers’ rookie deal, NFLPA records indicate that he is signed through 2009.

Absent a salary cap in 2010, Rodgers would be eligible only for restricted free agency after his current deal expires, since he’d have only five years of service.

Rodgers’ rookie deal contains extensive incentives based on playing time, and Rodgers already has lost a shot to earn millions of dollars based on the fact that Brett Favre didn’t retire after the 2005 or 2006 seasons. Now that Favre is back, and if Favre wins the starting job and stays healthy, Rodgers will make only $680,000 this year.

If Rodgers is the starter in 2008 and 2009, he’ll make an extra $2.2 million. If he’d gotten the job in 2006 and held it through 2009, Rodgers would have earned $8.25 million in additional pay.

So Rodgers needs to play to get paid. And thus he’ll be screwed if Favre is the starter in 2008.

The best solution for Rodgers would be a trade to a team where he’d be the starter. But since the Packers delayed for several weeks the realization that Favre might be the better option in Green Bay, Rodgers would be seriously behind the curve if he were to land in a new city at some point in the next couple of weeks.


Unless I'm reading what they have written wrong!!!

No, you are reading it right. What is written is wrong. That article is not accurate. After 5 years of service a player is eligible for unrestricted FA, whether they started or not, whether that contract is a rookie contract or not. Whoever wrote this article has not done thier homework.

You missed the part about if there is no cap. If there is no cap the rules change.

[Patler]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Untrue. Rodgers is unrestricted when his contract expires. He'll have 5 years accrued service in teh NFL. He can sign with anyone he chooses and Green Bay has no way to stop him.

PER PFT:
RODGERS IS SIGNED THROUGH 2009
Posted by Mike Florio on August 4, 2008, 12:20 p.m.
We’ve gotten several e-mails and seen more than a few comments regarding the contractual status of Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Though some believe that 2008 is the final year of Rodgers’ rookie deal, NFLPA records indicate that he is signed through 2009.

Absent a salary cap in 2010, Rodgers would be eligible only for restricted free agency after his current deal expires, since he’d have only five years of service.

Rodgers’ rookie deal contains extensive incentives based on playing time, and Rodgers already has lost a shot to earn millions of dollars based on the fact that Brett Favre didn’t retire after the 2005 or 2006 seasons. Now that Favre is back, and if Favre wins the starting job and stays healthy, Rodgers will make only $680,000 this year.

If Rodgers is the starter in 2008 and 2009, he’ll make an extra $2.2 million. If he’d gotten the job in 2006 and held it through 2009, Rodgers would have earned $8.25 million in additional pay.

So Rodgers needs to play to get paid. And thus he’ll be screwed if Favre is the starter in 2008.

The best solution for Rodgers would be a trade to a team where he’d be the starter. But since the Packers delayed for several weeks the realization that Favre might be the better option in Green Bay, Rodgers would be seriously behind the curve if he were to land in a new city at some point in the next couple of weeks.


Unless I'm reading what they have written wrong!!!

The article is correct. One of the changes that occurs by the owners "opting out" of the CBA is that 5th year players are RFAs in the uncapped years. However, I doubt it will get to that. A new CBA will probably be in place by then. Hard to guess what will happen with RFAs in a new CBA, but I would be surprised if it didn't drop down to at least 4th year, maybe even less.

[Gunakor]

Why would Rodgers be "gone"?

He is signed through the 2009 season and then is RFA, Packers have plenty of time with him.



Brohm was to be a first round pick as well, whats to say he won't be better?

Untrue. Rodgers is unrestricted when his contract expires. He'll have 5 years accrued service in teh NFL. He can sign with anyone he chooses and Green Bay has no way to stop him.

PER PFT:
RODGERS IS SIGNED THROUGH 2009
Posted by Mike Florio on August 4, 2008, 12:20 p.m.
We’ve gotten several e-mails and seen more than a few comments regarding the contractual status of Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Though some believe that 2008 is the final year of Rodgers’ rookie deal, NFLPA records indicate that he is signed through 2009.

Absent a salary cap in 2010, Rodgers would be eligible only for restricted free agency after his current deal expires, since he’d have only five years of service.

Rodgers’ rookie deal contains extensive incentives based on playing time, and Rodgers already has lost a shot to earn millions of dollars based on the fact that Brett Favre didn’t retire after the 2005 or 2006 seasons. Now that Favre is back, and if Favre wins the starting job and stays healthy, Rodgers will make only $680,000 this year.

If Rodgers is the starter in 2008 and 2009, he’ll make an extra $2.2 million. If he’d gotten the job in 2006 and held it through 2009, Rodgers would have earned $8.25 million in additional pay.

So Rodgers needs to play to get paid. And thus he’ll be screwed if Favre is the starter in 2008.

The best solution for Rodgers would be a trade to a team where he’d be the starter. But since the Packers delayed for several weeks the realization that Favre might be the better option in Green Bay, Rodgers would be seriously behind the curve if he were to land in a new city at some point in the next couple of weeks.


Unless I'm reading what they have written wrong!!!

No, you are reading it right. What is written is wrong. That article is not accurate. After 5 years of service a player is eligible for unrestricted FA, whether they started or not, whether that contract is a rookie contract or not. Whoever wrote this article has not done thier homework.

You missed the part about if there is no cap. If there is no cap the rules change.

The current CBA is valid through 2011, so he'd fall under the same FA rules as today. Sorry, I edited my last post to reflect this as well.