Why not Trade Rogers?

[Tony Oday]

He is worth more right now in terms of picks. Get a guarentee that Favre plays two more years and have Brian Brohm be the QB of the future.

[cpk1994]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

He is worth more right now in terms of picks. Get a guarentee that Favre plays two more years and have Brian Brohm be the QB of the future.

You are not goning to get a guarantee from Favre. THe last 5 years is clear proof of that. Aaron doesn't have near the value becuase Favre would be appealing to go for a SB run. Rodgers would be essentailly = to what the other teams already have so, no reason to trade for Rodgers when you already have a version of him.

[boiga]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

He is worth more right now in terms of picks. Get a guarentee that Favre plays two more years and have Brian Brohm be the QB of the future.

Because we can't get Favre to agree to anything more than 2 hours away.

Rodgers is worth more to us right now than Favre is for the same reason he's worth more picks. He's a young improving franchise caliber QB. He's compatible with management, has good report with all his team mates, and listens when the coach tells him to do something.

Trading Rodgers for Brett would be a short term solution that leaves us weaker in the long run.

[Sparkey]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

He is worth more right now in terms of picks. Get a guarentee that Favre plays two more years and have Brian Brohm be the QB of the future.

If Favre promises to stay through his contract, can you really believe that he will ?

[The Leaper]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

Trading Rodgers for Brett would be a short term solution that leaves us weaker in the long run.

There is no reason to trade Rodgers. Even if there was an open competition and Favre was truly welcomed back by the team, there would be no reason to get rid of Rodgers at this point.

[bobblehead]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

Trading Rodgers for Brett would be a short term solution that leaves us weaker in the long run.

There is no reason to trade Rodgers. Even if there was an open competition and Favre was truly welcomed back by the team, there would be no reason to get rid of Rodgers at this point.

Um...he might feel differently if the rug gets pulled out from under him...or is brett the only one who gets to call his own shots?

[imscott72]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

He is worth more right now in terms of picks. Get a guarentee that Favre plays two more years and have Brian Brohm be the QB of the future.

Because we can't get Favre to agree to anything more than 2 hours away.

Rodgers is worth more to us right now than Favre is for the same reason he's worth more picks. He's a young improving franchise caliber QB. He's compatible with management, has good report with all his team mates, and listens when the coach tells him to do something.

Trading Rodgers for Brett would be a short term solution that leaves us weaker in the long run.

But Brett gives us the best chance at a Superbowl run while the pieces are in place now. There are a lot of contracts up after next season. Who knows what kind of shape the team will be in after 2009.

[boiga]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

Trading Rodgers for Brett would be a short term solution that leaves us weaker in the long run.

There is no reason to trade Rodgers. Even if there was an open competition and Favre was truly welcomed back by the team, there would be no reason to get rid of Rodgers at this point.

That's a good point as well. As long as both Brett and Rodgers could accept either the starting or backup roles, we would be a better team with both of them on the roster.

I'm just not sure that either would accept being the backup right now. So, if we had to decide between them, then it really is argument between short term or long term potential benefits.

[The Leaper]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

Um...he might feel differently if the rug gets pulled out from under him...or is brett the only one who gets to call his own shots?

What is he going to do? He's under contract for 2 more years.

Favre can afford to act like a dumbass...he already has his money and isn't going to be looking to sign any free agent deals in the future.

Rodgers can't afford to act like a dumbass...his entire NFL future is riding on that.

[boiga]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

But Brett gives us the best chance at a Superbowl run while the pieces are in place now. There are a lot of contracts up after next season. Who knows what kind of shape the team will be in after 2009.

The other way to look at it is that the current caliber of quality on this team makes this the ideal opportunity to move on without Favre. If we stick Brohm in there two years from now with a deteriorated supporting caste, we could be throwing him to the wolves while relegating the Packers to another thirty years of suck.

This year, even if Rodgers trips coming out of the gate, the team around him is good enough to get us to at least 8-8 while he gets his legs under him. I have higher hopes than that for Rodgers, but by making this transition while the team is still quality, we aren't risking a 1-15 season like the dolphins did last year with their rookie QB and non-existent team.

We're going to have to transition to a post Favre era eventually, and it makes more sense to do it with a good team to hold up the new QB than with a lousy one dragging him down.


@ The Leaper: If Rodgers doesn't get to play this year or next, I could certainly see him demanding a trade. He'd get a lot of public sympathy considering the situation and the Packers might take the high draft pick compensation to avoid even further media uproar. We'd have screwed him over, not the other way around in that situation.

[imscott72]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

But Brett gives us the best chance at a Superbowl run while the pieces are in place now. There are a lot of contracts up after next season. Who knows what kind of shape the team will be in after 2009.

The other way to look at it is that the current caliber of quality on this team makes this the ideal opportunity to move on without Favre. If we stick Brohm in there two years from now with a deteriorated supporting caste, we could be throwing him to the wolves while relegating the Packers to another thirty years of suck.

This year, even if Rodgers trips coming out of the gate, the team around him is good enough to get us to at least 8-8 while he gets his legs under him.

8-8 would be a tragedy considering how strong the team is at this point. I think we'd have a lot of pissed off veteran players who wouldn't be interested in re-signing here.

[The Leaper]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

This year, even if Rodgers trips coming out of the gate, the team around him is good enough to get us to at least 8-8 while he gets his legs under him.

So we sacrifice a chance at a SUPER BOWL RUN with a very strong team in favor of letting Rodgers "get his legs under him"? Ugh.

I think your point works fine...FOR THOMPSON AND MCCARTHY. They've just gotten their fat new contracts. They've been paid and have security to endure an 8-8 season. Players on the roster who haven't been paid might not see things in the same "long term" light.

@ The Leaper: If Rodgers doesn't get to play this year or next, I could certainly see him demanding a trade.

Oh, he'd be gone if he didn't play this year or next. I've never suggested the Packers should shelve Rodgers. My opinion is that they should open up the QB spot for competition...Favre will win, but increase Rodgers' role. I've advocated strongly using both QBs in some capacity. They both have value to the team IMO.

[boiga]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

8-8 would be a tragedy considering how strong the team is at this point. I think we'd have a lot of pissed off veteran players who wouldn't be interested in re-signing here.

Maybe so, much that's much better than the potential 1-15 case if we lost Harris and Clifton to age/injury this year and tried to start Brohm next year with a porous defense and non-existent protection.

If he plays now, Rodgers is very likely to be a better QB next year that could handle such adversity. Heck, if Rodgers can survive the pressure from this season, he'll be able handle anything.

Edit:

Oh, he'd be gone if he didn't play this year or next. I've never suggested the Packers should shelve Rodgers. My opinion is that they should open up the QB spot for competition...Favre will win, but increase Rodgers' role. I've advocated strongly using both QBs in some capacity. They both have value to the team IMO.

I agree heartily with that point. I'd love to have them sharing time to a certain extent. I'm just not sure that they can coexist with the ego issues/circus atmosphere surrounding this situation.

Also, I was just talking worst case scenarios. I have hopes that Rodgers can lead us deep in the play offs NOW, but we need to be prepared for calamity as well as success.

[prsnfoto]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

But Brett gives us the best chance at a Superbowl run while the pieces are in place now. There are a lot of contracts up after next season. Who knows what kind of shape the team will be in after 2009.

The other way to look at it is that the current caliber of quality on this team makes this the ideal opportunity to move on without Favre. If we stick Brohm in there two years from now with a deteriorated supporting caste, we could be throwing him to the wolves while relegating the Packers to another thirty years of suck.

This year, even if Rodgers trips coming out of the gate, the team around him is good enough to get us to at least 8-8 while he gets his legs under him.

8-8 would be a tragedy considering how strong the team is at this point. I think we'd have a lot of pissed off veteran players who wouldn't be interested in re-signing here.

If this team goes any less than 10-6 TT,MM and red headedMM should all be immediately shitcanned if hes their boy and is the undisputed starter because that is putting the best team on the field then no less than a division title and deep into the playoffs is acceptable.

[Gunakor]

Re: Why not Trade Rogers?

But Brett gives us the best chance at a Superbowl run while the pieces are in place now. There are a lot of contracts up after next season. Who knows what kind of shape the team will be in after 2009.

The other way to look at it is that the current caliber of quality on this team makes this the ideal opportunity to move on without Favre. If we stick Brohm in there two years from now with a deteriorated supporting caste, we could be throwing him to the wolves while relegating the Packers to another thirty years of suck.

This year, even if Rodgers trips coming out of the gate, the team around him is good enough to get us to at least 8-8 while he gets his legs under him.

8-8 would be a tragedy considering how strong the team is at this point. I think we'd have a lot of pissed off veteran players who wouldn't be interested in re-signing here.

We don't have alot of veteran players to begin with, so how is it that we are going to have alot of pissed off ones? The core of this team is 25, 26 years old. And many of them have already spoken in support of Rodgers. The 30 somethings on our roster do not represent the majority.