AR wants out?!

[Packers4Glory]

Not sure how you could think there packers were blindsided. They released statements about flying out to talk to him & stuff about restructuring & then redoing his deal. Not much of a chance they were blindsided

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm guessing they would have kept Tim Boyle had they known Rodgers might not want to come back. So it must have been after that.

Obviously, very likely. Any rookie QB who had no training camp and no preseason games isn't going to be as ready as a guy who has been in the system for several years. It's too bad we couldn't retain Boyle. I like him, and I think he has a shot at being the league for a long time.

[call_me_ishmael]

Not sure how you could think there packers were blindsided. They released statements about flying out to talk to him & stuff about restructuring & then redoing his deal. Not much of a chance they were blindsided

I don't think they were blind-sided last week, but I think it's possible (although unlikely) they were this off-season.

[Zool]

Obviously, very likely. Any rookie QB who had no training camp and no preseason games isn't going to be as ready as a guy who has been in the system for several years. It's too bad we couldn't retain Boyle. I like him, and I think he has a shot at being the league for a long time.

Me too. Kind of a Doug Pederson guy.

[th87]

Lets see if I can tear this down. Did the broncos end up functional after manning? The bucs have had brady for one season so...pass on that one. Saints never did get over the hump again, and now are in cap and talent hell. Ditto Steelers. Cardinals absolutely did if Rosen is his name. Chargers kept Rivers until he was so bad they had the 6 overall pick. Similar answer for giants.

Don't mind garbage seasons after the Rodgers era. Would free up my Sundays. And you can rebuild quickly with a few bad seasons.

[texaspackerbacker]

I've liked and agreed with your posts in the Packers section lately, th87, but not this one above. "garbage seasons after the Rodgers era and rebuild quickly with a few bad seasons" is exactly what I don't want. Aside from the fact that rebuilding success is far from a sure thing, a "feast or famine" situation is far worse than what we Packer fans have had the past several decades.

[scharpcheddar]

Tik tik tik, he's almost gone

[th87]

I've liked and agreed with your posts in the Packers section lately, th87, but not this one above. "garbage seasons after the Rodgers era and rebuild quickly with a few bad seasons" is exactly what I don't want. Aside from the fact that rebuilding success is far from a sure thing, a "feast or famine" situation is far worse than what we Packer fans have had the past several decades.

I think it could work out well in the long run. SF has leapfrogged us twice to SB appearances by having high picks to use on impact players. And emotionally, I think having a temporarily sucky low expectation team is better than one who gets your hopes up only to disappoint.

Teams who are in perennial rebuilds are just bad organizations.

[Sparkey]

They give Rodgers a 4 year extension with most of it guaranteed and it will go down as the worst QB extension ever given. He has two good years left. Reason I see this, is his best attributes are all tied to his ability to move in the pocket. Anyone who watches closely can see that he is not as good as he was.

Brady does not rely on scrambling, pocket manipulation. He is a classic, stand tall in the pocket QB.

[texaspackerbacker]

You're dead wrong on all counts, Sparkey.

I only hope they actually do extend him 4 years and your post stands side by side with mine to be remembered by then. Barring serious injury - which could happen to somebody 10 or 15 years younger - Rodgers should have those four years and more of greatness, and it damn well better all be with the Packers. Rodgers' "best attribute" - the primary reason why he is the GOAT - tied to his brain and attitude, specifically the mindset to not throw interceptions, which sets him miles apart from Brady or anybody else. The fact that he is more athletic and mobile than Brady/less dependent on good line blocking is a reason in favor of longevity, not against it.

[Bretsky]

I'll welcome at 4 year extension; but I think there are a lot of challenges and they are real.

AROD imo wanted this from the start and Gutebag was not on board with the idea. Now IMO that is stinging him in the ass.

[Fritz]

We don't know - and I don't think the Packer brass knows - what they have in Love yet. So they're faced with a choice of a pissed-off Rodgers who will wreck whatever short-term chance they have at a SB, or mollifyng him at the risk of being stuck with what will very likely be his albatross of a contract extension for long after he's either effective or capable - that is, he'll either get less and less mobile and thus less effective, or he'll just suffer a serious injury.

It's a tough, tough choice. It comes down to the classic short-term versus long-term. But the Packers don't know what they have in Love, so the long-term is foggier.

Most people like instant gratification and that's why so many people here want them to cave in to Rodgers.

[call_me_ishmael]

They may not be 100% sure but I am extremely sure they have a strong inkling by now as to what Love will be.

[bobblehead]

They may not be 100% sure but I am extremely sure they have a strong inkling by now as to what Love will be.

One thing we can all agree on, from the most optimistic Love people to the most pessimistic. Rodgers right now, this season gives us a much better chance to win the Owl.

Even if they think Love will be a stud, they still want Rodgers this season. This team is so close and has sold out to win it. To lose Rodgers and accept that first year starters don't win Owls would make a lot of the other moves a waste. It would also be very unfair to Jones who took less money to stay.

[Tony Oday]

Put love in this year and lets win a Super Bowl just to piss of AR.