NEXT YEAR AARON RODGERS WILL BE

[RashanGary]

QB's are way more NFL ready now than they were when AROD was drafted IMO. I really think they know, or have a view, of the huge, or lack of upside they have with Love by now. They knew Rodgers upside and it's why they slowly moved away from Favre. They seem to be doing the opposite here

Exactly. After two years you have an idea of what you’ve got.

[texaspackerbacker]

So to you 1 or 2 great years with rodgers is better than setting up the next decade of very good years?

hahahahaha I want the next decade to be GREAT with Rodgers. Without him, the dark ages are upon us - probably for a decade or more - and I say that being the forum optimist.

To answer your question, though, even two years of Rodgers would be better than what would befall the team without him. Now answer my question. Do you seriously want to get rid of him, knowing that 1-3 years of complete oblivion and x number more of bad to mediocre years would then occur? (or don't you think that would happen?)

[George Cumby]

Rodgers is 39. He's put up back to back MVP seasons. The likelihood of him producing a third MVP season is......... slim.

The wheels could fall off at any time.

Now is the time to be looking long-term.

One hopes Murphy, Gutebag and MLF see this.

[texaspackerbacker]

Or not.

Consider the next ten years ...... would the Packers have a significantly better record with: Rodgers playing all ten (which even I have to admit is a stretch, but just theoretically through age 48)? Or with Rodgers gone and whatever else came along? I say the former. And if you make it a more realistic 5 or 6 years, absolutely better with Rodgers.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Rodgers is 39. He's put up back to back MVP seasons. The likelihood of him producing a third MVP season is......... slim.

The wheels could fall off at any time.

Now is the time to be looking long-term.

One hopes Murphy, Gutebag and MLF see this.

38.

The odds of a 3rd Wu-Tang QB succeeding Butte are even slimmer. Butte’s Kung Fu is still better than 95% of the QBs in the known universe. Plus, medical advancements now make it possible for a few chosen ones (like the GOAT, TB12; possibly Butte) to debunk and sodomize Father Time.

Butte needs to spend the upcoming offseason in India as a pupil of the Anti-Choke Guru. Gotta master the psychology of winning in the clutch, especially in the playoffs. That being said, the Packers should ride Butte til his prodigious right arm falls off.

[texaspackerbacker]

+ 1 ....... except that Rodgers, not Brady is the GOAT.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

+ 1 ....... except that Rodgers, not Brady is the GOAT.

GOAT should have more than a fluke ring.

[George Cumby]

Or not.

Consider the next ten years ...... would the Packers have a significantly better record with: Rodgers playing all ten

You are absolutely stoned if you even think this is even remotely possible.

[Fritz]

You are absolutely stoned if you even think this is even remotely possible.

Before last offseason, all Rodgers talked about was wanting to play on and on and on, into his mid-40's. Yet now he's talking about the "R" word, and about appreciating every moment.

Doesn't sound like a guy who thinks he's playing for another five or six years any more.

[call_me_ishmael]

Rodgers is 39. He's put up back to back MVP seasons. The likelihood of him producing a third MVP season is......... slim.

The wheels could fall off at any time.

Now is the time to be looking long-term.

One hopes Murphy, Gutebag and MLF see this.

Why do you think that? Rodgers doesn't really rely on his athleticism much anymore IMO, and he just doesn't make risky throws - sometimes to his own detriment (see playoffs). I highly doubt his stats will drop off that much this year. We shall see.

[George Cumby]

Why do you think that? Rodgers doesn't really rely on his athleticism much anymore IMO, and he just doesn't make risky throws - sometimes to his own detriment (see playoffs). I highly doubt his stats will drop off that much this year. We shall see.

He is still capable of playing at a very high level, my bad for not amplifying that.

Just based on probability, I think it's unlikely he makes it a three-peat.

Additionally, speaking of probability, he is in a bad place on the probability curve. The fact he's made it this long as the starter already makes him an out-lier. He's one nasty hit from being done.

Brady is a once in a lifetime phenonmenon. Will we see other players extend their careers? For sure. Will it even be a trend? Given improvements in medical care, technology, changes in the game and rule-book, sure.

Is it likely that we see Brady, The Post-Season GOAT, and his record crushing career immediately followed up by Rodgers, The Regular Season GOAT also playing into his mid-40's? I doubt it.

And I'm sorry, at the end of the Divisional Game, Rodgers looked just like Favre against the Giants, cold, old, unhappy and wishing he was somewhere else.

[gbgary]

if spitting into the wind is their plan 12 will be back.

[texaspackerbacker]

Or not.

Consider the next ten years ...... would the Packers have a significantly better record with: Rodgers playing all ten (which even I have to admit is a stretch, but just theoretically through age 48)? Or with Rodgers gone and whatever else came along? I say the former. And if you make it a more realistic 5 or 6 years, absolutely better with Rodgers.

I haven't seen any answers yet from the damn fools wanting to get rid of Rodgers. As I said, he probably won't play ten years, although 5 or 6 is reasonable even likely. If the Packers have Rodgers even 2 or 3 years, we'd win more games in those 2 or 3 than we would win in 10 years without him. If anybody has the balls/idiocy to disagree, bring it on.

[RashanGary]

I haven't seen any answers yet from the damn fools wanting to get rid of Rodgers. As I said, he probably won't play ten years, although 5 or 6 is reasonable even likely. If the Packers have Rodgers even 2 or 3 years, we'd win more games in those 2 or 3 than we would win in 10 years without him. If anybody has the balls/idiocy to disagree, bring it on.

Burrow, Herbert, Allen, Mahommes, Jackson, Wilson, Stafford, Murray….

There are plenty of really good quarterbacks. The odds of finding one are more like 1 in 4 or better than they are 1 in 100. Love probably isn’t it, or they would be trading Rodgers yesterday, but in a couple losing seasons, we could stumble on the next great QB and be just fine without Rodgers.

[call_me_ishmael]

Burrow, Herbert, Allen, Mahommes, Jackson, Wilson, Stafford, Murray….

There are plenty of really good quarterbacks. The odds of finding one are more like 1 in 4 or better than they are 1 in 100. Love probably isn’t it, or they would be trading Rodgers yesterday, but in a couple losing seasons, we could stumble on the next great QB and be just fine without Rodgers.

Counterpoint - several of the above have had many chances to win it and haven't done much.

Mahomes is a freak and outlier. He is next level talented.

Wilson had a historically good defense and hasn't repeated the same level of success.

Guys like Mahomes and arguably Rodgers give their team a chance year after year.

I'm not so sure Burrow, Herbert, Allen, Jackson, Stafford, Murray are that good. We shall see. Burrow is looking very special IMO.