Are you ALL IN, or ALL out, on da LOVE MACHINE

[George Cumby]

Fuggit:

All in.

[Massive J]

All in.
He's a far out dude in a happening sort of way.

[wthigoot]

Aaron Rodgers began to really look the part in this third preseason. Love is not there yet, but the COVID stuff set him back.

By next season, he should be at the good backup, decent starter level. I think his ceiling will be clear by then, my guess is average starter, but it might be better.

The 5th year option is some gigantic amount, like $20m or something, can't do that. Rodgers probably has 2 more years after this one, so that is Love waiting to start in his 6th year at earliest. The timing is all messed up now, so he probably is traded before we get another look at him in training camp (instead of keeping him for 4th year and getting no return).

I would try this - but it probably means nothing back for a 1st and a 4th:
- No 5th year option (too expensive)
- Keep him as backup 4th year
- See if you can sign him for a reasonable contract, but my guess is he will go elsewhere

So I guess per the question that means - out, or in - not sure

EDIT: QB 5th year option is $19.6m this year

[texaspackerbacker]

Good Analysis of why it was a colossal blunder to draft Love. Gutekunst in general has done an excellent job as GM, but that is the one gigantic stain on his record.

[call_me_ishmael]

Can you trade a player in year 4 or year 5 if they sign the option? I wonder if they sign the option and trade him.

[Joemailman]

Can you trade a player in year 4 or year 5 if they sign the option? I wonder if they sign the option and trade him.

I believe you can. However, I believe the 5th year is guaranteed, which might make some teams shy away from trading for him.

[call_me_ishmael]

I imagine the plan is to keep him this year and see what ARod does. I think this is likely Rodger's last season, or he is playing this one + two more based on comments I heard him say somewhere. If this is his last year, they have Love ready to go and can see what's up. Can they franchise him if he is a stud and they decline the 5th year option? What about regular resigning before hitting FA?

[bobblehead]

I staked my claim in another thread. I think he is the packer starter maybe even next year (depends on ARod). I think he will be midlevel good. Matt Ryan, Cousins, Tannehill. I just don't want to pay him $40 million and expect we can win an Owl with him.

[bobblehead]

Aside from the fact that I see Rodgers playing way longer than a year or two, I just don't think Love has looked like what we want for a future QB. As I have said, maybe Kirk Cousins level at best. For the present as a back up/clipboard holder, I suppose he's adequate, and for the first time this year, I don't see total oblivion if Rodgers went down. Our D and RBs give the team a chance to be fairly decent even with a mediocre QB, for part of a season anyway. As for who that back up is, of course it will be Love, but from what I've seen, I'm not sure our chances wouldn't be better with Etling at QB.

Yes, tex. That is what 28 NFL teams have to try to win with. If your attitude is that we should move on and get us another Rodgers....well, in your world I guess that is easy.

[George Cumby]

I staked my claim in another thread. I think he is the packer starter maybe even next year (depends on ARod). I think he will be midlevel good. Matt Ryan, Cousins, Tannehill. I just don't want to pay him $40 million and expect we can win an Owl with him.

If this defense rounds into form and they can keep the talent, he may not have to be a pro-bowler, just top third of the league, -ish.

[texaspackerbacker]

Yes, tex. That is what 28 NFL teams have to try to win with. If your attitude is that we should move on and get us another Rodgers....well, in your world I guess that is easy.

What by any stretch could possibly give you the idea that my attitude is "that we should move on"? Have I not said enough times, we need to hang onto the Rodgers we have for as long as possible? A decade or more would suit me fine hahahahaha. When we do lose him - sooner or later or much later, it's gonna be dark times - basically until we do find another Rodgers or close to it. And it's increasingly apparent that Jordan Love ain't that, not even close.

[bobblehead]

What by any stretch could possibly give you the idea that my attitude is "that we should move on"? Have I not said enough times, we need to hang onto the Rodgers we have for as long as possible? A decade or more would suit me fine hahahahaha. When we do lose him - sooner or later or much later, it's gonna be dark times - basically until we do find another Rodgers or close to it. And it's increasingly apparent that Jordan Love ain't that, not even close.

The thread is about Jordan Love, not Rodgers. Move on refers to Love.

[bobblehead]

If this defense rounds into form and they can keep the talent, he may not have to be a pro-bowler, just top third of the league, -ish.

That is basically my attitude, maybe i assume everyone reads all my past drivel. I mean you can't win an owl paying him $40 million. But pay him $20 mil and put a team around him you have a shot.

[SudsMcBucky]

Couldn't vote in this poll. I'm not at either of those extremes, yet.

[texaspackerbacker]

The thread is about Jordan Love, not Rodgers. Move on refers to Love.

Well, excuse me, king bobble hahahahaha (I'm with you on that other thing, though). You said I think getting another Rodgers is easy, which sort of implies moving on from Rodgers. Obviously I don't think that, although lightning has struck twice, so why not a third time. After all, Ol' Vince is up there directing the Lord's football operations.

Regarding Love, if you were referring to him with the moving on thing, hell yeah. I do think finding a Love-quality QB is pretty damn easy. I don't know why they ever thought he was all that special in the first place, and as somebody said and I agreed with, drafting him when we did was grossly stupid - by far the worst, maybe only stain on Gutekunst's record as GM.