Again, we need the Love Machine

[Fritz]

I doubt it would be that difficult to keep both. Talk of trading Rodgers is all out bonehead STUPID. Yes, I would take Indy's second for Love - in a heartbeat.

Packers would be better off right now had they traded Rodgers last offseason. They'd have a boatload of picks and would know by know if Love is the guy going forward. They'd be way ahead of where they are right now, in terms of the organization.

They should STILL trade Rodgers after next June 1. He's toast. Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on.

[Joemailman]

I doubt it would be that difficult to keep both. Talk of trading Rodgers is all out bonehead STUPID. Yes, I would take Indy's second for Love - in a heartbeat.

A lot of people said the same thing about trading Favre in 2008. And Favre was coming off a better year than Rodgers is having this year. Yet 3 years later Rodgers was the Super Bowl MVP and Favre was out of football.

[texaspackerbacker]

Packers would be better off right now had they traded Rodgers last offseason. They'd have a boatload of picks and would know by know if Love is the guy going forward. They'd be way ahead of where they are right now, in terms of the organization.

They should STILL trade Rodgers after next June 1. He's toast. Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on.

That's just wrong. Aside from the fact that there is still a chance this season, the Packers will still be right there at the top assuming Rodgers is still the QB next year and well beyond that. If Rodgers is gone, mediocrity and the middle of the pack is the high end estimate for the foreseeable future - with Love or anybody else we'd have a chance to get other than Rodgers.

I say again, trading Rodgers last summer, next summer, ever would be all out idiotic - and that's for reasons above and beyond the contract/dead money thing.

And Joe, at the time of the Favre trade, 3 things: Rodgers is way better now than Favre in his last Packer year, Love is nowhere near as good now as Rodgers was then, and the dead money assbite from trading Favre was nowhere near what Rodgers' is now.

[Teamcheez1]

Favre’s last year with GB (2007):

4155 yds 28 TD 15 Int QB Rating 95.7

AR (so far in 2022)
2864 yds 22 TD 9 Int. QB Rating. 92.4

They look about the same in this comparison. As far as longevity, I think it’s no sure thing that AR will do better next year.

[George Cumby]

Packers would be better off right now had they traded Rodgers last offseason. They'd have a boatload of picks and would know by know if Love is the guy going forward. They'd be way ahead of where they are right now, in terms of the organization.

They should STILL trade Rodgers after next June 1. He's toast. Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on.

THIS.

[Joemailman]

Favre’s last year with GB (2007):

4155 yds 28 TD 15 Int QB Rating 95.7

AR (so far in 2022)
2864 yds 22 TD 9 Int. QB Rating. 92.4

They look about the same in this comparison. As far as longevity, I think it’s no sure thing that AR will do better next year.

Come on. It's easier to pass now because of the way quarterbacks and receivers are protected from hard contact. Favre was 6th in both passer rating and QBR in 2007. Rodgers is 13th and 28th.

[run pMc]

Favre's last year (2007) was the year that ended with the bad INT in that brutally cold NFCCG OT loss to NYG. Favre basically said "fuck it, I'm cold and throwing this no matter what".
The next year they went 6-10 with Rodgers. A lot of people were complaining that GB made a mistake.

As for this year, Rodgers has not been as good as Favre was in 2007. Not even close. That year the offense had numerous 30+ point games and went 13-3 and looked like a SB contender. This team hasn't played a single game that tells me they are worthy of the playoffs or contenders. It's been a good half of football here or there, along with occasionally beating up on a shitty Bears team.

I can understand why they gave Rodgers the extension -- he wanted one and was coming off back to back MVP seasons. I don't know many sane non-homers who didn't think the offense would take time to figure itself out with no Adams and 2-3 rookie WRs. I wasn't expecting another 13 win season, but they were still the NFCN favorites. I was expecting the defense to play better, and win (or keep them in) a few games. They haven't done that enough, and the defense is both overall and individually worse this year.

Yes Rodgers has been hurt, and yes the early OL with Hanson-Newman was bad. They were supposed to lean on the run game and forgot it (or RPO'd out of it). The things that have been most troubling to me are the poor (or lack of) reads, and his accuracy and zip aren't what they were 5 years ago. No surprise - dude is approaching 40. I think it's possible Rodgers has a better year next year. He needs to go back to working thru progressions and working on his footwork as well.

It's likely he's the QB for GB and they try to "run it back" as they have the last few years. Thing is, to keep doing that they need to rack up more on the cap space credit card each year... so Rodgers will have to do it with less proven talent each year as he eats up more cap space. Meanwhile they have a younger, cheaper QB on the bench that they need to make a decision on.

If a coach is concerned with the current team and the next game, then a GM is concerned with the roster construction and long term. Extending Rodgers focused on the former at the expense of the latter, which makes me wonder if Murphy stepped in to intervene or if assurances were made in 2020-2021.

The fact the Rodgers is paid like a top 5 QB but isn't playing anywhere near one is a problem. Next year is it for him one way or the other... I don't think he will be mentally or physically able to play up to his own standards atter the 2023 season. Father Time gets everyone. Personally, I wouldn't trade him unless someone made a knockout offer. If Rodgers is back, I'd consider giving him a quarter of preseason time so he gets used to being in a game and at least preseason speed. Say what you want about preseason games, but this year it took Rodgers a few games to look like a quality QB.

In the meantime, I'd name Love the starter for the last two games of this season to see what to do with him for the future.

[run pMc]

Look at all the aging HOF QB's and how it worked out for them as they hung on and hung on

The list of QB with even "good" (not great) years is very short.
Favre, Manning, Rivers, Testaverde, Brees all did not look good their final years. Seems like just yesterday we were joking about Brees arm strength.

Brady is the exception to QB arguments, not the rule.
Assuming Rodgers will be another exception is betting on long odds. This year's performance does little to suggest he'll beat those odds.

[George Cumby]

The Divisional Game against SF last year, Rodgers looked like Favre in his final game against the Giants, old, cold and disinterested.

[bobblehead]

What about Ryan Grant? I don’t recall Handsome Grant being a “attention grabbing selfish” diva.

Grant was already 25 when he was acquired by the Polar Bear prior to the 2007 season. With the great Deshawn Wynn, Packers couldn’t run the rock til Grant’s beakout game on Monday Night Football against the Broncos. Eventually earned a 4 years $30M contract. Injury ruined his Super Bowl season, but the dude rushed for 1,200+ yards twice. Played out his contract; was not re-signed b/c the Packers felt he was too old. Eventually made his way back to Green Bay for another season.

Grant was nothing but a class act. Fast; was a home run threat each time he touched the rock. Did I mention that the dude was handsome?

He held out after basically doing nothing in the NFL for 2 years and then having like 10 good games with us. I said at the time TT wouldn't forget it. After he played out the deal everyone here was convinced they would bring him back. I was the lone voice saying he was gone.

If the packers think Love is for real Rodgers MIGHT get one more year.....but he also might be traded/cut next year before the season starts.

[Fritz]

That's just wrong. Aside from the fact that there is still a chance this season, the Packers will still be right there at the top assuming Rodgers is still the QB next year and well beyond that. If Rodgers is gone, mediocrity and the middle of the pack is the high end estimate for the foreseeable future - with Love or anybody else we'd have a chance to get other than Rodgers.

I say again, trading Rodgers last summer, next summer, ever would be all out idiotic - and that's for reasons above and beyond the contract/dead money thing.

And Joe, at the time of the Favre trade, 3 things: Rodgers is way better now than Favre in his last Packer year, Love is nowhere near as good now as Rodgers was then, and the dead money assbite from trading Favre was nowhere near what Rodgers' is now.

As usual, your boner for Rodgers blinds you to the truth. Have you, uh, looked at the Packers' record this year? With your boy as the starter? "Mediocre" would be an upgrade from where they are now.

Now you can cue up the excuses, which I am sure you will, yet you also have argued an offensive line isn't that important because Rodgers is so good. So throw that excuse out. The defense sucks? Sure. But they've sucked in the past and had that ol' 10 - 6 record. Special teams? No worse than last year, maybe a tick better. Running backs? Best tandem in GB since McArthur Lane and John Brockington. Recievers? You also have said they don't matter so much since Rodgers is so damn good.

So maybe, just maybe, Rodgers is losing his skills as he ages, and it would've been best to trade him last offseason, and, since they didn't, maybe they ought to trade him after June 1 of next year.
deesaaQ

[texaspackerbacker]

Can you seriously claim Rodgers is primarily responsible for the shitty record - with Barry's underperforming D, injuries, and the WR situation for most of theseason? And whatever less than GOAT-like performance by Rodgers likely is due to the thumb injury rather than age. I'd say even with all of that, he has still performed better than all but a handfull of QBs. The decreased stats also are the result of an improved run game.

If Rodgers is bad the rest of the way - with a closer to healthy thumb and Watson and Doubs and Lazard and Cobb all apparently healthy, then maybe you've got a point about him deteriorating, but I doubt that happens.

[Teamcheez1]

I think you’ve got it backwards. Only a handful of QB’s didn’t perform better than Rodgers this year.

[MadtownPacker]

Texxy, I would say Rodgers is responsible for two losses. That alone is the difference in the season besides the other malfunctions of the squad. We have all seen Rodgers missing passes, throwing passes in the dirt and looking noodle armed sometimes. I don’t think his thumb because it’s not really the accuracy it’s just the overall strength. Somewhere along the line Rodgers got a old on us. I’m not even sure how it happened. 20 years from now will probably blame Olivia Munn.

I can see by your second paragraph you are beginning to prepare yourself for the inevitable. I know it is hard mi compa but we will have to put ole Yeller down someday. Bobble will be here for you to tell he is an ingrate. You will be partially correct.

[MadtownPacker]

I think you’ve got it backwards. Only a handful of QB’s didn’t perform better than Rodgers this year.

The one that matters, Love, also performed better than him.