Report: Rodgers wants new contract (Update: May not want to return in 2021)

[nodakfan17]

Does Greg Jennings feel a tad vindicated?

[SDBrew fan]

As one of my favorite games is trades that I have no say in I agreed to a post June 1st trade with a Bronco friend of mine. Broncos receive Aaron Rodgers and the Packers receive first round picks in 2022 and '23, a third round pick in 2022, Jerry Jeudy and as a bridge(water), Teddy. I believe if Aaron's bluff is called he could return to the team and proceed to blow up the locker room. I think the Pack have to move on.

[MrTPlush]

I don’t think there is any chance they trade him before this year now. Now all the picks they get would be based off a Rodgers led team. The Broncos #9 pick this year would have been intriguing, but now it would be more like #15+ next year.

 

I really don’t see the Packers trading Rodgers for mystery picks that could easily end up making them pick at #25 or even later than that. Too much of a gamble.

 

I also can’t fathom the Broncos finding it a good idea to trade for Rodgers and ship what is arguably their top WR back...I’m sure Rodgers would love that. Actually, I’m almost positive he would hit the decline button real fast.

[SeaBass]

If anyone has ESPN+ there's an interesting article by Bill Barnwell about what 7 teams could be in on a Rodgers trade and what trade offers each of those teams could make. Have to say, I didn't see too much that I disagreed with in what he put forward. I'm not sure how fans of the other teams might feel about those offers. I think Barnwell treated the situation pretty fairly and stayed away from the sensationalist material that has been smeared around the internet since last Thursday. First off, he claimed that the move that made the most sense was Rodgers staying with Green Bay. I think this article alone made my subscription payment for this month worth it.

[SeaBass]

I don’t think there is any chance they trade him before this year now. Now all the picks they get would be based off a Rodgers led team. The Broncos #9 pick this year would have been intriguing, but now it would be more like #15+ next year.

 

I really don’t see the Packers trading Rodgers for mystery picks that could easily end up making them pick at #25 or even later than that. Too much of a gamble.

 

I also can’t fathom the Broncos finding it a good idea to trade for Rodgers and ship what is arguably their top WR back...I’m sure Rodgers would love that. Actually, I’m almost positive he would hit the decline button real fast.

The Broncos could still offer to swap 2021 1st round picks with the Packers, Surtain for Stokes. This was something that I thought could happen after Thursday's draft since they both went CB. Who knows, maybe Gute really likes Stokes and doesn't want to swap but it's still an option.

[brwrsfan]

The thing with the Broncos trade (or any team for that matter) is that their first round picks will (presumably) be pretty low in the first round, assuming Rodgers stays healthy. So even though it's 2-3 first round picks, the value of those picks isn't that great if it's in the low 20's. Not saying it wouldn't happen or the Broncos couldn't include Surtain as part of the deal, but draft night would have made a lot more sense. Though I'd have to believe if the Packers really thought that was going to happen, they wouldn't have drafted Stokes as well (though who knows?).

 

I also don't love getting a QB back. If we trade Rodgers, I'd hope we'd be ready for Love to play. Sign a veteran to back him up/learn from if you want, but I'd rather get another player back in the trade than a QB.

 

All that said...I still believe that cooler heads prevail and that they work this out. Rodgers wants to win, he wants his ego stroked and this was a power play to get the bigger extension that he wants. If he wants to win, this is probably his best shot (maybe Denver is close, but who knows what they give up?). There's no other team that's ready to win but is just missing a QB.

[tmwiese55]

Just a quick reminder, Denver was 5-11 last year and plays in the same division as KC. It's not like they were some good/great team just missing a QB like several other situations over the years. Sure I guess LV/SD aren't to be feared. But if he really thinks this is a better spot to be than GB he's a fool. The team is only so/so and you're in the same division as the SB favorite. So you're very unlikely to win division and get a bye. If San Fran is healthy, well, at least I see a discussion then but would still take the GB situation. Keep in mind the NFC North should almost be a freebie this year.

[CheezWizHed]

Who is "SD"?

 

Stupid LA...

[JosephC]

I haven't been following this situation, but how tradeable is Farve now from the Packer's perspective? To me, it seems as if he really wanted out of Green Bay, he was beyond foolish to wait until they were pushed right up to the draft so the Packers had limited time to field and assess trade offers. Wouldn't it have made more sense for Rodgers to do it two weeks out, giving the Packers ample time to work through deals and find one that was the best to their liking?

 

As already brought up by brwrsfan a few posts ago, there is so much uncertainty with where a Rodger's led team will be picking next season that IMO it makes it very difficult for the Packers to make a deal at this point.

 

I'd go as far as saying that I'd prefer it if the Packers traded Rodgers. But from a value perspective, I'm even less interested in trading Rodgers if the return looks to be two late first round picks, an average NFL starting player and a bandage quarterback. If that is my option, I'd tell Rodgers he can sit on his rear for a year if he wants and I'd just take my chances on the trade market next off-season when at least I know exactly where the initial draft pick will be.

[PeaveyFury]

I haven't been following this situation, but how tradeable is Farve now from the Packer's perspective?

 

Not sure if this was an intentional or unintentional swapping of Favre/Rodgers, but I like it....

[brewcrewdue80]

Would a trade involving 2 or 3 1st rd picks be possible to hold a conditional value picks? Like say 2022 and 2023 1st rd picks only on condition they are a top 20 and if not the 3rd round pick for that season is included? Also, what teams out there possess future 1st round picks already besides their own? So you acquire 2 1st rd picks to use along with your own for 3 1sts in one season? A team with 2 1sts in 2022 and their 1st in 2023 even if on the lower side believing Rodgers lead team finishes a 12 win or better season has to hold fair amount of value. Any team trading for Rodgers most likely is in the same scenario we've always been, an injury to him and your season is going to be lucky to see 7wins. Drag this out in to preseason or even in to the season until a team suffers a QB injury. Make the trade then and a Rodgers report to team with no practice leads to a more likely injury based on fitness during the rush back to playing football. There is your high 1st rd draft pick coming back.

 

I think the team will best be served with coming out and saying that Aaron is allowed to do what he wants to do. If that means retiring from football, we are going to prepare from this day moving forward with Jordan Love to be our QB. We'll continue talking with Aaron and within reason seek a solution that works best for our Green Bay organization. Probably bring Jordan Love to this press conference to speak as you have just declared him as you QB moving forward. Field his share of questions to do the "I'm looking forward to getting in training camp, film, practicing with the #1 guys," type of feel good media talk. When doing this, it shows that you have a decision on the direction all the Offensive starters can prepare mentally who you're rallying around at QB. Not to keep this in the air what you're going to do, question who's our Qb in 2021.

[wildcat83]

I don't think the NFL can do conditional picks like the NBA does, or at least, I've never heard of it being done.

 

That's oddly one of the biggest trade issues I see. If we trade Rodgers to a team for a package that includes their first round pick, it's probably not going to be a top 10 pick obviously. A team that wants to pay up for Rodgers is probably a deep playoff run type team, and you are picking in the late 20's

[SeaBass]

There have been pick swaps negotiated in NFL trades. If a team holds their own 1st rounder and another team's 1st rounder in next season's draft they can offer the better pick to a team they trade with. I'm certain that just happened in this last draft but I don't want to look up which teams did it.

 

Actually that's not technically a pick swap but the rest of what I said is accurate. I feel like there have been actual pick swaps in the NFL as well, where one time gives up their higher pick and takes the other team's lower pick.

[PeaveyFury]

That's oddly one of the biggest trade issues I see. If we trade Rodgers to a team for a package that includes their first round pick, it's probably not going to be a top 10 pick obviously. A team that wants to pay up for Rodgers is probably a deep playoff run type team, and you are picking in the late 20's

 

I think that's why you target a team that has multiple firsts. But, of those teams you're really only looking at the Giants as a team that needs a QB, and they're obviously not a QB away from competitive. Otherwise, you're banking on a team like Philly or Miami souring on their young QBs.

[brewcrewdue80]

What hurts the most is the cap hit on trade. Like how about taking some team's contract to offset the amount like in baseball. Thing here is that Green Bay is penalized for the trade. What is the team Rodgers is traded to on the hook for the next 2 seasons? If there's a team that wants Rodgers but are up against the cap themselves, how do they make the trade work? Green Bay couldn't swap for a player to even out the trade so it would work?

[MrTPlush]

You can make it a conditional pick and move based on what happens, they literally did that with Favre...ironically. Favre’s was essentially based on being healthy and how far the Jets made it. I believe the Packers ended up with the minimum 3rd rounder, but it could have been a first rounder had they made the super bowl.

 

The problem is a 3rd round pick doesn’t make up for getting a 23rd pick versus a #8 pick (example). Even if you wanted to conditionally trade picks to make up for it (so the Packers could trade up that high if they felt inclined) the value difference would be a haul. So unless that acquiring team wants to risk having zero high picks for two straight years it would be impossible to do.

 

I’m not even sure how you’d fill the gap value wise. Would the 2nd round picks for 2022/2023 make up for the pick being some near 20 picks worse?

 

Even after you find a “fair” compromise the Packers now have to wait an entire year to start recouping their value from losing Rodgers instead of getting some back last week. A pick a week ago is much more value than a pick a year from now.

[PeaveyFury]

What hurts the most is the cap hit on trade. Like how about taking some team's contract to offset the amount like in baseball. Thing here is that Green Bay is penalized for the trade. What is the team Rodgers is traded to on the hook for the next 2 seasons? If there's a team that wants Rodgers but are up against the cap themselves, how do they make the trade work? Green Bay couldn't swap for a player to even out the trade so it would work?

 

Technically, they're on the hook for nothing. They could trade for him and cut him literally the next day with no cap consequences. Far more likely, they'd negotiate an extension that would restructure his remaining contract to lessen the cap hit.

 

In the NFL, the trading team always receives the worse end of the deal cap-wise.

[brwrsfan]

You can make it a conditional pick and move based on what happens, they literally did that with Favre...ironically. Favre’s was essentially based on being healthy and how far the Jets made it. I believe the Packers ended up with the minimum 3rd rounder, but it could have been a first rounder had they made the super bowl.

 

The problem is a 3rd round pick doesn’t make up for getting a 23rd pick versus a #8 pick (example). Even if you wanted to conditionally trade picks to make up for it (so the Packers could trade up that high if they felt inclined) the value difference would be a haul. So unless that acquiring team wants to risk having zero high picks for two straight years it would be impossible to do.

 

I’m not even sure how you’d fill the gap value wise. Would the 2nd round picks for 2022/2023 make up for the pick being some near 20 picks worse?

 

Even after you find a “fair” compromise the Packers now have to wait an entire year to start recouping their value from losing Rodgers instead of getting some back last week. A pick a week ago is much more value than a pick a year from now.

 

What the NBA does is that you can say "I'll give you my first round pick but only if it falls between these numbers for X amount of years". For example, we get Denver's first round pick if it's in the top 15 within the next 3 years, beyond that we just get the first round pick 4 years down the road". The NBA is usually the opposite where it's protected for higher picks "you don't get our pick if it's in the top 5". But you get the idea. As far as I'm aware, the NFL doesn't allow this. You can do conditional trades based on performance, but based upon where your draft pick happens to fall (I think at least).

[nodakfan17]

The NBA is just silly when it comes to putting protection on future picks, but I sort of see the need. With only two rounds, the 15th overall pick in the NBA Draft is roughly equivalent to the 60th overall pick in the NFL Draft.

[brewcrewdue80]

You can make it a conditional pick and move based on what happens, they literally did that with Favre...ironically. Favre’s was essentially based on being healthy and how far the Jets made it. I believe the Packers ended up with the minimum 3rd rounder, but it could have been a first rounder had they made the super bowl.

 

The problem is a 3rd round pick doesn’t make up for getting a 23rd pick versus a #8 pick (example). Even if you wanted to conditionally trade picks to make up for it (so the Packers could trade up that high if they felt inclined) the value difference would be a haul. So unless that acquiring team wants to risk having zero high picks for two straight years it would be impossible to do.

 

I’m not even sure how you’d fill the gap value wise. Would the 2nd round picks for 2022/2023 make up for the pick being some near 20 picks worse?

 

Even after you find a “fair” compromise the Packers now have to wait an entire year to start recouping their value from losing Rodgers instead of getting some back last week. A pick a week ago is much more value than a pick a year from now.

 

Maybe the structure goes something like- top 14pick only. 15-21 is 1st plus 3rd. 22-32 is 1st plus 2nd rd picks. However you make it work. But I dunno on having this say done 2 straight years. Maybe for 2022 only and 2023 youre stuck with that teams' 1st rd pick regardless where its at? I would say that clause may be reversed so it happens in 2023 vs 2022. Just 2022's 1st and then that contingency for 2023. Basically giving that team a chance to draft a year with both their 2nd and 3rd to surround Rodgers or build playoff team roster with valuable picks.

 

Edit add. What if this becomes so complicated, the NFL literally changes how trades or cap hits are addressed under a "Rodgers rule"

[madbad2000]

If you put in a lot of conditions, I would assume that limits your ability to trade those picks because you would have to have ownership of all potential picks to fulfill whatever terms come to fruition. Once a condition is met/not met, then they would be available again. So if a team gives you the option of our 1st next year if it's 1-14, a 1st and 3rd if it's 15-21 and a 1st and 2nd if it's 22-32, you would not be able to trade your 1, 2 OR 3 next year until the conditions are met after this season and the draft picks are determined. If this is only for say 2022, that should not be that hard actually. But if you are talking pick options for 2022 and 2023 with other variables, now you are locking down a lot of picks that can't be moved until the choose your own adventure has progressed. It's doable, but i'm not sure how many teams are going to go for that. Especially with the swing that can happen from one year to the next with injuries or other factors.

[GAME05]

If Rodgers wants out and the Packers are willing, couldn't Rodgers agree to restructure his contract in such a way that would lessen the cap hit on the Packers? That might be a good compromise between the two sides if it can be done. It seems to me that the cap hit is the biggest barrier to a trade rather than the picks/players we'd get back.

[BillScottCanRake]

CheeseheadTV has an interesting article on the Rodgers situation here.

 

I think it is pretty balanced and makes a good case for neither side being in the right and neither side being in the wrong.

[JimH5]

Rodgers has been bad mouthing Gutekunst in team chats, calling him "Jerry Krause", who famously had poor interpersonal skills.

 

He's like everyone whose ever had a crappy boss, but Rodgers is powerful enough to do something about it. I'm on Rodgers' side in this spat. He's a 3-time MVP. He has earned whatever special handling he wants.

[OldHeidelberg]

If Rodgers wants out and the Packers are willing, couldn't Rodgers agree to restructure his contract in such a way that would lessen the cap hit on the Packers? That might be a good compromise between the two sides if it can be done. It seems to me that the cap hit is the biggest barrier to a trade rather than the picks/players we'd get back.

 

I could be wrong but I think the answer is no, the portion that gets accelerated onto the cap is the remaining prorated signing bonus, that has been paid and has to hit the cap when they trade/release him. I thought I read here that there is a difference between trade and release so I might be missing something. I don't think the cap hit is in the way of the trade much especially after June 1, for the Packers the issue is they were counting on having Rodgers this year and they also paid a large signing bonus for a 5 year deal in which I think Rodgers has only played 2 of. That's also why they should demand a lot in a trade, if they are paying the lions share of that 5 year deal and another team gets him for 3 they should pay a price for that in picks.