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

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Is there anything on why 5 WRs skipped OTAs too? Davante Adams also appeared to surrender $500k to not go. Is that all coincidental or are the WRs somewhat standing up for their QB? I didn't really see anything that dove into why any of those guys didn't show up or if they have skipped in past years too.

 

MLF said he'd spoken to all of them and that it was different circumstances for each. Hot air possibly, who knows. They probably all hate going to those anyway and going for reps with a guy who won't be throwing them passes this year makes it totally useless in their eyes.

[bjkrautk]

For all we know, Aaron - who happens to be in Hawaii getting photographed with the fiancée - could be making it up to players who opt out of OTAs.

[adambr2]

For all we know, Aaron - who happens to be in Hawaii getting photographed with the fiancée - could be making it up to players who opt out of OTAs.

 

Maybe Rodgers' absence from OTAs which he has always attended has nothing to do with the huge rift between Rodgers and the organization which has been hinted at since January and became huge news for the last month plus - that is some next level optimism. :)

 

Well done, sir.

[GAME05]

I figure if there's some kind of trade in place it would have to wait until June 1 (?) when the financials change. And if there is, it's probably already been worked out and we're just waiting until then. If Rodgers makes it past that, he'll stay in GB.

 

Some paper in Wisconsin reported that Green Bay wasn't yet convinced that Love is ready to be the starter just yet. Makes sense since there was no training camp. So Oakland makes more sense than Denver because Carr still presents a realistic chance of making the SB.

[homer]

For all we know, Aaron - who happens to be in Hawaii getting photographed with the fiancée - could be making it up to players who opt out of OTAs.

 

Maybe Rodgers' absence from OTAs which he has always attended has nothing to do with the huge rift between Rodgers and the organization which has been hinted at since January and became huge news for the last month plus - that is some next level optimism. :)

 

Well done, sir.

 

He hinted at skipping OTAs a while back. A bunch of guys around the league are skipping them. NFLPA wants them all virtual.

[PeaveyFury]

I figure if there's some kind of trade in place it would have to wait until June 1 (?) when the financials change. And if there is, it's probably already been worked out and we're just waiting until then. If Rodgers makes it past that, he'll stay in GB.

 

Some paper in Wisconsin reported that Green Bay wasn't yet convinced that Love is ready to be the starter just yet. Makes sense since there was no training camp. So Oakland makes more sense than Denver because Carr still presents a realistic chance of making the SB.

 

The Packers would likely have enough cap savings post 6/1 to be able to take Carr's contract back in a swap for Rodgers. A subsequent extension would free up more, presumably.

 

What would a Raiders/Rodgers deal look like? Carr+ what?

[CheezWizHed]

His comments about 'people' really mean 'me'.

 

Yes, this came out pretty clearly in the interview:

- Did he mean everyone on the team? No, he didn't mention his teammates once; neither by name (understandable) or even generically as a team.

- Who did he mention? - Starr, FarvEE, Reggie White - oh, he means the legends of the franchise. i.e. Rodgers himself.

**side note: It is REALLY funny how he mentions Favre even though he was treated EXACTLY the same way. At least Favre lasted 3 years with Rodgers behind him instead of one.

 

MVP year threw a wrench on the plans.

- This really shows what the problem is. They made a replacement plan in case Rodgers stunk. He had been regressing for two years and suddenly MVP revival last year. Sorry if you don't understand your own weakness; no one beats age. Yet, you want to fault the team for having a potential replacement.

 

I have to admit that a trade looks better as we go. Yes, Rodgers is probably our best chance to win next year. But assuming Gute stays...what does the locker room really start to look like next year?

[Fear The Chorizo]

MVP year threw a wrench on the plans.

 

If Rodgers is all about winning, this never, ever gets out of his mouth. Hell, if Rodgers is even sort of about winning and is a team player even just on gamedays this probably never comes out of his mouth.

 

I'd love to listen to him expand on what exactly these "plans" are that Rodgers is so certain were inevitable, no matter what his level of play was moving forward. No team just cuts bait and moves on from an MVP quarterback the season after he wins MVP. He's still under contract for 3 more seasons - in no way is that a "year to year contract" if Rodgers continued to perform at a high level.

 

And bringing in a talented but developmental QB project high in a draft is in no way locking down the expiration date on Rodgers' tenure as a Packer - his onfield production dictates that no matter what the backup QB roster situation looks like. If anything, multiple Rodgers injuries over the years that just cratered seasons because Green Bay had nothing aside from him in the QB room made getting more talent at that position a priority, then Rodgers' 2018 and 2019 seasons probably solidified a sense of urgency to plan for the future. That's obviously what the Packers' front office had in mind with drafting Love, and Rodgers knows this - he just can't bring himself to actually say those words because he knows that would speak to the flaws (age, injuries, 2018-2019 performance decline) that were creeping into his onfield abilities in recent years.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I figure if there's some kind of trade in place it would have to wait until June 1 (?) when the financials change. And if there is, it's probably already been worked out and we're just waiting until then. If Rodgers makes it past that, he'll stay in GB.

 

Some paper in Wisconsin reported that Green Bay wasn't yet convinced that Love is ready to be the starter just yet. Makes sense since there was no training camp. So Oakland makes more sense than Denver because Carr still presents a realistic chance of making the SB.

 

The Packers would likely have enough cap savings post 6/1 to be able to take Carr's contract back in a swap for Rodgers. A subsequent extension would free up more, presumably.

 

What would a Raiders/Rodgers deal look like? Carr+ what?

 

One little factoid - guess who one of Adams' collegiate QB's was?

[reillymcshane]

I figure if there's some kind of trade in place it would have to wait until June 1 (?) when the financials change. And if there is, it's probably already been worked out and we're just waiting until then. If Rodgers makes it past that, he'll stay in GB.

 

Some paper in Wisconsin reported that Green Bay wasn't yet convinced that Love is ready to be the starter just yet. Makes sense since there was no training camp. So Oakland makes more sense than Denver because Carr still presents a realistic chance of making the SB.

 

The Packers would likely have enough cap savings post 6/1 to be able to take Carr's contract back in a swap for Rodgers. A subsequent extension would free up more, presumably.

 

What would a Raiders/Rodgers deal look like? Carr+ what?

Proposals I have read include:

- Carr and two 1st rounders and one 2nd rounder

- Carr and three 1st rounders

- Carr and two 1st rounders and two 2nd rounders

 

Some proposals even add in a player or two. I don't know much about the LV roster to make a comment on any of their guys - short of TE Darren Waller, who I doubt the club is willing to part with.

 

I posted earlier that a Raiders deal makes a lot of sense - assuming the Packers don't think Love is ready to start.

 

- Carr is still good. A top 10-12 QB. That's not bad, so the club could hope to still win with him - especially if he takes to our offense. He should be able to fit into our salary structure, and we'd have him for two years. That fits the time frame to get Love ready to take over.

- Getting 3-4 high draft picks would be a jolt of young talent that we could use over the next few years.

- Jon Gruden is the kind of guy who would go all in on Rodgers - and I believe he has total control of personnel. He needs a franchise altering player - and Rodgers is it. Carr is fine - but he's never really loved the guy. He's made comments about not drafting Rodgers was his greatest regret. So time to correct that. He'd say "to heck with the next three years on draft picks. I'll take Rodgers and go for it in that time. After that - I either am fired or a hero. But who cares about those players who I don't even have yet. It's about winning now."

- Oakland would be further motivated to overpay to keep Rodgers out of Denver - their rivals. Chargers are up-and-coming with a young QB, Chiefs are obviously really good. Why give the Broncos - who have a lot of young talent - a QB that will transform them into a contender.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

My interpretation of the "wrench" was that him winning MVP complicated the Packers "moving on" plan, which was set in motion, at least as Rodgers was concerned, prior to even drafting Love when they appeared (again, from his perspective) to do little to improve a 6-win team. Drafting Love reinforced his feeling that the team moving on was imminent, then he won MVP and they could have their cake and eat it until the last possible second. "He's signed through next year so let's make sure he's MVP again before we decide anything."

 

That's when things boiled over and Rodgers said, no, not so fast.

[PeaveyFury]

I think all of your points are correct, reilly. There's a lot of potential uncertainty that the Packers would have with Love at QB on a team that is primed to contend. Using Carr as a bridge likely mitigates a lot of that concern.

 

And any of those trades for picks would likely be of interest to the Packers, I'd think....

[MrTPlush]

Rodgers isn't all about winning, correct. No player, literally no player, is all about winning. Please point me in the direction of a list of players that voluntarily offered to play for league minimum. Professional athletes are just like any other person on earth. They have many values of which they value at differing degrees. Location, money, winning, when they want to retire...all varies. Rodgers cares about winning plenty, just as much as any other player.

 

I also don't understand why now we are suddenly forgetting that the entire sports world (including most Packers fans) strongly felt the Packers were going to move on to Love after 2021. This was due to how his contract was set up and it would be fairly easy to move onto him at that point. That is what makes the contract effectively a year to year contract. It won't be a major burden to kick him to the curb or even trade him post 2021. It is about as close to year to year as you can get without literally signing a bunch of one year deals. Some even felt that after his MVP season they might still decide to move on after 2021 regardless of performance. Now I don't think this was ever the case and their commitment to him this offseason probably proves that was never a hard set divorce date.

 

Regarding Carr, is there really a point grabbing him if we don't believe he can lead us to a Super Bowl? If the Packers blow it with keeping Rodgers a bunch of 9-8 or 10-7 seasons aren't really going to mean much to the fanbase. Seems like we might as well get something better from the Raiders or flip Carr to another team. I don't think we need a bridge QB. If we want that just go sign some veteran.

[SeaBass]

Raiders were a top 10 offense with Carr, I'm not sure upgrading to Rodgers really moves the needle much for them. Their problem is defense and it sure seems to me like keeping their picks makes more sense than trading them away for a QB in regards to improving defensively. We've seen Packers teams with Rodgers leading a good offense with a not so great defense why would he be any more successful for the Raiders?

[PeaveyFury]

Rodgers isn't all about winning, correct. No player, literally no player, is all about winning. Please point me in the direction of a list of players that voluntarily offered to play for league minimum.

 

Let's not even try to pretend that Aaron Rodgers is scheduled to make anything close to the league minimum this year. He's quibbling over the difference between making $30-some million this year vs. $40 some million.

 

Regarding Carr, is there really a point grabbing him if we don't believe he can lead us to a Super Bowl? If the Packers blow it with keeping Rodgers a bunch of 9-8 or 10-7 seasons aren't really going to mean much to the fanbase. Seems like we might as well get something better from the Raiders or flip Carr to another team. I don't think we need a bridge QB. If we want that just go sign some veteran.

 

Because Carr is better than most journeyman vet QBs, by a lot. You seem to be assuming the Packers crater without Rodgers, which is possible, but not the only outcome. What if acquiring Carr gets them to 11-12 wins?

[PeaveyFury]

Raiders were a top 10 offense with Carr, I'm not sure upgrading to Rodgers really moves the needle much for them. Their problem is defense and it sure seems to me like keeping their picks makes more sense than trading them away for a QB in regards to improving defensively. We've seen Packers teams with Rodgers leading a good offense with a not so great defense why would he be any more successful for the Raiders?

 

The problem with the Raiders is that you can't assume they act like a normal team would. I could see a guy like Gruden alongside whichever Davis is running things now thinking that a guy like Rodgers makes them better without actually fixing their actual issues. In fact, he probably does in some way. Maybe that's the difference between 8 and 10-11 wins for them?

[Fear The Chorizo]

My interpretation of the "wrench" was that him winning MVP complicated the Packers "moving on" plan, which was set in motion, at least as Rodgers was concerned, prior to even drafting Love when they appeared (again, from his perspective) to do little to improve a 6-win team. Drafting Love reinforced his feeling that the team moving on was imminent, then he won MVP and they could have their cake and eat it until the last possible second. "He's signed through next year so let's make sure he's MVP again before we decide anything."

 

That's when things boiled over and Rodgers said, no, not so fast.

 

Agreed on thats what Rodgers may feel, but that also shows how insane that perception is. The Packers did a ton between the 2018 and 2019 seasons to improve their roster (short and longterm). If they truly had a "moving on" plan established, they don't go out and sign all the free agents they did and use high draft picks before the 2019 season in effort to fill the talent gaps that roster had at key spots on the defense.

 

If Rodgers thinks that 7 win improvement between 2018 and 2019 seasons was due to his performance, he needs to look at his stats again.

[MrTPlush]

Rodgers isn't all about winning, correct. No player, literally no player, is all about winning. Please point me in the direction of a list of players that voluntarily offered to play for league minimum.

 

Let's not even try to pretend that Aaron Rodgers is scheduled to make anything close to the league minimum this year. He's quibbling over the difference between making $30-some million this year vs. $40 some million.

 

Regarding Carr, is there really a point grabbing him if we don't believe he can lead us to a Super Bowl? If the Packers blow it with keeping Rodgers a bunch of 9-8 or 10-7 seasons aren't really going to mean much to the fanbase. Seems like we might as well get something better from the Raiders or flip Carr to another team. I don't think we need a bridge QB. If we want that just go sign some veteran.

 

Because Carr is better than most journeyman vet QBs, by a lot. You seem to be assuming the Packers crater without Rodgers, which is possible, but not the only outcome. What if acquiring Carr gets them to 11-12 wins?

 

That isn't my point. People seem to infer Rodgers doesn't really care about winning because he also has other priorities/wants. My point was no player is all about winning, so I don't really see the point people are trying to make.

 

Carr would be better than any journeyman QB. Carr could probably get us over .500....I would guess. However, if we don't think he can really win a Super Bowl is he worth not getting better long term value in some other form? Especially when he was referred to as a "bridge" to Jordan Love. If Love is the answer in a year or two just go get some scrap heap bridge QB. Carr would definitely make up a good chunk of the value we get back in my opinion, for a short term bridge...that seems like a waste. Now if people think he can maybe get us deep into the playoffs and maybe win a Super Bowl, yah totally, lets bring him back in the trade.

[PeaveyFury]

That isn't my point. People seem to infer Rodgers doesn't really care about winning because he also has other priorities/wants. My point was no player is all about winning, so I don't really see the point people are trying to make.

 

The point is, Rodgers is at the point in his career where he's made more money than he'll ever need. He's currently being a giant Diva over whether he makes $30 or $40 million dollars next year. All the other 'great' QBs like Manning, Favre, etc. were all about trying to get a second ring at the end of their career. Not Rodgers- he wants to be the highest paid player in the league. And in doing so, he's preventing his best chance to actually win from happening.

 

Carr could probably get us over .500....I would guess.

 

I think the disconnect here is that you seem to think the Packers are a below .500 team without Rodgers, which I think is completely off base.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I also don't really care about getting a QB in return. If the fans are upset about being knocked out of the playoffs I don't know why Carr and a 1st or 2nd round exit is fruitful. I'd prefer to just let the Phoenix rise from the ashes especially if that means picking higher in the draft a couple years.

[Fear The Chorizo]

I also don't really care about getting a QB in return. If the fans are upset about being knocked out of the playoffs I don't know why Carr and a 1st or 2nd round exit is fruitful. I'd prefer to just let the Phoenix rise from the ashes especially if that means picking higher in the draft a couple years.

 

Yes, but getting a decently paid QB back in return is probably the easiest way to make the financials work this offseason....then you could always flip that QB elsewhere the next offseason if you really wanted to hand the keys to Love in 2022.

[patrickgpe]

yeah i'd rather get the extra pick than a QB

[MrTPlush]

I think the disconnect here is that you seem to think the Packers are a below .500 team without Rodgers, which I think is completely off base.

 

No, I think they are about .500 (which isn't possible anymore, I know). That is with Love starting and being competent. So...not Brett Hundley type play. Even then I may vote for a Love team to be sub .500 because he has such little work with the starters and lets be honest, actual playing experience.

 

Darek Carr would certainly be a big step up on paper. Good chance they would be a playoff, but again, does the fanbase really need to tread water with a QB if we don't think they can actually lead us to a Super Bowl. We are talking about a fanbase that has had Top 3 or Top 5 Super Bowl favorite expectations for most of the last 20+ years.

 

I might not start Love anyway though. Let Rodgers go ball for a different team and not have Love get absolutely destroyed if he (and the team) aren't doing well. If the Packers think Love would benefit from another year sitting, they definitely should go that route.

[tmwiese55]

Yes a factor in getting a QB back is trying to mitigate the blowback by being solid next year. Trade Rodgers, go 4-13 and the people will go nuts, jobs will be on the line, etc. Make the playoffs they're covered.

[adambr2]

I also don't really care about getting a QB in return. If the fans are upset about being knocked out of the playoffs I don't know why Carr and a 1st or 2nd round exit is fruitful. I'd prefer to just let the Phoenix rise from the ashes especially if that means picking higher in the draft a couple years.

 

Yes, but getting a decently paid QB back in return is probably the easiest way to make the financials work this offseason....then you could always flip that QB elsewhere the next offseason if you really wanted to hand the keys to Love in 2022.

 

Right, I think it's almost a necessity in these deals. In the Raiders' example for instance, the Raiders are not paying Derek Carr 40M to be a backup for the next 2 years. So they either cut him (highly unlikely), they can trade him separately (somewhat more likely, but still unlikely), or they include him in the deal to us.

 

The only type of deal where a team wouldn't necessarily give us a QB back was if they had a young QB that wasn't necessarily working out the best but the other team wanted to keep as a cheap backup on a rookie deal. A Daniel Jones or Drew Lock, perhaps.