Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lets Poll It....Do You Want Aaron Rodgers To Lead The Denver Broncos?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Broncos are not going to get an MVP QB on a Lock salary. If Lock ever developed into an MVP type, he would make 40+ million too. Me personally, I would prefer the known commodity. We have been living on the wish strategy for 5 years now and haven't gotten any better.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Bronco51 View Post
      The Broncos are not going to get an MVP QB on a Lock salary. If Lock ever developed into an MVP type, he would make 40+ million too. Me personally, I would prefer the known commodity. We have been living on the wish strategy for 5 years now and haven't gotten any better.
      Not arguing the point. A quality QB needs to be paid. Simply a fact of life.

      But as I pointed out, it is not just about the money. If Rodgers was a free agent to be signed today there would not really be an issue. Even if they made him the highest paid QB for the next 4 yrs I would hope the Broncos were standing first in line to do so. And the accountants could work some overtime to make the numbers work.

      And that even includes the risk of giving an aging QB a four year deal, which should cause some pause, but wont'.

      But he isn't a free agent. There are trade implications added to the discussion. They have to be considered.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by jazzbodog View Post

        Wow....I heard the exact same thing....except nobody noticed if it was diet or regular Pepsi. Anyway, this stat must be true.
        In a revised study, Rodgers' stats drop from a winning record of .475 to .467 if it's a regular Pepsi. Although there is some heavy debate about the linkage to sunny vs cloudy days, so lets see how this shakes out.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post

          Not arguing the point. A quality QB needs to be paid. Simply a fact of life.

          But as I pointed out, it is not just about the money. If Rodgers was a free agent to be signed today there would not really be an issue. Even if they made him the highest paid QB for the next 4 yrs I would hope the Broncos were standing first in line to do so. And the accountants could work some overtime to make the numbers work.

          And that even includes the risk of giving an aging QB a four year deal, which should cause some pause, but wont'.

          But he isn't a free agent. There are trade implications added to the discussion. They have to be considered.
          I hear you. I don't think it's all about the money for him. I think he definitely wants a respectable contract, but I'm sure he realizes players may be included in the trade, as well as high contract, so that takes resources from the team. He seems to care more about being respected and being included in the plan to win. No matter what, to fit him in, our cap guys are going to have to get creative. We have a good amount of cap space, but no need to spend it all.

          Comment


          • The new salary cap number for next season has been increased by 30 million to $208 million

            I wont be surprised to see feelings and relationships suddenly healed.....to coincide with a heavy front loaded 5 year deal from GB.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by atwaterandstir View Post
              The new salary cap number for next season has been increased by 30 million to $208 million

              I wont be surprised to see feelings and relationships suddenly healed.....to coincide with a heavy front loaded 5 year deal from GB.
              I really don’t think money is the real issue here. It probably plays a role but I don’t think it’s the make of break. Rodgers feels disrespected, not just from the Love draft pick but from when the team didn’t ask him about LaFleur before they hired him.

              Plus a 5 year contract throws them out of their Love timeline. The fact is, they did draft him to replace Rodgers and they used a 1st so they could have that 5th year option. A new 5 year deal for Rodgers means Love is out and no one behind that pick will let their ego go to the point to where they’ll let a 1st round QB walk without ever seeing him start. We tried to resign Osweiler to a huge contract despite 7 or so games and he wasn’t even a 1st round pick.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by beastlyskronk View Post

                I really don’t think money is the real issue here. It probably plays a role but I don’t think it’s the make of break. Rodgers feels disrespected, not just from the Love draft pick but from when the team didn’t ask him about LaFleur before they hired him.

                Plus a 5 year contract throws them out of their Love timeline. The fact is, they did draft him to replace Rodgers and they used a 1st so they could have that 5th year option. A new 5 year deal for Rodgers means Love is out and no one behind that pick will let their ego go to the point to where they’ll let a 1st round QB walk without ever seeing him start. We tried to resign Osweiler to a huge contract despite 7 or so games and he wasn’t even a 1st round pick.
                Yes, that is exactly how I see it. Money, money, money....but at some point you get diminishing return, when the game changer at this time of his career appears to be respect and involvement in terms of a leadership capacity. He's checked the career boxes, other than winning more than one championship. He has plenty of game left, and, somewhat like Brady, is looking around for a more perfect fit, where football can not only be fun and rewarding, but where his voice is more valued. There are teams that can provide that, while offering an environment that is at least as conducive to winning more rings.

                Comment


                • Here's an interesting article that talked to 6 anonymous NFL front office people, including GMs, about what Rodgers' trade value would be. My take is the consensus is "two first rounders plus" and that three firsts would be possible, but an "outlier". The reasons for the lower value have been brought up in this thread.

                  https://sports.yahoo.com/what-do-som...153114132.html

                  With the new "advice" and what they think the market may be, how about we offer two firsts, a second, either Lock or Teddy, and we swap our second for their third every year Rodgers is on our roster after the third year?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post
                    Here's an interesting article that talked to 6 anonymous NFL front office people, including GMs, about what Rodgers' trade value would be. My take is the consensus is "two first rounders plus" and that three firsts would be possible, but an "outlier". The reasons for the lower value have been brought up in this thread.

                    https://sports.yahoo.com/what-do-som...153114132.html

                    With the new "advice" and what they think the market may be, how about we offer two firsts, a second, either Lock or Teddy, and we swap our second for their third every year Rodgers is on our roster after the third year?
                    I don’t think the rule about not trading picks more than three years out only applies to first round picks. Seems like a far fetched idea to begin with.

                    Apparently Vegas has set the odds on Lock being the favorite to start for Green Bay if Rodgers doesn’t.

                    All that aside, two firsts, a second, and Lock seems fair. Maybe throw in a 2023 third round pick.
                    My Opinion isn’t determined by what the Popular Opinion is. Sometimes I agree with the Majority, Sometimes I Don’t. If My Opinion is Different than Yours, I have to Ask One Question:
                    You Mad Bro?
                    Don’t Be A Mean Girl

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post
                      Here's an interesting article that talked to 6 anonymous NFL front office people, including GMs, about what Rodgers' trade value would be. My take is the consensus is "two first rounders plus" and that three firsts would be possible, but an "outlier". The reasons for the lower value have been brought up in this thread.

                      https://sports.yahoo.com/what-do-som...153114132.html

                      With the new "advice" and what they think the market may be, how about we offer two firsts, a second, either Lock or Teddy, and we swap our second for their third every year Rodgers is on our roster after the third year?
                      Thx for this. I had a feeling that we were not talking 3 firsts. Partly hoping that. If this is what these "tuned in" folks think, I'm even more down with it. I always start with the basics: 1 first is a given, and again, it's not til next season. The 2nd first makes simple sense, because we're talking MVP QB. And in both cases we're likely talking a lesser draft pick because we theoretically will have better records in both seasons....maybe much better.

                      Then you throw in a QB, which they probably need, and we do not. That's a wash.

                      So then comes the more difficult part, not that it's overpaying. Another player, like a receiver (not named Sutton) is fine by me. But that starts to minimize any other draft picks. If they want Risner or Chubb, it certainly ends the draft capital situation. 2 firsts, Lock and a WR and either Risner or Chubb is plenty for me (maybe too much), and I need to think about it. May have to revisit with draft capital consequences in our favour. But if not Chubb or Risner, I could see another 2nd and even a little more if we make it conditional to some degree, with Rodgers' years starting here. For me, the 2 firsts, Lock and a WR not named Sutton are not a big stretch for us, therefore we could add a little more draft capital, like a 2nd or 3rd.

                      End of the beautiful day, I feel better knowing what some of the big guys are saying. Yes, Rodgers only has a limited career remaining, and yes, he will be expensive from a salary perspective. But if we can get 3 or more years out of him, giving us time to draft/sign another QB, and he leads us to some real success.....I still love the concept!

                      Comment


                      • Interesting opinions shared in the article. Can be taken a couple of ways.

                        First, it was nice to see that the overall deal may not include as many assets as some suggest. Especially with the point of Rodgers new deal being considered. Still not very enthusiastic about giving up players other then a QB when he is likely getting a max contract. Still have the unrealistic fantasy he accepts a much more team friendly deal. A man can dream!

                        Second, the negative part is the “if one team bids against itself because FO feels it HAS to happen”.
                        Desperation can cause errors in judgement. Even by the most savvy of negotiators. Have to trust Paton and Elway have the “sand” to hold their ground if or when they ever sit at that table with GB. It would be a bold move to choose to walk away. The critics would be brutal!

                        Hope we see some resolution in the next couple weeks. Whether trading for him or not it is time to get to work on the season. First r the team and for Rodgers. Have to wonder how much “work” he has put in recently. Seems to be enjoying vacation time more then prepping for a season.

                        If the Broncos do make the trade, I can’t help but wonder just how ready Rodgers is for the transition to a new team, system and culture. For the price, they better be getting fully committed, motivated and physically game ready Rodgers.
                        Last edited by FR Tim; 05-27-2021, 07:33 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post
                          Interesting opinions shared in the article. Can be taken a couple of ways.

                          First, it was nice to see that the overall deal may not include as many assets as some suggest. Especially with the point of Rodgers new deal being considered. Still not very enthusiastic about giving up players other then a QB when he is likely getting a max contract. Still have the unrealistic fantasy he accepts a much more team friendly deal. A man can dream!

                          Second, the negative part is the “if one team bids against itself because FO feels it HAS to happen”.
                          Desperation can cause errors in judgement. Even by the most savvy of negotiators. Have to trust Paton and Elway have the “sand” to hold their ground if or when they ever sit at that table with GB. It would be a bold move to choose to walk away. The critics would be brutal!

                          Hope we see some resolution in the next couple weeks. Whether trading for him or not it is time to get to work on the season. First r the team and for Rodgers. Have to wonder how much “work” he has put in recently. Seems to be enjoying vacation time more then prepping for a season.

                          If the Broncos do make the trade, I can’t help but wonder just how ready Rodgers is for the transition to a new team, system and culture. For the price, they better be getting fully committed, motivated and physically game ready Rodgers.
                          I would not worry about Rodgers being ready, and able to work his way into our system and culture, only unless this dragged out for many weeks. The guy's a pro, and a leader. Plus he is not the type to embarrass himself on the field. He does need time to study up, get in reps and get to learn the inner aspects of our team/players. That does take time, but a lot of that will happen in actual game play. Brady took time. Game play did it. He looked ordinary for a good part of the season. But he and the group showed much more gel at the latter part of the season when it mattered most. The good news for The Broncos, the early schedule is not too bad. Decent O plus our fairly strong D should get us thru fine in those first weeks.
                          Last edited by CanDB; 05-27-2021, 08:10 AM.

                          Comment


                          • Rodgers “being ready” is just a small concern. He has to be traded first. Lol!

                            Just as an example though. Brady signed with Bucs on Mar 20th. Was in contact with teammates and coaches by phone and Zoom. almost immediately Was attempting workouts in April despite Health restrictions and had first unofficial passing workout with teammates on May 19th.

                            By that timeline, Broncos are 2 mos behind that schedule of learning the system. A week behind passing chemistry as of today.

                            Every week counts in either making this deal or moving on with the season. Hopefully it is resolved next week one way or the other.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post
                              Rodgers “being ready” is just a small concern. He has to be traded first. Lol!

                              Just as an example though. Brady signed with Bucs on Mar 20th. Was in contact with teammates and coaches by phone and Zoom. almost immediately Was attempting workouts in April despite Health restrictions and had first unofficial passing workout with teammates on May 19th.

                              By that timeline, Broncos are 2 mos behind that schedule of learning the system. A week behind passing chemistry as of today.

                              Every week counts in either making this deal or moving on with the season. Hopefully it is resolved next week one way or the other.
                              Think positive......

                              If we acquire him for a good price, it's an excellent situation. From there we accept whatever timeline, though I doubt it will take too long given The Pack have to move on as well. Positive situation with some small bumps.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Bronco51 View Post
                                The Broncos are not going to get an MVP QB on a Lock salary. If Lock ever developed into an MVP type, he would make 40+ million too. Me personally, I would prefer the known commodity. We have been living on the wish strategy for 5 years now and haven't gotten any better.
                                Good point. You pay for what you get, within the pay structure of the league. Your point, sort of the "bird in hand" take, relates well, because we have not had a quality QB for some time, so any savings we had as a result, did not result in better performance of the remainder of the team. It's a unit, and in the case of QBs, it does have more serious implications. Arguably the hardest and most important position in all of sports. Yes, it's expensive, but again, you pay for what you get. And to your comment about Luck, if you ever have a promising young QB on your roster, and if you get the production you hope for, over time, you will pay big as well. Pay me now, or pay me later, if you want a top tier QB.

                                In this case, pay me now means we have the bird in hand, and I'm pretty much all in if management wants to make a deal.
                                Last edited by CanDB; 05-27-2021, 10:26 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X