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

  • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post

    How do you know why Rodgers is upset? He's never said so himself. My guess is he doesn't trust the GB front office, or at least someone in the FO.

    And where did you come up with the idea that I think drafting Love gives Rodgers leverage? You're just making things up now. Playing or not playing is Rodgers' leverage. I've said this many times so I'm not sure you'll get it this time either.

    I've asked you before...why did Cinn trade Palmer when they didn't have to? They would have gotten more if they waited until after the season too, right?

    As far as waiting to trade Rodgers next season after playing him this season...what happens if he gets injured, what does that do to his trade value? GB better hope Rodgers doesn't get hurt or your plan of "getting more" will quickly become "getting less". A bird in hand....

    Cinci had Dalton who was playing well enough to make it okay to trade Palmer. They got to the playoffs with Dalton in five straight years if I remember correctly.

    Rodgers has zero leverage to force a trade. His leverage is just a fantasy created by fans.
    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 broncolee View Post
      Whether the current story is new or not, it was reported several weeks or months ago that Rodgers turned down an extension.

      It means nothing at this point.

      No one knows for a fact that Rodgers wants out of Green Bay.
      It is relevant what we heard this am. It may not suit your dialogue, but that's life. Adam Schefter and other sources are very aware of the news they put out there. It's called "news" because it's "new".

      Comment


      • Originally posted by broncolee View Post

        Cinci had Dalton who was playing well enough to make it okay to trade Palmer. They got to the playoffs with Dalton in five straight years if I remember correctly.

        Rodgers has zero leverage to force a trade. His leverage is just a fantasy created by fans.
        Wrong. If Rodgers is willing to sit, he has leverage. That's a fact. And the point that Cinn felt they had more to gain instead of waiting until after the season still stands.

        BTW, what was Elway's leverage to force a trade? Or Eli Manning's leverage to force a trade? Elway at least had baseball. Not acknowledging actual historical facts is fan denial.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post

          Wrong. If Rodgers is willing to sit, he has leverage. That's a fact. And the point that Cinn felt they had more to gain instead of waiting until after the season still stands.

          BTW, what was Elway's leverage to force a trade? Or Eli Manning's leverage to force a trade? Elway at least had baseball. Not acknowledging actual historical facts is fan denial.
          Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong
          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


          • Aaron Rodgers has zero leverage to force a trade.

            That doesn’t mean he won’t be traded.

            It just means he has zero leverage to force a trade.

            It is entirely the Packers’ decision whether to trade him or not.
            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 FR Tim View Post

              So you are splitting hairs on this topic pretty close.

              In April, it is reported GB offered Rodgers an extension, he refused.
              In July, it is reported GB offered Rodgers an extension, he refused.

              That is some damn fine cutting edge reporting by Schefter.

              And since we are nit picking the details, in the Schefter report it states ".This off-season" . Do we know if Schefter is reporting on a new offer that was made by GB in recent days? A standing offer? The same offer that technically fulfills the "this off-season" criteria. Inquiring minds must know.

              Most importantly does it even matter if he is not on the trading block?
              If you click the first link to the Google News search you will see that every major news outlet is reporting it as NEW news, Tim.

              And no, in April it was NOT reported that he was offered an extension with top pay and refused. It was reported that he wasn't interested in returning to the team, and that contract negotiations had broken down. See: Report: Aaron Rodgers Wants Contract Extension, Not Packers' Restructured Deal

              In May, Ian Rapoport reported that he turned down the extension that he had wanted in April, but we knew nothing about it until Schefter's latest tweet: "Packers offered Aaron Rodgers a two-year contract extension that would have tied him to Green Bay for five more seasons and made him the highest-paid QB and player in football. Rodgers declined the offer, proof it’s not about the money."

              Denigrate that as splitting hairs if you like, but lots of people are following this situation very closely and want every little detail to understand his mindset and which way this might go.
              For example, while going through some of the news links this morning I came across this:

              Pat McAfee Shares New Details On Aaron Rodgers Situation

              There are people looking everywhere for information on what Aaron Rodgers will do next–even the schedules of cleaning services in the Green Bay area.

              Yesterday, Packers play-by-broadcaster Wayne Larrivee appeared on NFL Network and said he has unconfirmed reports of Rodgers hiring a service to deep-clean his Green Bay home next week. If true, this would seem to indicate the three-time MVP intends on reporting for training camp.

              However, on his radio show today, Pat McAfee cited a text message from Rodgers saying he has never had his house cleaned by anyone but his own personal cleaner. Through McAfee, Rodgers also threw cold water on the idea that his renewal of a Green Bay country club membership last month carries deeper meaning.

              “The country club renewal isn’t something that I pick and choose to do,” Rodgers told McAfee, implying that it happened automatically.

              source: https://thespun.com/nfl/nfc-north/gr...gers-situation

              So, like it or not, every little thing is getting scrutiny right now.

              Of course this latest item begs the question – if this is not about the money, and Rodgers simply wants out because of the management, then why was he fussing with them so much over the contract back in April?



              Superbowl 50 MVP Von Miller on February 7th, 2016

              Comment


              • Originally posted by underrated29 View Post



                I think we have beaten this horse to death enough, but to respond to the highlighted portion of your post.....

                The difference is they have been competing for the SB for the last 5 years, were 1 game away last year and likely are among the favorites (if he plays this year). That is the position I want us to be in. Competing for a SB. We have not been there for the last 5 years, not even close. So yes, anything ending up like them is EXACTLY what we want to be. GB struggled to fill holes because they are stupid at drafting. We do not seem to have those problems. Our roster is better than theirs QB aside.
                The whole notion that we retain our roster in a trade and that we don't need draft picks and elite players is laughable.
                Green Bay has nothing but money tied up in Aaron Rodgers, whereas any trade partner would have to give up elite draft picks, players and money. Secondly, we are not in a division that is as easy as NFC North. 40 million extra in cap space can buy some good players to support Drew Lock.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by L.M. View Post


                  If you click the first link to the Google News search you will see that every major news outlet is reporting it as NEW news, Tim.

                  And no, in April it was NOT reported that he was offered an extension with top pay and refused. It was reported that he wasn't interested in returning to the team, and that contract negotiations had broken down. See: Report: Aaron Rodgers Wants Contract Extension, Not Packers' Restructured Deal

                  In May, Ian Rapoport reported that he turned down the extension that he had wanted in April, but we knew nothing about it until Schefter's latest tweet: "Packers offered Aaron Rodgers a two-year contract extension that would have tied him to Green Bay for five more seasons and made him the highest-paid QB and player in football. Rodgers declined the offer, proof it’s not about the money."

                  Denigrate that as splitting hairs if you like, but lots of people are following this situation very closely and want every little detail to understand his mindset and which way this might go.
                  For example, while going through some of the news links this morning I came across this:

                  Pat McAfee Shares New Details On Aaron Rodgers Situation

                  There are people looking everywhere for information on what Aaron Rodgers will do next–even the schedules of cleaning services in the Green Bay area.

                  Yesterday, Packers play-by-broadcaster Wayne Larrivee appeared on NFL Network and said he has unconfirmed reports of Rodgers hiring a service to deep-clean his Green Bay home next week. If true, this would seem to indicate the three-time MVP intends on reporting for training camp.

                  However, on his radio show today, Pat McAfee cited a text message from Rodgers saying he has never had his house cleaned by anyone but his own personal cleaner. Through McAfee, Rodgers also threw cold water on the idea that his renewal of a Green Bay country club membership last month carries deeper meaning.

                  “The country club renewal isn’t something that I pick and choose to do,” Rodgers told McAfee, implying that it happened automatically.

                  source: https://thespun.com/nfl/nfc-north/gr...gers-situation

                  So, like it or not, every little thing is getting scrutiny right now.

                  Of course this latest item begs the question – if this is not about the money, and Rodgers simply wants out because of the management, then why was he fussing with them so much over the contract back in April?

                  Curious to hear what you think about the multiple reports today stating that the Schefter report is not “new news”?

                  Even the suggestion by Kornheiser that it was Schefter doing a little PR work for GB. With the rest of the media just blindly jumping on the story to give the impression of “ new news”.

                  The plot thickens!
                  Last edited by FR Tim; 07-21-2021, 07:28 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by BroncoFanDK View Post

                    The whole notion that we retain our roster in a trade and that we don't need draft picks and elite players is laughable.
                    Green Bay has nothing but money tied up in Aaron Rodgers, whereas any trade partner would have to give up elite draft picks, players and money. Secondly, we are not in a division that is as easy as NFC North. 40 million extra in cap space can buy some good players to support Drew Lock.
                    Some will even go so far as to state "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result" in this situation. I won't say that's what we have done, but 5 straight sub par seasons, and an abundance of QB changes over those years and much longer, which have essentially restricted our offensive production. This is a pattern that seems closely linked. Even with a good D.

                    Many of us are saying that if you can acquire one of the best QBs both in terms of the history of the game AND in current times, you can instantly elevate this solid roster, and is worth the loss of some draft cap and possibly a player or two. The story goes like this....it is worth sacrificing "potential" down the road and even some on the current roster for instant leadership and talent at the helm. Draft picks are never a guarantee, plus a HoF QB can lure other talent in Free Agency. Rodgers is better than Brady of late, but Brady proved how important a quality leader can be. This type of leader makes the whole team better. They bring confidence and ample evidence of success.

                    They do not come cheap, but as other says, no matter what you do you will pay pretty good coin for a starting QB, even a barely average one at that.

                    What's laughable is being the one to say others are laughable, without any proof that it won't work. Manning instantly made us a contender. Brady instantly made Tampa a contender. They came "freely" but we've had ample discussion about the cost/benefits of a trade. The Broncos, minus a few draft picks, and maybe a player or two, are a really good roster today.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by BroncoFanDK View Post

                      The whole notion that we retain our roster in a trade and that we don't need draft picks and elite players is laughable.
                      Green Bay has nothing but money tied up in Aaron Rodgers, whereas any trade partner would have to give up elite draft picks, players and money. Secondly, we are not in a division that is as easy as NFC North. 40 million extra in cap space can buy some good players to support Drew Lock.
                      No one said anything about not needing draft picks, but losing your first Rd pick is not a death sentence. Teams are willing to move around the draft.
                      Aaron Rodgers is the top of the "elite" at the most critical position. I'm not sure where you think losing one or two guys (or selections) but gaining there is somehow laughable.

                      But more importantly where is this 40 million in extra cap space coming from or going to remain? That money is getting spent at the QB position regardless. Have you seen the QB contracts next season? That is the year we may be looking at a franchise tag situation or an extension of some kind.

                      If Lock is our starter and shows any kind hope, we can't let him play out his contract for '22 and hit FA, that's not how starting QBs contracts work. They very very rarely just expire (outside of 1 yr deals) They get cut or they get extended before they can hit FA. If Bridgewater wins the job and has success we are looking at a Franchise tag or a multi-year deal.....and I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Bridgewater has been the better QB at every stage of his career. That is what is most likely to continue.

                      If you think building a team around Rodgers and a 40 million hit would be tough, take a look at the franchise tag number Teddy is about to get in '22 -or if Lock improves, the cap hit Lock and Sutton (who Lock HAS to have) will have in '22 and beyond. There is more than the '21 season.
                      Last edited by atwaterandstir; 07-21-2021, 09:11 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by BroncoFanDK View Post

                        The whole notion that we retain our roster in a trade and that we don't need draft picks and elite players is laughable.
                        Green Bay has nothing but money tied up in Aaron Rodgers, whereas any trade partner would have to give up elite draft picks, players and money. Secondly, we are not in a division that is as easy as NFC North. 40 million extra in cap space can buy some good players to support Drew Lock.
                        Its laughable if you think 40 mil in cap space is going to help us.

                        What else is laughable is the Packers and the entire League laughing at us, while they compete for suoer bowls and we are Consistently one of the 5 worst teams in the entire league.

                        But hey those last 5 years we have had 40 mil in cap space and high round draft picks, right? They've served us well havent they? Youre right, this sounds like a great winning formula.
                        So far:
                        FA- Melvin Gordon. Brandon Scherff
                        1. Kenneth Murray LB; 2. Shenault WR; 2B. Biadazz Center, 3. OT

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Bronco51 View Post
                          So, hearing Rodgers turned down an offer to be extended and become the highest paid player in history. So, looks like money isn’t the reason.
                          Was money ever reported to be the reason? I don't think it was.

                          Rodgers declined the 2 year extension, because it was a glorified restructure that would have kept him in GB through the end of 2023. He wants the starting job for the rest of his career, not 1-3 more seasons like the Packers want.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post

                            How do you know why Rodgers is upset? He's never said so himself. My guess is he doesn't trust the GB front office, or at least someone in the FO.

                            And where did you come up with the idea that I think drafting Love gives Rodgers leverage? You're just making things up now. Playing or not playing is Rodgers' leverage. I've said this many times so I'm not sure you'll get it this time either.

                            I've asked you before...why did Cinn trade Palmer when they didn't have to? They would have gotten more if they waited until after the season too, right?

                            As far as waiting to trade Rodgers next season after playing him this season...what happens if he gets injured, what does that do to his trade value? GB better hope Rodgers doesn't get hurt or your plan of "getting more" will quickly become "getting less". A bird in hand....

                            I was assuming Rodgers was upset for the sake of discussion. If he isnt, then this is all a moot conversation, don't you think?

                            You claimed that the Packers being willing trade Rodgers means Rodgers has leverage. But all it actually means is that we have a 1st round QB who we plan on succeeding him. That isnt leverage for Rodgers, its leverage for GB.

                            CINN traded Palmer because they got a better deal then they would have gotten later. The Raiders gave two firsts because their starting QB got injured.

                            I agree that Rodgers getting hurt would hurt his value, but him staying healthy until there are more teams bidding would increase his value AND we get him for the 21' season. That's worth the risk of him getting hurt.

                            Even if he did get hurt, the additional teams involved in the bidding would still likely offset the value depreciation that would accompany an injury.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post

                              Wrong. If Rodgers is willing to sit, he has leverage. That's a fact. And the point that Cinn felt they had more to gain instead of waiting until after the season still stands.

                              BTW, what was Elway's leverage to force a trade? Or Eli Manning's leverage to force a trade? Elway at least had baseball. Not acknowledging actual historical facts is fan denial.
                              That isnt leverage, because GB will get more in return by waiting until after the season when more teams are bidding.

                              Cincy was the opposite. The Raiders start got injured and they had a deal that wouldn't be beaten. Noone else was going to trade 2 firsts for Carson Palmer.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by atwaterandstir View Post

                                No one said anything about not needing draft picks, but losing your first Rd pick is not a death sentence. Teams are willing to move around the draft.
                                Aaron Rodgers is the top of the "elite" at the most critical position. I'm not sure where you think losing one or two guys (or selections) but gaining there is somehow laughable.

                                But more importantly where is this 40 million in extra cap space coming from or going to remain? That money is getting spent at the QB position regardless. Have you seen the QB contracts next season? That is the year we may be looking at a franchise tag situation or an extension of some kind.

                                If Lock is our starter and shows any kind hope, we can't let him play out his contract for '22 and hit FA, that's not how starting QBs contracts work. They very very rarely just expire (outside of 1 yr deals) They get cut or they get extended before they can hit FA. If Bridgewater wins the job and has success we are looking at a Franchise tag or a multi-year deal.....and I hate to be the bearer of bad news but Bridgewater has been the better QB at every stage of his career. That is what is most likely to continue.

                                If you think building a team around Rodgers and a 40 million hit would be tough, take a look at the franchise tag number Teddy is about to get in '22 -or if Lock improves, the cap hit Lock and Sutton (who Lock HAS to have) will have in '22 and beyond. There is more than the '21 season.
                                There is a substantial difference between loosing your first round pick for one year and for multiple years. We have seen teams overcome trading future picks for high draft position QBs (very inexpensive QB) but only Rams and Eagles have had success with that formula, but others have been tanking since going big. No one has had success with a trade like what people are pining for in the 27 years of the salary cap era.

                                As amazing as Aaron Rodgers is, he has not been able to get GB to the SB in the last 12 years, where he has been one of the best paid QBs. It is not easier to make it in a tougher division with less draft assets.

                                As for the salaries that Lock/Bridgewater can expect they need to be elite for years to hit the salaries that Rodgers would command. I doubt that either of these two QBs will earn top 10 salaries.


                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X