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 aaronitout View Post

    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.
    It wasn’t reported earlier to not be the reason either. There are instances where players posture for more money as a sign of respect from the organization. Not the case here it seems.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by BroncoFanDK View Post

      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.

      What QB of Rodgers caliber has been traded in the salary cap era? Rodgers immediately makes this a playoff team, there’s no denying that. Not having first round picks sucks, but more in regards to the long term than the short term. Many of those picks probably won’t pan out very well anyway as they’re going to be much later in the round. A net negative, but Rodgers still keeps us in the positive overall.

      Rodgers hasn’t made it back to the super bowl for so long primarily because for much of that time there were some home grown players not living up to their extensions (ie Mike Daniels (poor positional value to begin with) and Clay Matthews). Couple that with the philosophy of not signing free agents, add in letting certain players walk, and building through the draft (which they did poorly for the most part) and you have a close but no cigar team. They drafted a few really good players but never enough nor were they particularly good at drafting defensive talents.

      If Lock or Bridgewater put up elite numbers they will get a top 10 contract. Some team will bite and be ok with it. That’s the nature of the position and free agency, we saw that firsthand with Osweiler and a handful of good games.

      Comment


      • n 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."
        Can someone explain to me how Ian Rapoport reported in May something we didn’t know about until July?

        What is meant by we didn’t know anything about it?

        Obviously we knew about the extension in May, Rapoport reported it. The only thing that could possibly be new news are the details of that extension. Am I the only seeing the obvious here?
        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

          Can someone explain to me how Ian Rapoport reported in May something we didn’t know about until July?

          What is meant by we didn’t know anything about it?

          Obviously we knew about the extension in May, Rapoport reported it. The only thing that could possibly be new news are the details of that extension. Am I the only seeing the obvious here?
          Boy if we ever sign Rodgers you will be so disappointed....

          Comment


          • Originally posted by BroncoFanDK View Post

            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.

            I think you are underestimating our roster. You seem to be lumping us together with rebuilding teams or teams void of talent. We aren't in the Jets situation or teams of the past who traded away everything for a Rookie. We are likely to have a top defensive unit, a top WR unit and probably the best defensive backfield in the league. We have an all-pro LT and S and two incredible pass rushers. We can certainly afford to "only" have 12 picks instead of 14 over the next two years especially if adding a top rated QB is part of the equation.

            But again, have you seen some of the top QB contract numbers for '22 and '23. That is what we are up against with the franchise tag (if we have use it) as that will be the average of the top 5 QB contracts(as per league rules)......putting us paying whomever that is almost exactly what Rodgers is scheduled to make.

            I think we have a really good team and TBH I'm not worried about Lock or Bridgewater leading us. I think both guys can get this team to the playoffs.....I think many fans feel this way- but many also feel like Aaron Rodgers could be what puts us over the top.
            ​​​

            Comment


            • Originally posted by atwaterandstir View Post

              I think you are underestimating our roster. You seem to be lumping us together with rebuilding teams or teams void of talent. We aren't in the Jets situation or teams of the past who traded away everything for a Rookie. We are likely to have a top defensive unit, a top WR unit and probably the best defensive backfield in the league. We have an all-pro LT and S and two incredible pass rushers. We can certainly afford to "only" have 12 picks instead of 14 over the next two years especially if adding a top rated QB is part of the equation.

              But again, have you seen some of the top QB contract numbers for '22 and '23. That is what we are up against with the franchise tag (if we have use it) as that will be the average of the top 5 QB contracts(as per league rules)......putting us paying whomever that is almost exactly what Rodgers is scheduled to make.

              I think we have a really good team and TBH I'm not worried about Lock or Bridgewater leading us. I think both guys can get this team to the playoffs.....I think many fans feel this way- but many also feel like Aaron Rodgers could be what puts us over the top.
              ​​​
              There is no arguing that Rodgers is the better QB and the team is better with him. Everyone understands that.

              But I continually see comments dismissing the “cost” in assets to acquire him. I would be thrilled if trading for him was “ a couple of picks” and a market value contract . And the roster maintains its quality as you describe. But is that the reality of the trade? The Bronco low ball offer?

              The overall cost of the trade is the key point. Where is that sweet spot for a trade?

              Take a moment that think about it from the GB perspective that most ignore around here. I keep seeing the “ GB has no leverage” comments. But do we expect them to quietly hang there heads in shame and just hand him over for pennies on the dollar?

              Most speculation I have seen from the GB side of any trade has 3 first rd picks and a couple other 2nd or 3rds. They also include current players. Players like Chubb, Surtain, Risner, Jeudy or similar starters. Not just one but usually 2 or more. Doesn’t that weaken the overall team?

              Then comes the Rodgers contract. What does he expect? $25m? $30m? $40m+? For how many years and how much is guaranteed for an aging player? It matters because it effects the ability to re-sign or replace lost player either in the trade or in a year when the coveted “ best Defense in the league” loses 3 starters in the secondary or “best WR group” need to be paid. That extra $10-15m would go a long way in finding quality roster replacements over the next 3-4 yrs Rodgers would be expected to be in Denver. Especially difficult if he begins to decline as an aging vet. Disastrous if he plummets off the cliff.

              I love the idea of Rodgers leading the team as much as the next Bronco fan. Just not as “certain”’the cost matches the expectations of many around here.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by atwaterandstir View Post

                I think you are underestimating our roster. You seem to be lumping us together with rebuilding teams or teams void of talent. We aren't in the Jets situation or teams of the past who traded away everything for a Rookie. We are likely to have a top defensive unit, a top WR unit and probably the best defensive backfield in the league. We have an all-pro LT and S and two incredible pass rushers. We can certainly afford to "only" have 12 picks instead of 14 over the next two years especially if adding a top rated QB is part of the equation.

                But again, have you seen some of the top QB contract numbers for '22 and '23. That is what we are up against with the franchise tag (if we have use it) as that will be the average of the top 5 QB contracts(as per league rules)......putting us paying whomever that is almost exactly what Rodgers is scheduled to make.

                I think we have a really good team and TBH I'm not worried about Lock or Bridgewater leading us. I think both guys can get this team to the playoffs.....I think many fans feel this way- but many also feel like Aaron Rodgers could be what puts us over the top.
                ​​​
                Though we've discussed ad nauseum, which is not your fault, you state this situation soooo well! I will touch on the key points you made:
                1 - The roster. The Broncos have a good roster, and the addition of one of the best QBs in the league would be obviously a huge plus. What does that make us, even if we let one or two players go....I'd describe it as a top tier team. Instantly. I think our D is outstanding with the upgraded Dbackfield, but same goes for an O with Rodgers, 2 really good backs, a group of young, really talented receivers, and an Oline that took a major step in 2020, with the breakout year from Bolles. This would be a 2021 team with major upside, and very few issues.
                2 - Lost draft picks. Again, we only give up one 1st each year, and these first rounder picks will likely be quite late thanks to the probability of a very good season record, and hopefully a long playoff run. As stated repeatedly, draft picks are not a guarantee. Aaron Rodgers is as a good a guarantee as there is. And though you still have to pay for them, Rodgers will entice good players to want to play here in the next year or two, which in terms of talent gain/loss, probably makes lost draft picks an overall wash.
                3 - Rodgers is a big money investment, but if we go with Lock and Bridgewater, and they do well, we pay pretty big coin for the 2 of them. Same goes for any vet we may want to sign if a Rodgers deal does not happen, and the current guys do not succeed. And outside of a few QBs, you pay more for Rodgers because you get more.
                4 - Yes, Drew and Teddy might be good enough to get this team into the playoffs. But if you are a betting person, Rodgers gives you a better chance.
                Last edited by CanDB; 07-22-2021, 08:07 AM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post

                  There is no arguing that Rodgers is the better QB and the team is better with him. Everyone understands that.

                  But I continually see comments dismissing the “cost” in assets to acquire him. I would be thrilled if trading for him was “ a couple of picks” and a market value contract . And the roster maintains its quality as you describe. But is that the reality of the trade? The Bronco low ball offer?

                  The overall cost of the trade is the key point. Where is that sweet spot for a trade?

                  Take a moment that think about it from the GB perspective that most ignore around here. I keep seeing the “ GB has no leverage” comments. But do we expect them to quietly hang there heads in shame and just hand him over for pennies on the dollar?

                  Most speculation I have seen from the GB side of any trade has 3 first rd picks and a couple other 2nd or 3rds. They also include current players. Players like Chubb, Surtain, Risner, Jeudy or similar starters. Not just one but usually 2 or more. Doesn’t that weaken the overall team?

                  Then comes the Rodgers contract. What does he expect? $25m? $30m? $40m+? For how many years and how much is guaranteed for an aging player? It matters because it effects the ability to re-sign or replace lost player either in the trade or in a year when the coveted “ best Defense in the league” loses 3 starters in the secondary or “best WR group” need to be paid. That extra $10-15m would go a long way in finding quality roster replacements over the next 3-4 yrs Rodgers would be expected to be in Denver. Especially difficult if he begins to decline as an aging vet. Disastrous if he plummets off the cliff.

                  I love the idea of Rodgers leading the team as much as the next Bronco fan. Just not as “certain”’the cost matches the expectations of many around here.
                  And what if you're wrong on that price? You keep suggesting that that will be the price. That was the price for Watson, a young qb in his prime. That will not be the price for an aging qb with only a few years left. Likely 5.

                  So what if the price is 2 -1sts, 1- 2nd, and Tim Patrick?

                  That is more reasonable. the pack cannot just say we want ALLLLL this compensation. No one is going to give it to them. If Rodgers sits, they're in trouble. If they ask for too much they're in trouble. If he retires then we know they blew 2 -1sts and 1- 2nd immediately! And they're screwed.

                  They are not going to get the bounty you think. They are not going to get the bounty equal to Watson (pre hand jobs). Just isn't going to happen man.


                  Id like to hear your thoughts on the trade without Watson compensation.
                  So far:
                  FA- Melvin Gordon. Brandon Scherff
                  1. Kenneth Murray LB; 2. Shenault WR; 2B. Biadazz Center, 3. OT

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by CanDB View Post

                    Though we've discussed ad nauseum, which is not your fault, you state this situation soooo well! I will touch on the key points you made:
                    1 - The roster. The Broncos have a good roster, and the addition of one of the best QBs in the league would be obviously a huge plus. What does that make us, even if we let one or two players go....I'd describe it as a top tier team. Instantly. I think our D is outstanding with the upgraded Dbackfield, but same goes for an O with Rodgers, 2 really good backs, a group of young, really talented receivers, and an Oline that took a major step in 2020, with the breakout year from Bolles. This would be a 2021 team with major upside, and very few issues.
                    2 - Lost draft picks. Again, we only give up one pick each year, and these first rounder picks will likely be quite late thanks to the probability of a very good season record, and hopefully a long playoff run. As stated repeatedly, draft picks are not a guarantee. Aaron Rodgers is as a good a guarantee as there is. And though you still have to pay for them, Rodgers will entice good players to want to play here in the next year or two, which in terms of talent gain/loss, probably makes lost draft picks an overall wash.
                    3 - Rodgers is a big money investment, but if we go with Lock and Bridgewater, and they do well, we pay pretty big coin for the 2 of them. Same goes for any vet we may want to sign if a Rodgers deal does not happen, and the current guys do not succeed. And outside of a few QBs, you pay more for Rodgers because you get more.
                    4 - Yes, Drew and Teddy might be good enough to get this team into the playoffs. But if you are a betting person, Rodgers gives you a better chance.
                    You are correct. I do state the same points repeatedly, in response to the same narrative being stated repeatedly.

                    I get it, it is a Bronco fan board. The opinions are going to heavily biased towards the Bronco perspective. But sometimes I will watch threads and comments that completely dismiss the other side of the coin. Or arguing with a GB fan that his opinion is wrong.

                    At times I feel like I’m watching one of those house hunting shows on cable. With the client going through the shopping lists of “ must haves” and then the shot of the realtor rolling there eyes at the unrealistic expectations. Then the show goes through the “trade offs” as they look at properties until they settle for less and pay more.

                    IMO Broncos best chance of winning is this year with Rodgers. When the team is still “ mostly intact” and before his contract extension kicks in. This becomes more difficult daily as Training Camp starts in a week. Unless Rodgers is secretly studying a Bronco playbook it will be difficult to build chemistry within the offense.

                    Going forward it gets even more difficult to maintain the overall roster quality the Broncos have achieved.

                    And the other factor that you stated yourself, why is GB trading for such bad picks in the first place? Still believe Rodgers finds the “respect” he is looking for and plays for GB for at least year.

                    As I stated, I don’t hate the Rodgers concept. Maybe I’m even overestimating the potential issues. But you are just as much underestimating or dismissing them. Hope for both our sakes there is a balance point that makes us both happy. If Rodgers even gets to the trade market!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by underrated29 View Post

                      And what if you're wrong on that price? You keep suggesting that that will be the price. That was the price for Watson, a young qb in his prime. That will not be the price for an aging qb with only a few years left. Likely 5.

                      So what if the price is 2 -1sts, 1- 2nd, and Tim Patrick?

                      That is more reasonable. the pack cannot just say we want ALLLLL this compensation. No one is going to give it to them. If Rodgers sits, they're in trouble. If they ask for too much they're in trouble. If he retires then we know they blew 2 -1sts and 1- 2nd immediately! And they're screwed.

                      They are not going to get the bounty you think. They are not going to get the bounty equal to Watson (pre hand jobs). Just isn't going to happen man.


                      Id like to hear your thoughts on the trade without Watson compensation.
                      “ 2 1sts, 1 2nd and Patrick” …. I make that deal in a heartbeat.

                      I would have some concerns for his expected contract. Hopefully more in the area of “ team friendly” then “ highest paid QB in the League”. That effects the ability to sign and re-sign overall roster talent over the next three years.

                      Does your opinion change if the cost is more in line with the GB perspective I stated?

                      Comment


                      • To me Tim Patrick is not involved in any deal. He is a big factor in my Rodgers math as I believe he can be extended for far less than Sutton. Lock and his errant throws need Sutton and his unbelievable range. With Rodgers who has great accuracy -he just needs guys that will catch it. Tim Patrick was a league leader in catch rate and that is a great combo.

                        This is realistic in '22 -24

                        Lock/Bridgewater 27 million
                        Sutton 15 million
                        Rodgers 40 million
                        Patrick 7 million

                        Last edited by atwaterandstir; 07-22-2021, 08:33 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post

                          “ 2 1sts, 1 2nd and Patrick” …. I make that deal in a heartbeat.

                          I would have some concerns for his expected contract. Hopefully more in the area of “ team friendly” then “ highest paid QB in the League”. That effects the ability to sign and re-sign overall roster talent over the next three years.

                          Does your opinion change if the cost is more in line with the GB perspective I stated?
                          If we have to give up two players it definitely sways me away, but it depends upon whom the players are too.

                          If it is a Chubb and Jeudy for example, plus the 1sts and 2nds, then I would probably take my chances on deshaun watson getting aquitted/cleared/whatever and landing him. He will cost that much or less imo. If it is Tim Patrick and Kyle Fuller then I would be okay with that trade.

                          If it is more along the lines of what you are thinking I tell GB to have fun watching him file his retirement papers and if they change their minds they know where to find me.
                          So far:
                          FA- Melvin Gordon. Brandon Scherff
                          1. Kenneth Murray LB; 2. Shenault WR; 2B. Biadazz Center, 3. OT

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by atwaterandstir View Post
                            To me Tim Patrick is not involved in any deal. He is a big factor in my Rodgers math as I believe he can be extended for far less than Sutton. Lock and his errant throws need Sutton and his unbelievable range. With Rodgers who has great accuracy -he just needs guys that will catch it. Tim Patrick was a league leader in catch rate and that is a great combo.

                            This is realistic in '22 -24

                            Lock/Bridgewater 27 million
                            Sutton 15 million
                            Rodgers 40 million
                            Patrick 7 million
                            If we have Rodgers what is your thinking about having lock/ted? As a backup? 27 mil is a lot for a backup. We would only need 1 of them as a backup and def not at 27 mil.

                            Ideally if we have Rodgers we keep Lock as the backup, but even then he wont get a huge spike in pay or he can walk, I am not sure he would though. He may pull the osweiller.
                            So far:
                            FA- Melvin Gordon. Brandon Scherff
                            1. Kenneth Murray LB; 2. Shenault WR; 2B. Biadazz Center, 3. OT

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post

                              You are correct. I do state the same points repeatedly, in response to the same narrative being stated repeatedly.

                              I get it, it is a Bronco fan board. The opinions are going to heavily biased towards the Bronco perspective. But sometimes I will watch threads and comments that completely dismiss the other side of the coin. Or arguing with a GB fan that his opinion is wrong.

                              At times I feel like I’m watching one of those house hunting shows on cable. With the client going through the shopping lists of “ must haves” and then the shot of the realtor rolling there eyes at the unrealistic expectations. Then the show goes through the “trade offs” as they look at properties until they settle for less and pay more.

                              IMO Broncos best chance of winning is this year with Rodgers. When the team is still “ mostly intact” and before his contract extension kicks in. This becomes more difficult daily as Training Camp starts in a week. Unless Rodgers is secretly studying a Bronco playbook it will be difficult to build chemistry within the offense.

                              Going forward it gets even more difficult to maintain the overall roster quality the Broncos have achieved.

                              And the other factor that you stated yourself, why is GB trading for such bad picks in the first place? Still believe Rodgers finds the “respect” he is looking for and plays for GB for at least year.

                              As I stated, I don’t hate the Rodgers concept. Maybe I’m even overestimating the potential issues. But you are just as much underestimating or dismissing them. Hope for both our sakes there is a balance point that makes us both happy. If Rodgers even gets to the trade market!
                              This is a reasonable post in my opinion, though I am not as worried about missed training camp time. It could have an impact, but the first few games are against less than stellar opponents, so momentum will gather in my opinion. And a modified game plan that suits Rodgers will likely ensure at least 2 wins of the 3.

                              I could be underestimating some, but this potential "opportunity" has a an extremely good feel to me, and sometimes you go with your gut after doing the assessment. My gut feels really good, as it did when we pursued Manning, and like it did when there were talks about Brady possibly leaving the pats....though in his case it was not because it would benefit us but because I felt he could make a difference elsewhere, in a place he wanted to go.

                              So some of this is a "feeling", but most relates to raw data and various considerations. And the problem with it all is that you have to experience it to realize the outcome. Nothing we say or do matters....not until he lines up behind our Oline, and is wearing Orange and Blue.

                              Comment


                              • I am going to say NO to A.Rodgers. To Old and The Price Denver will have to pay is way too much Sorry In Drew Lock I Trust #3rd Year Player about to Break Out !! Oh Yaaaaa!!

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X