Simmons: I have intel Rodgers going to Jets

[ChuckkieB]

Despite this team not being able to draft a QB to save their life for the last 20 years, I cannot believe that there are some of you against Rodgers coming here.  Wilson was the last straw for me of holding on to this romantic notion of drafting a blue chip QB and riding him to multiple Super Bowls. That strategy has completely backfired over and over again and this team has wallowed in QB hell and the bottom of the standings for over a decade, so now if we have a chance to completely reverse that, even for a only a two year stretch, sign me the F up!  I'm sick of losing and I'm sick of rooting for bum QB's.

[Scotty Wooty Doo Doo]

Somehow i see Farve part 2 !

[Warfish]

15 minutes ago, ChuckkieB said:

Despite this team not being able to draft a QB to save their life for the last 20 years, I cannot believe that there are some of you against Rodgers coming here.

I am cynical that brining onboard yet another aging future HOF'er, a guy who has waffled about retiring for several years now, who had a poor season (for him), and is on the downside of his career at age 40, who will cost two #1 picks and $50 million a season in cap space, will work out the way we would want.

Would he be the best QB we may have ever had?  Sure, the same way Favre was when we acquired him in a very similar situation.

But will it work out, or will it simply cripple us for a one-year "run" where his skills deteriorate, his frustration mounts, and then he retires or demands a trade to Minnesota, lol.

Could it work?  Sure.  Will it work?  Forgive, but I have my doubts. 

Instant-fixes and miracle saviors isn't proper roster management, and we're not one QB away from a Super Bowl.

15 minutes ago, ChuckkieB said:

Wilson was the last straw for me of holding on to this romantic notion of drafting a blue chip QB and riding him to multiple Super Bowls. That strategy has completely backfired over and over again and this team has wallowed in QB hell and the bottom of the standings for over a decade, so now if we have a chance to completely reverse that, even for a only a two year stretch, sign me the F up!  I'm sick of losing and I'm sick of rooting for bum QB's.

All understandable.  

At least Rodgers would end any chance of Wilson playing, he'd be entertaining at least (even if just to watch flame out), and he could work out (for playoffs at least).

I won't cry if we do it, despite my doubts, but I won't cry if he goes elsewhere either.  

I don't know what the answer is.  Not today.

[Warfish]

9 hours ago, bitonti said:

Why would Rodgers do anything with his contract?

Hes due 50 mil in cash on March 17

Being traded is not more important than the 50 mil 

Unless he's somehow getting even more money, players don't just change their contracts 

Conversions of salary into bonus happens all the time.  Player doesn't take less, team gets cap savings by spreading it all out.

[faba]

This is the dilemma for 50 years we have been wrong so many times on getting the next franchise QB we just are desparate even for a short term solution

[PepPep]

20 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

I'm interested to hear more on the Purdy injury. If that UCL ruptured then that's Tommy John, out for the year. I think Brady goes to Vegas too but if the 49er job opens up, I can see him landing there.

49ers - Brady

Raiders - Rodgers

Panthers - Carr

Colts - Draft/Matt Ryan

Seahawks - Geno/Draft

 

I think Jimmy G lands with the Jets in this scenario but I think the Texans are dark horses for him with the NE guys there. Then we are probably looking at Tannehill.

[slimjasi]

31 minutes ago, ChuckkieB said:

Despite this team not being able to draft a QB to save their life for the last 20 years, I cannot believe that there are some of you against Rodgers coming here.  Wilson was the last straw for me of holding on to this romantic notion of drafting a blue chip QB and riding him to multiple Super Bowls. That strategy has completely backfired over and over again and this team has wallowed in QB hell and the bottom of the standings for over a decade, so now if we have a chance to completely reverse that, even for a only a two year stretch, sign me the F up!  I'm sick of losing and I'm sick of rooting for bum QB's.

As someone who is lukewarm at best on trading for Rodgers, my main issue is investing in a player who just had his worst season in forever at age 39. I suspect he's in the twilight of his career and am skeptical he will have a bounce back year at age 39-40. I also don't like the fact that he has already been talking about retirement for several years now. Basically, the Rodgers move feels like a classic desperate, short-sided move that is likely to backfire. 

If we trade for him, I'll be excited to see what happens, but the cynical Jets fan in me would expect him to bomb here. 

[Claymation]

40 minutes ago, Scotty Wooty Doo Doo said:

Somehow i see Farve part 2 !

I have no issue with this besides him being injured.

[bitonti]

31 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Conversions of salary into bonus happens all the time.  Player doesn't take less, team gets cap savings by spreading it all out.

Rodgers' salary is pathetically small - he's all bonus already. Like he makes 49 mil in bonus this year and 1 mil in salary 

we're basically saying give him more bonus 

[PepPep]

8 minutes ago, Warfish said:

I am cynical that brining onboard yet another aging future HOF'er, a guy who has waffled about retiring for several years now, who had a poor season (for him), and is on the downside of his career at age 40, who will cost two #1 picks and $50 million a season in cap space, will work out the way we would want.

Would he be the best QB we may have ever had?  Sure, the same way Favre was when we acquired him in a very similar situation.

But will it work out, or will it simply cripple us for a one-year "run" where his skills deteriorate, his frustration mounts, and then he retires or demands a trade to Minnesota, lol.

Could it work?  Sure.  Will it work?  Forgive, but I have my doubts. 

Instant-fixes and miracle saviors isn't proper roster management, and we're not one QB away from a Super Bowl.

While I understand being hesitant and skeptical, I don't think some of the things you are saying are 100% accurate, including the Favre comparison. And frankly, while Favre didn't 'work out' on the Jets. When he came here he had pretty similar stats that he had the last 3 years at GB and actually had a much better season a year later in Minn. So, you could argue his skills didn't really decline THAT much. It's just a bit of an odd comparison when arguing against Rodgers if you really look at the numbers.  

The other thing is- Rodgers WILL NOT cost multiple first round draft picks. He simply won't. The market will dictate that and nobody will pay multiple 1st rounders if ANY for Rodgers (who- as you said- has one foot one the door, in retirement). 

Rodgers has already said he is willing to re-work his deal if traded. Again, this is where he has some leverage. And that's fine. Rodgers doesn't have a no-trade clause but its hard to trade him with his deal as it currently stands. However, if he decides he want to be traded, he will be willing to re-work his deal. Its really the only way to make it happen. Carr, Rodgers, Jimmy G (whos a FA)- these guys know that in order to win the team needs cap space to field a competitive team and they need to work with management to allow for that to happen. In Rodger's case- a trade will pretty much require him to re-work his deal. 

His stats. I won't get much into his stats. I will just say that almost every year his stats have been fantastic and he has played almost all of his games (stayed healthy). This was his one off year with almost no offensive weapons and a porous defense. And still, his worst season would have gotten the Jets into the playoffs and most likely into the divisional game. Dude is still a stud. The year before (as a 38yr old), he threw for 4,115yrds; 37 TDs and 4 INTS...the year before (as an old a** 37yr old) he threw for 4,299yrds; 48 TDs and 5 INTS. Respect the name, respect the game. He's not just 'some guy' on the verge of retiring. He's still considered one of the top QBs in the NFL and underestimating him is probably a mistake. 

And you're right. It could not work. It's fair to have doubts. But I don't think the Jets will be giving up a ton of draft capital. They will DEFINITELY be getting a substantial upgrade at QB. His contract situation is overblown (those can always be reworked and typically are). And the goal is not to WIN the SB with this one move. The goal is to be able to compete. Rodgers gives us that opportunity. With Rodgers, some of the weapons we have ono offense and our defense we SHOULD be able to get into the playoffs and once we do, its anybody's game. He's the type of QB who has postseason experience and knows how to win. He will allow us to at least compete for a SB.    

[Augustiniak]

20 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

As someone who is lukewarm at best on trading for Rodgers, my main issue is investing in a player who just had his worst season in forever at age 39. I suspect he's in the twilight of his career and am skeptical he will have a bounce back year at age 39-40. I also don't like the fact that he has already been talking about retirement for several years now. Basically, the Rodgers move feels like a classic desperate, short-sided move that is likely to backfire. 

If we trade for him, I'll be excited to see what happens, but the cynical Jets fan in me would expect him to bomb here. 

I think Rodgers has been kinda mailing it in the past few years, he’s been at odds with GB management in a major way since they drafted love and his off the field stuff hasn’t helped.  Still, his accuracy is still very good and he’s been quite durable.  I think the biggest question with Rodgers is, how badly does he still want to win?  With Brady that’s never an issue, he’s chosen football over everything.  With Rodgers, who knows.  I think if his goal is to win a super bowl you’d be trading for a highly effective qb.  If his goal is to maybe play a few more years and date supermodels in nyc, then the plan is destined to fall short.  But he’s got enough left to make it interesting. 

[Gastineau Lives]

1 hour ago, Maynard13 said:

Let’s just trade them Breece  who was a 2nd rounder and G Wilson who was a 1st and get it over with.  Yea that makes a ton of sense. Two guys who are potentially HOF players for a guy who going to cost 100M for 2 years. 

So we’re getting a Breece level player at tackle in the second round, you’re saying 

[Gastineau Lives]

2 hours ago, bonkertons said:

lol if those guys are clowns, I cringe at the thought of what our current QBs are.  Walmart Clowns?  

John Wayne Gacyses

[slimjasi]

16 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

I think Rodgers has been kinda mailing it in the past few years, he’s been at odds with GB management in a major way since they drafted love and his off the field stuff hasn’t helped.  Still, his accuracy is still very good and he’s been quite durable.  I think the biggest question with Rodgers is, how badly does he still want to win?  With Brady that’s never an issue, he’s chosen football over everything.  With Rodgers, who knows.  I think if his goal is to win a super bowl you’d be trading for a highly effective qb.  If his goal is to maybe play a few more years and date supermodels in nyc, then the plan is destined to fall short.  But he’s got enough left to make it interesting. 

I think you hit on a big point with the bolded. It was Gronk who recently pointed out that Rodgers said he can still win MVPs, when what he should have said is that he can still lead a team to a SB trophy. 

I'm just very skeptical about Rodgers for a myriad of reasons and it just feels like the type of move we make that never works out. We have a long, tortured history of bringing in stars who made their name with another organization and then underwhelmed as Jets. I just don't have a good feeling about Rodgers. Maybe I'm wrong. 

[THE BARON]

Brady to Raiders.  Rodgers to Jets.  Carr to Panthers ,Colts. or Redsk... CAUGH. Commanders.  That seems most likely now.

[C Mart]

jamie stuart @jamiestuartTV

Leroy Butler on@WFAN660 says he thinks Rodgers back to Green Bay is “100 percent.”

[ChuckkieB]

46 minutes ago, slimjasi said:

As someone who is lukewarm at best on trading for Rodgers, my main issue is investing in a player who just had his worst season in forever at age 39. I suspect he's in the twilight of his career and am skeptical he will have a bounce back year at age 39-40. I also don't like the fact that he has already been talking about retirement for several years now. Basically, the Rodgers move feels like a classic desperate, short-sided move that is likely to backfire. 

If we trade for him, I'll be excited to see what happens, but the cynical Jets fan in me would expect him to bomb here. 

I'm as cynical as it gets too, but investing in young QB's and wasting years at a time to watch them crash and burn hasn't worked for the Jets in two decades, so I'm all for trying a different approach.  Normally I hate the high priced, wrong side of his career, mercenary approach but I'm sick and tired of rooting for sh*tty teams year after year.  As long suffering fans, we invest a lot of time and emotion into this damn team, and we're f**king due for some sort of payoff! I'd rather watch Rodgers potentially crash and burn for two years than Carr or Garappolo win us 9 games and lose a first round road playoff game. If Rodgers has any magic left at all, this team can do some damage next year, and that's the kind of legit hope that Jets fans have been begging for!

[Zachtomims47]

 

MOREEEE

[C Mart]

1 hour ago, Scotty Wooty Doo Doo said:

Somehow i see Farve part 2 !

And that means what?

[PepPep]

2 hours ago, Maynard13 said:

Let’s just trade them Breece  who was a 2nd rounder and G Wilson who was a 1st and get it over with.  Yea that makes a ton of sense. Two guys who are potentially HOF players for a guy who going to cost 100M for 2 years. 

OR lets trade them Zach Wilson and Denzel Mims. 

Am I playing the same game you are yet? Have I convinced you that your reasoning makes absolutely no sense yet?  

[Claymation]

37 minutes ago, Augustiniak said:

I think Rodgers has been kinda mailing it in the past few years, he’s been at odds with GB management in a major way since they drafted love and his off the field stuff hasn’t helped.  Still, his accuracy is still very good and he’s been quite durable.  I think the biggest question with Rodgers is, how badly does he still want to win?  With Brady that’s never an issue, he’s chosen football over everything.  With Rodgers, who knows.  I think if his goal is to win a super bowl you’d be trading for a highly effective qb.  If his goal is to maybe play a few more years and date supermodels in nyc, then the plan is destined to fall short.  But he’s got enough left to make it interesting. 

What? He won the MVP in '21 and '20.

[RutgersJetFan]

10 minutes ago, C Mart said:

jamie stuart @jamiestuartTV

Leroy Butler on@WFAN660 says he thinks Rodgers back to Green Bay is “100 percent.”

Leroy Butler can shut the hell up.

[Adoni Beast]

12 minutes ago, C Mart said:

jamie stuart @jamiestuartTV

Leroy Butler on@WFAN660 says he thinks Rodgers back to Green Bay is “100 percent.”

[bla bla bla]

1 hour ago, slimjasi said:

As someone who is lukewarm at best on trading for Rodgers, my main issue is investing in a player who just had his worst season in forever at age 39. I suspect he's in the twilight of his career and am skeptical he will have a bounce back year at age 39-40. I also don't like the fact that he has already been talking about retirement for several years now. Basically, the Rodgers move feels like a classic desperate, short-sided move that is likely to backfire. 

If we trade for him, I'll be excited to see what happens, but the cynical Jets fan in me would expect him to bomb here. 

He injured his thumb early in the season.

 

- Rodgers play without Hackett

- Seattle's play without Russell Wilson

?

[Maynard13]

21 minutes ago, PepPep said:

OR lets trade them Zach Wilson and Denzel Mims. 

Am I playing the same game you are yet? Have I convinced you that your reasoning makes absolutely no sense yet?  

You actually thought I was being serious? Seriously? Talktherapy.com 

[Maynard13]

2 hours ago, Maynard13 said:

Let’s just trade them Breece  who was a 2nd rounder and G Wilson who was a 1st and get it over with.  Yea that makes a ton of sense. Two guys who are potentially HOF players for a guy who going to cost 100M for 2 years. 

So people actually beliee I was being serious here. I was making a point how giving up a ! and 2 would, could be like giving up a G Wilson and Breece Hall.  Or it could be giving up two Zachs.  Bottom line, I'm not trading for Rodgers if we are forced to surrender a #1, conditional or not. The life of a Jets fan. Guaranteed to lose one's sense of humor.

[Maynard13]

55 minutes ago, Gastineau Lives said:

So we’re getting a Breece level player at tackle in the second round, you’re saying 

So let me ask, would you trade Breece for Rodgers right now straight up? You dont know what you're getting when you draft a player, in any round/pick. Could be a great fit or a bust. It's a crapshoot. JD's draft picks have been getting much better so I'll forgo giving up a #1. I could see a #2 and another #2 on a conditional basis in 2024. 

[slimjasi]

16 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

He injured his thumb early in the season.

 

- Rodgers play without Hackett

- Seattle's play without Russell Wilson

?

The injury is a fair point but injuries happen more to older QBs and I'm still not sold on his commitment to playing/winning. 

[Zachtomims47]

1 minute ago, Maynard13 said:

So let me ask, would you trade Breece for Rodgers right now straight up? You dont know what you're getting when you draft a player, in any round/pick. Could be a great fit or a bust. It's a crapshoot. JD's draft picks have been getting much better so I'll forgo giving up a #1. I could see a #2 and another #2 on a conditional basis in 2024. 

Easily. There shouldn't be a debate on that lol. 

[shuler82]

3 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

So people actually beliee I was being serious here. I was making a point how giving up a ! and 2 would, could be like giving up a G Wilson and Breece Hall.  Or it could be giving up two Zachs.  Bottom line, I'm not trading for Rodgers if we are forced to surrender a #1, conditional or not. The life of a Jets fan. Guaranteed to lose one's sense of humor.

So you wouldn’t give up a #1 for.. let’s say.. a 2 year window of Rodgers and this roster? 

I don’t know. We’ve had a lot of #1 picks over the last 12 years. Think I’m taking the chance to make a post season run now before all of our young players get too expensive to keep together.

[Maynard13]

9 hours ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Also because every other year our 1st round only yields busts anyway, going back for a decade, and that'd be next year. So there's really nothing lost. 

HUH? G Wilson is a bust? Becton had a stellar 1st year then got injured. Not his fault. Players get injured. AVT, another 1st round pick is a bust? I hear you looking backwards BUT trauma therapy resolves a lot of  issues.  I'd let JD continue to shape this team primarily through the draft. He is done a great job in flipping this roster over. Its no quick fix.  Rodgers woul dbe nice but not if we're surrending big assets like a #1.

No Way (Jose) Edwards.

[Maynard13]

5 minutes ago, shuler82 said:

So you wouldn’t give up a #1 for.. let’s say.. a 2 year window of Rodgers and this roster? 

I don’t know. We’ve had a lot of #1 picks over the last 12 years. Think I’m taking the chance to make a post season run now before all of our young players get too expensive to keep together.

NOOOOOO as in N O  NOOOOOO

[HighPitch]

AR is such a dick too. Very unrootable

[BigRy56]

Only a matter of time my brethren

[Zachtomims47]

11 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

HUH? G Wilson is a bust? Becton had a stellar 1st year then got injured. Not his fault. Players get injured. AVT, another 1st round pick is a bust? I hear you looking backwards BUT trauma therapy resolves a lot of  issues.  I'd let JD continue to shape this team primarily through the draft. He is done a great job in flipping this roster over. Its no quick fix.  Rodgers woul dbe nice but not if we're surrending big assets like a #1.

No Way (Jose) Edwards.

We use those big assets to find a QB. We've been searching for quite sometime. Why not use it to acquire said QB? If it were 2 firsts, then I agree, no thanks. But surrendering just one year? Pft. I'm all in.