Aaron Rodgers to the Jets rumor: Merged

[dbatesman]

7 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I think it's the lack of integrity (making sh*t up) people despise. We love that Rodgers calls them on their BS.

We should be able to rely on these people to report the truth. We can't. 

Why are you so defensive of them?

Truthcharge: The Loneliness of Courage

[Barry McCockinner]

1 minute ago, Tranquilo said:

You just said they were making sh*t up. That's not lies?

Like I said, you're saying that Rodgers calling out the media as if it's one thing. That's where the black and white comes from. Some reports are good, some are bad. Nothing to whine about as if they're ruining his life. And he could've said something this entire time if he wanted "transparency."

yes - clearly they have made sh*t up.

• they made up that Rodgers had a list of demands
• they made up that Rodgers was the hold up

They have also got some things right.

The point is, they shouldn't be making ANYTHING up. You don't get to just stir in some bullsh*t here and there to paint a narrative and expect people to respect you. One lie is enough to lose credit as a journalist. We should expect and demand integrity from them. You're defending them because they got some stuff right. wtf

[derp]

Think the Jets just need to go about their business. Sign a veteran quarterback who can be the backup this year if they acquire Rodgers so that Wilson can develop as the QB3. Operate as if they're not sure they're acquiring Rodgers with the rest of the roster. 

The Jets need Rodgers to go all in this year, but they can keep building the team the right way without him. So just do that. If there's an opportunity to acquire him for a good price, awesome. If not? Don't mortgage the future for one to two years of going all in on a 39 year old QB in what's currently a loaded AFC

Obviously run the risk of somebody else coming to the table, but Rodgers would need to want to play there and the Packers would need to be okay trading him there. They need to get rid of him more than the Jets need him and the trade should account for that.

[JTJet]

1 minute ago, hotrodcharlie said:

 

thanks but I dont need to watch something I already watched. And you confirmed my take was correct anyway

No. Your take conveniently left out 99% of the conversation so that you could proclaim victory for some weird reason. 

You're wrong. 

Deal. 

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

This sucks.  Brandt is an expert on this stuff.

 

[Beerfish]

15 minutes ago, MykePM said:

There were reports out there that GB and the Jets had a deal done and they were just waiting on Rodgers to make a decision - that he was holding everyone hostage after saying he wouldn’t.  Add the “demand list” to that and many were painting him to be the diva/heel in this scenario, when now it appears that he made his decision last week and it’s the Packers who are being difficult.

Him 'making his decision last week' is why the packers suddenly have some leverage when they had none.

If being difficult is doing whats best for your team then the Packers are being difficult.

The Jets and Rodgers both counted their chickens before they are hatched and now they have to twist for a while.

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

They’d better sign the Stache before Colts do

It gives them a quality backup and leverage in Rodgers negotiations

[Tranquilo]

Just now, Barry McCockinner said:

yes - clearly they have made sh*t up.

• they made up that Rodgers had a list of demands
• they made up that Rodgers was the hold up

They have also got some things right.

The point is, they shouldn't be making ANYTHING up. You don't get to just stir in some bullsh*t here and there to paint a narrative and expect people to respect you. One lie is enough to lose credit as a journalist. We should expect and demand integrity from them. You're defending them because they got some stuff right. wtf

You make it sound like these are like some unforgivable lies and not things lost in translation. He said, it becomes a game of telephone. That sh*t happens. But the majority of the reporting has been spot on, which is why we know he's getting traded to the Jets in the first place! Like jeezus. The media loses integrity because the list ACCORDING TO RODGERS ON A SHOW THAT MAKES HIM LOOK GOOD, said that it's a wishlist and not a demand list? Come on, man.

[Barry McCockinner]

1 minute ago, hotrodcharlie said:

journalistic integrity? WTF

Pat McAfee, Ph.D, lol. I don't know if you've watched his show much but they aren't going to be using it to teach any graduate level journalism classes haha

Isn't that neat that dumb jock with no education in journalism is better at it than the ones who do? 

Why would you laugh at the idea of media having journalistic integrity? We should demand it.

[Barry McCockinner]

1 minute ago, Tranquilo said:

You make it sound like these are like some unforgivable lies and not things lost in translation. He said, it becomes a game of telephone. That sh*t happens. But the majority of the reporting has been spot on, which is why we know he's getting traded to the Jets in the first place! Like jeezus. The media loses integrity because the list ACCORDING TO RODGERS ON A SHOW THAT MAKES HIM LOOK GOOD, said that it's a wishlist and not a demand list? Come on, man.

I give the media no passes on lies. You lie once and you've lost my trust. Do you job. Verify your source. 

You must be one of these pigs with so much defending of their lies.

[Tranquilo]

1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Isn't that neat that dumb jock with no education in journalism is better at it than the ones who do? 

Why would you laugh at the idea of media having journalistic integrity? We should demand it.

The media's job is to make their subjects look good? That's journalistic integrity?

[Tranquilo]

1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

I give the media no passes on lies. You lie once and you've lost my trust. Do you job. Verify your source. 

You must be one of these pigs with so much defending of their lies.

And you must be one of these pigs who thinks Rodgers going to his favorite MEDIA SHOW is not part of the media

[Ron Rico]

Just now, Tranquilo said:

So they report truth too? Not according to Rodgers

You're conflating it. We are (or were) discussing specifically statements that were made in that interview. No one ever stated "the media only reports lies" until you did. Anyone that can be quoted "the media is just making sh*t up" was exclusively applying that statement to the crap that was being reported as fact concerning the Jets, Packers, Aaron Rogers negotiations ONLY. 

If you want to assume something, that's your prerogative, but you don't get to put words in someone else's mouth.

[Gastineau Lives]

The deadline is the draft, period. If Green Bay gets nothing this season out of perceived spite that GM is not long for the job.

As for the fan base being at a fever pitch, personally, I can wait and **** Green Bay.

[Tranquilo]

Just now, Ron Rico said:

You're conflating it. We are (or were) discussing specifically statements that were made in that interview. No one ever stated "the media only reports lies" until you did. Anyone that can be quoted "the media is just making sh*t up" was exclusively applying that statement to the crap that was being reported as fact concerning the Jets, Packers, Aaron Rogers negotiations ONLY. 

If you want to assume something, that's your prerogative, but you don't get to put words in someone else's mouth.

And what I'm saying is putting all reports and journalists under one umbrella and giving equal blame to all of them, sh*tting on the entire media is stupid. Getting the difference between wishlist and demand list wrong isn't enough to say they've been wrong this entire time when this entire time, the only reason we know about this rumor is because of the media. Not Aaron Rodgers.

[JohnnyLV]

20 minutes ago, slats said:

The Packers can take their time because the salary cap time bomb doesn’t go off until around opening day of the season, but I have a hard time believing that it could possibly go beyond the draft, resulting in Green Bay getting little or nothing for Rodgers this year. 

I see a couple things to consider here:

On the risk side for the Jets:

1. The longer the trade does not get done, the more possibility there is that some playoff bound team loses their QB and might be willing to flip some firsts at GB.

2. It is unknown what patience level Woody will have. I think JD can call GBs bluff and stretch this out until a reasonable deal is struck but will Woody allow him. Woody could storm into JDs office today, tomorrow or any day he is not traded and just demand JD give GB whatever they want

On the Jets side:

1. There is absolute precedent on the amount of compensation needed with the previous Favre trade and the Rodgers contract situation is much worse

2. GB must at some point trade him. Sure they could wait until the first week of the season but the Jets will likely have moved on before then

3. Rodgers could "retire" if he wanted to go the dick route. This I believe would accelerate the cap hit instantly and GB might find themselves having to restructure or cut players right away

There are sort of Armageddon scenarios on both side. Reasonable minds should prevail, but I think the GM might hate Rodgers and want to stick it to him a bit and Woody is a big wildcard.

 

[Warfish]

37 minutes ago, hotrodcharlie said:

I would ask for a 1st if I was them as well, what do the Jets have for leverage?

The power to say "Ok, thanks, we're going to move in another direction, good luck".

Would it suck for the Jets, sure.  But so what? 

We'll still field a team, we'll still play the games, Stadium will still sell out, fans will still buy swag, the Johnsons will still do fine.  We've been wasting years for over a decade now, what's one more year.  

If this were happen, JD would pivot, and try something else.  Drafting a QB.  Signing some McCown-alike to Veteran-start till Zachy-poo has enough time to step back in, etc. 

Would fans like it?  No.  Does that matter, really?  Also no.

Leverage is only leverage is it's a must-do.  We have no "must do" here, only a "really want to do".

Green Bay, on the other hand, has a real conundrum if we drop out.  Simply taking him back and paying him creates several challenges for them, cap wise, shift-to-Love wise, and more.  Could they survive it?  Yes.  So it's not a "must do" for them either, it's a "really want to do".

So both sides have leverage, and neither side "must" do it, but they both want to, so I'd wager they'll figure it out.

 

[Ron Rico]

19 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

People who hate the media like the media that confirms their biases or says good things about them. 

"biases" are subjective and I don't need my biases validated by a presstitute. I have friends and family for that.

[Barry McCockinner]

4 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

And you must be one of these pigs who thinks Rodgers going to his favorite MEDIA SHOW is not part of the media

what? has mcafee made sh*t up? i don't believe he has.

[choon328]

The leverage that the Jets have is that they can afford to walk away from the deal, the Packers can't. The Packers do not want him on the roster.

There is going to be a lot of pressure from Packers fans and players to get past this.  Other players in the league and in GB are watching how the Packers handle this, that matters. 

[Tranquilo]

Just now, Ron Rico said:

"biases" are subjective and I don't need my biases validated by a presstitute. I have friends and family for that.

No sh*t they're subjective and they just were validated by Rodgers's appearance on the Pat McAfee Show.

[Barry McCockinner]

7 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

The media's job is to make their subjects look good? That's journalistic integrity?

never said that. again - you're making up narrative. you must be one of them.

All I ask is they don't make sh*t up. Is that so hard?

[JTJet]

3 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

The longer the trade does not get done, the more possibility there is that some playoff bound team loses their QB and might be willing to flip some firsts at GB

Only problem with this part is that it requires AR to agree to it versus the threat of retirement, and he has already stated the Jets are where he wants to be. 

The Jets know they arent losing him to another team. 

[choon328]

2 minutes ago, Warfish said:

The power to say "Ok, thanks, we're going to move in another direction, good luck".

Would it suck for the Jets, sure.  But so what? 

We'll still field a team, we'll still play the games, Stadium will still sell out, fans will still buy swag, the Johnsons will still do fine.  We've been wasting years for over a decade now, what's one more year.  

If this were happen, JD would pivot, and try something else.  Drafting a QB.  Signing some McCown-alike to Veteran-start till Zachy-poo has enough time to step back in, etc. 

Would fans like it?  No.  Does that matter, really?  Also no.

Leverage is only leverage is it's a must-do.  We have no "must do" here, only a "really want to do".

Green Bay, on the other hand, has a real conundrum if we drop out.  Simply taking him back and paying him creates several challenges for them, cap wise, shift-to-Love wise, and more.  Could they survive it?  Yes.  So it's not a "must do" for them either, it's a "really want to do".

So both sides have leverage, and neither side "must" do it, but they both want to, so I'd wager they'll figure it out.

 

Stafford is available, in sure Tannehill can be coaxed away as well. There are other options. I think GB has very little leverage

[Tranquilo]

Just now, Barry McCockinner said:

what? has mcafee made sh*t up? i don't believe he has.

He gave Rodgers softball questions that allowed Rodgers to paint a narrative that isn't all fact (because it's just his perspective). Did Adam Schefter make something up? Is the deal done? Last I checked the deal isn't done.

[hotrodcharlie]

12 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Isn't that neat that dumb jock with no education in journalism is better at it than the ones who do? 

Why would you laugh at the idea of media having journalistic integrity? We should demand it.

No, you missed understood. I am not laughing at journalistic integrity. I am laughing at your take that caveman Pat McAfee is better at it than the ones who are educated 

[Tranquilo]

1 minute ago, Barry McCockinner said:

never said that. again - you're making up narrative. you must be one of them.

All I ask is they don't make sh*t up. Is that so hard?

If the media's job isn't to make their subjects look good, then how do you feel about the Pat McAfee show?

Most of the media did not make sh*t up. How did you know the Packers and Jets were talking about Rodgers?

[bgivs21]

1 minute ago, Tranquilo said:

He gave Rodgers softball questions that allowed Rodgers to paint a narrative that isn't all fact (because it's just his perspective). Did Adam Schefter make something up? Is the deal done? Last I checked the deal isn't done.

He literally made up the quote about the hold up being Aaron, when in fact it was the Packers. 

This Obviously paints AR in a bad light because he talked about not letting his decision linger into FA. It made AR look like a douche and if you don't believe me look back at this thread from a couple days ago, posters were calling him exactly that. 

[Ron Rico]

3 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

And what I'm saying is putting all reports and journalists under one umbrella and giving equal blame to all of them, sh*tting on the entire media is stupid. Getting the difference between wishlist and demand list wrong isn't enough to say they've been wrong this entire time when this entire time, the only reason we know about this rumor is because of the media. Not Aaron Rodgers.

I hear ya. Fair enough.

[Beerfish]

17 minutes ago, derp said:

Think the Jets just need to go about their business. Sign a veteran quarterback who can be the backup this year if they acquire Rodgers so that Wilson can develop as the QB3. Operate as if they're not sure they're acquiring Rodgers with the rest of the roster. 

The Jets need Rodgers to go all in this year, but they can keep building the team the right way without him. So just do that. If there's an opportunity to acquire him for a good price, awesome. If not? Don't mortgage the future for one to two years of going all in on a 39 year old QB in what's currently a loaded AFC

Obviously run the risk of somebody else coming to the table, but Rodgers would need to want to play there and the Packers would need to be okay trading him there. They need to get rid of him more than the Jets need him and the trade should account for that.

Too bad this was not the Jets and Rodgers attitude all along.  They hung themselves on this issue.

They should have made their desire for Rodgers very clear to the Packers and Rodgers early which I believe they did,

They then should have put a deadline on the time line so that if either of them was not ready to move they could have pivoted to plan B or C

Instead in their desperation for plan A they let it go too long, then for some reason assumed that the moment Rodgers said okay the packers would roll over, this after the other viable options were off the table.

I have no doubt when talking to the Packers Douglas is trying to walk it back and suggest just what you are saying, but those words are hollow and the Packers know it.

Before the Jets held all the cards and the Packers had none.  But the way we handled this situation we gave the Packers some juice to squeeze.

Also, what comes around goes around, Rodgers squeezed the Packers his last few years there, now they feel they can do the squeezing.

In the end an agreement will be made, the Packers will get less than they like the Jets will pay more than they like.

 

[Ron Rico]

4 minutes ago, choon328 said:

Stafford is available, in sure Tannehill can be coaxed away as well. There are other options. I think GB has very little leverage

Tennessee is probably waiting to see who falls to them in the draft. 

[bgivs21]

17 minutes ago, JoeNamathsFurCoat said:

This sucks.  Brandt is an expert on this stuff.

 

He's wrong. Look up Jason from OTC video where he talks about everything. It doesn't move the needle.

[Alka]

29 minutes ago, NYJCAP2 said:

Personally I feel JD thinks a 2 AND a cond. 2/1 is too much. But I have no basis for this.

I agree with you 100%.  I think JD feels he needs the 1st and 2nd round picks this year for maybe a starting center and defensive tackle to replace the guys we lost in free agency.  I think JD is holding out for a 3rd round pick this year, and conditional 3rd round pick next year that would move up to either a 2nd rounder or move down to a 4th rounder depending on certain conditions.  

It think that is fair for a guy who will be 40 years old in December, and would cost your team around $60M if you were forced to keep him.  If I was Rodgers, I would tell Green Bay that if they don't make a deal with the Jets, then Rodgers will not retire, and hold Green Bay accountable for the $60M that they owe him for this year.

[Ron Rico]

5 minutes ago, hotrodcharlie said:

No, you missed understood. I am not laughing at journalistic integrity. I am laughing at your take that caveman Pat McAfee is better at it than the ones who are educated 

Educated???? LMFAO

[Tranquilo]

3 minutes ago, bgivs21 said:

He literally made up the quote about the hold up being Aaron, when in fact it was the Packers. 

This Obviously paints AR in a bad light because he talked about not letting his decision linger into FA. It made AR look like a douche and if you don't believe me look back at this thread from a couple days ago, posters were calling him exactly that. 

That's fair. I don't think it's enough to throw the entire media under the bus, though