Aaron Rodgers to the Jets rumor: Merged

[Tranquilo]

10 minutes ago, Green Ghost said:

Craig Carton being the guy who nails this would be epic.
Think what you will, but the guy is talking like he has a source in the GB front office and seems adamant about what he’s saying.

He also said Beckham was signing with the Jets 

[Dunnie]

23 minutes ago, jetblue95 said:

 

what exactly are you calling tampering here?  the jets were granted permission to talk to rodgers by the packers.

 

Exactly ...

DEFINITION. The term tampering, as used within the National Football League, refers to any interference by a member club with the employer-employee relationship of another club or any attempt by a club to impermissibly induce a person to seek employment with that club or with the NFL.

HAD THEY NOT GOTTEN PERMISSION .. the following would go into effect.

Public/Private Statements. Any public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media, is a violation of this Anti-Tampering Policy. (Example of a prohibited comment: “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”) In addition, speculation by a club owner, executive, or employee on whether a player under contract to a second club may play for a third club in the future may negatively impact the relationship between the player and the club currently holding his rights. If any such comments are found to have adversely affected that relationship, a finding of tampering can result. All clubs should be aware that improper disclosure of confidential trade discussions with another club may be a violation of this section on prohibited public statements.
Articles that appear on the website of a club that identify prospective free agents that the team might be interested in, or that rate prospective free agents, shall not be considered violations of the Anti-Tampering Policy unless they include a direct quote or expression of interest by an employee of the club (other than the author of the article) about a specific player.

Edited April 10, 2023 by Dunnie

[AceRothstein]

Isn’t all this attention Carton is getting from these rumors good for the Carton brand? 

[Beerfish]

38 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

The leverage only changes if Rodgers changes his mind. 

It already has changed.  The jets have one option, one, that is Rodgers they had many options now they have one despite people inventing all sorts of implausible scenarios.

If the packers indeed as many insist have zero leverage and zero choice then the jets will be happily giving up a 4th rounder this year only to take the awful contract off of the packers hands.

That is not going to happen, the jets are going to give up more then they want to in this deal.  The deal will get done and people will praise the hell out of Douglas for shrewdly giving up only two 2nd rounders or something.

[AFJF]

18 minutes ago, jetblue95 said:

 

what exactly are you calling tampering here?  the jets were granted permission to talk to rodgers by the packers.

 

It's not what I'm calling tampering.  It's what the NFL calls tampering.  

Speaking about a player without permission to negotiate a trade isn't the only way a team can tamper during trade talks according to league rules.

Now, I suppose that f you believe the Packers negotiated a trade with Joe Douglas and told him he was fine to reveal that to the public, then you would believe there's no tampering and you would be correct.

However, I do not believe the Packers have worked on this deal with the expectation of the trade or details of the trade being made public before they were ready to.  In fact, still no word from the Packers on a deal being completed despite Douglas' public comments.

So per league rules, publicly commenting on confidential trade discussions (again, nothing to do with permission to negotiate a trade) meets the standard for tampering.

Fortunately for the Jets, the Packers handed out one of the worst contracts in NFL history, therefore have no other buyers and will proceed without complaint.

Not sure if you listen to the Play Like a Jet pod but Scott Mason does a really good job of getting some behind the scenes folks on his show regularly.  He said on his show yesterday (or today, can't recall) that he asked about it and was told that what Douglas did was definitely tampering, but nobody should care because GB is in no position to complain.

[SickJetFan]

21 hours ago, AFJF said:

There was tampering, but the Packers aren't gonna' raise a stink about it.  Bad business to go after the only team doing you a solid by absorbing the worst contract you've ever handed out.

Riddle me this batman

During owners meeting JD was surrounded by reporters specifically asking questions about AR and that status of the trade in a public forum was he not?

 

[JETS SB]

19 minutes ago, AFJF said:

It's not what I'm calling tampering.  It's what the NFL calls tampering.  

Speaking about a player without permission to negotiate a trade isn't the only way a team can tamper during trade talks according to league rules.

Now, I suppose that f you believe the Packers negotiated a trade with Joe Douglas and told him he was fine to reveal that to the public, then you would believe there's no tampering and you would be correct.

However, I do not believe the Packers have worked on this deal with the expectation of the trade or details of the trade being made public before they were ready to.  In fact, still no word from the Packers on a deal being completed despite Douglas' public comments.

So per league rules, publicly commenting on confidential trade discussions (again, nothing to do with permission to negotiate a trade) meets the standard for tampering.

Fortunately for the Jets, the Packers handed out one of the worst contracts in NFL history, therefore have no other buyers and will proceed without complaint.

Not sure if you listen to the Play Like a Jet pod but Scott Mason does a really good job of getting some behind the scenes folks on his show regularly.  He said on his show yesterday (or today, can't recall) that he asked about it and was told that what Douglas did was definitely tampering, but nobody should care because GB is in no position to complain.

All that for nothing. Thanks 

[jetblue95]

44 minutes ago, AFJF said:

It's not what I'm calling tampering.  It's what the NFL calls tampering.  

Speaking about a player without permission to negotiate a trade isn't the only way a team can tamper during trade talks according to league rules.

Now, I suppose that f you believe the Packers negotiated a trade with Joe Douglas and told him he was fine to reveal that to the public, then you would believe there's no tampering and you would be correct.

However, I do not believe the Packers have worked on this deal with the expectation of the trade or details of the trade being made public before they were ready to.  In fact, still no word from the Packers on a deal being completed despite Douglas' public comments.

So per league rules, publicly commenting on confidential trade discussions (again, nothing to do with permission to negotiate a trade) meets the standard for tampering.

Fortunately for the Jets, the Packers handed out one of the worst contracts in NFL history, therefore have no other buyers and will proceed without complaint.

Not sure if you listen to the Play Like a Jet pod but Scott Mason does a really good job of getting some behind the scenes folks on his show regularly.  He said on his show yesterday (or today, can't recall) that he asked about it and was told that what Douglas did was definitely tampering, but nobody should care because GB is in no position to complain.

 

are you talking about joe's comments that rodgers will be here?

did joe revel that a trade was indeed completed?  did he reveal the contents of a trade?

or are you really stretching the "tampering" item because he may have expressed optimism that the two teams will be able to complete a trade at some juncture?  

the packers granted the jets permission to talk to rodgers.  mark murphy is on record saying so.  obviously for the jets to have rodgers, they need to trade for him unless GB cuts him.  GB is aware that they are engaged in trade discussions with the jets. calling joe's comments tampering is a major, major stretch, even if some podcast says it theoretically could be. 

but i guess this is what we are left with on page 4,372 of this thread...

[AFJF]

23 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

Riddle me this batman

During owners meeting JD was surrounded by reporters specifically asking questions about AR and that status of the trade in a public forum was he not?

 

Do you see the difference in these two answers?

1) We're not where we need to be yet.

2) He's going to be here.

The first is speaking in generic/general terms.  No specifics given.

The second tells us a deal is done.  In fact, how many fans went on twitter and JN immediately after that to say "It's done.  The deal is done.  That's Joe D. letting us know the deal is done"?

His comments gave the impression that a deal has been completed.  Whether it has or not, is unlikely to be something the Packers wanted to have out in the open.  Or maybe we'll pretend they did because it makes us feel better?

 

[SickJetFan]

1 minute ago, AFJF said:

Do you see the difference in these two answers?

1) We're not where we need to be yet.

2) He's going to be here.

The first is speaking in generic/general terms.  No specifics given.

The second tells us a deal is done.  In fact, how many fans went on twitter and JN immediately after that to say "It's done.  The deal is done.  That's Joe D. letting us know the deal is done"?

His comments gave the impression that a deal has been completed.  Whether it has or not, is unlikely to be something the Packers wanted to have out in the open.  Or maybe we'll pretend they did because it makes us feel better?

 

just because it wasn't positive doesn't mean 1 answer is more of tampering than the other

he could have easily said "we will get it done" and nobody would have questioned it or called it tampering

[AFJF]

54 minutes ago, Beerfish said:

It already has changed.  The jets have one option, one, that is Rodgers they had many options now they have one despite people inventing all sorts of implausible scenarios.

If the packers indeed as many insist have zero leverage and zero choice then the jets will be happily giving up a 4th rounder this year only to take the awful contract off of the packers hands.

That is not going to happen, the jets are going to give up more then they want to in this deal.  The deal will get done and people will praise the hell out of Douglas for shrewdly giving up only two 2nd rounders or something.

Not really the case though.  Rodgers is a one-year rental.  If you want a one-year rental veteran who has been to the post-season you can go out and get (or pretend to be trying to get) Tannehill.  Is he Rodgers? No.  Is he a veteran QB who has led a team to the playoffs  in 3 of the past 4 seasons?  Yes.

Problem is, Woody tipped his hand so any interest in another QB will likely be viewed as GB for what it is...a smoke screen.

[AFJF]

Just now, SickJetFan said:

just because it wasn't positive doesn't mean 1 answer is more of tampering than the other

he could have easily said "we will get it done" and nobody would have questioned it or called it tampering

And "we will get it done" does not suggest it is done.

"He'll be here" can reasonably be viewed as it being done, otherwise how do you know he'll be here?  He didn't say "he might be here".  He didn't say "I think he'll be here" and he didn't say "hopefully he'll be here".

Hence the fans all over the place proclaiming the deal was done and the teams were just (for some very odd reason) waiting a month to announce the deal.

But again...all a moot point because GB is screwed.

 

[AFJF]

10 minutes ago, jetblue95 said:

 

are you talking about joe's comments that rodgers will be here?

did joe revel that a trade was indeed completed?  did he reveal the contents of a trade?

or are you really stretching the "tampering" item because he may have expressed optimism that the two teams will be able to complete a trade at some juncture?  

the packers granted the jets permission to talk to rodgers.  mark murphy is on record saying so.  obviously for the jets to have rodgers, they need to trade for him unless GB cuts him.  GB is aware that they are engaged in trade discussions with the jets. calling joe's comments tampering is a major, major stretch, even if some podcast says it theoretically could be. 

but i guess this is what we are left with on page 4,372 of this thread...

I know a lot of folks get triggered if you question Douglas, but the rules are the rules.  I don't make them.

Telling fans a player is coming doesn't mean you're working on it.  It means you've done it.  The trade being done is a specific detail of the trade.  In fact, I'd argue it's the most important detail, which is what the rules prohibit.

It's great because I've seen fans go from "Joe just told us the deal is done" to "Joe didn't say anything meaningful" once they realized that saying it's done would be tampering.  

Love it.

[SickJetFan]

5 minutes ago, AFJF said:

And "we will get it done" does not suggest it is done.

"He'll be here" can reasonably be viewed as it being done, otherwise how do you know he'll be here?  He didn't say "he might be here".  He didn't say "I think he'll be here" and he didn't say "hopefully he'll be here".

Hence the fans all over the place proclaiming the deal was done and the teams were just (for some very odd reason) waiting a month to announce the deal.

But again...all a moot point because GB is screwed.

 

The standard answer when talking about a player on another team when you dont have permission to talk to said player is

 

"NO COMMENT or I cant comment on any player under contract with another team"

 

He could not have even said any of it at owners meeting w/o permission.

[Embrace the Suck]

1 hour ago, Dunnie said:

Exactly ...

DEFINITION. The term tampering, as used within the National Football League, refers to any interference by a member club with the employer-employee relationship of another club or any attempt by a club to impermissibly induce a person to seek employment with that club or with the NFL.

HAD THEY NOT GOTTEN PERMISSION .. the following would go into effect.

Public/Private Statements. Any public or private statement of interest, qualified or unqualified, in another club’s player to that player’s agent or representative, or to a member of the news media, is a violation of this Anti-Tampering Policy. (Example of a prohibited comment: “He’s an excellent player, and we’d very much like to have him if he were available, but another club holds his rights.”) In addition, speculation by a club owner, executive, or employee on whether a player under contract to a second club may play for a third club in the future may negatively impact the relationship between the player and the club currently holding his rights. If any such comments are found to have adversely affected that relationship, a finding of tampering can result. All clubs should be aware that improper disclosure of confidential trade discussions with another club may be a violation of this section on prohibited public statements.
Articles that appear on the website of a club that identify prospective free agents that the team might be interested in, or that rate prospective free agents, shall not be considered violations of the Anti-Tampering Policy unless they include a direct quote or expression of interest by an employee of the club (other than the author of the article) about a specific player.

Facts and logic? Good luck with that sh*t.

[AFJF]

1 minute ago, SickJetFan said:

The standard answer when talking about a player on another team when you dont have permission to talk to said player is

 

"NO COMMENT or I cant comment on any player under contract with another team"

 

He could not have even said any of it at owners meeting w/o permission.

Sometimes people give the right answer:

 

 

 

And sometimes people make mistakes (perhaps after a few beers in some cases) and say things they aren't supposed to say.
 

The rules say what the rules say no matter how much we like Joe Douglas.  Not sure why people are so upset over a thing that won't have any fallout because the Packers are screwed.

[SickJetFan]

7 minutes ago, AFJF said:

Sometimes people give the right answer:

 

 

 

And sometimes people make mistakes (perhaps after a few beers in some cases) and say things they aren't supposed to say.
 

The rules say what the rules say no matter how much we like Joe Douglas.  Not sure why people are so upset over a thing that won't have any fallout because the Packers are screwed.

lol i give up....whatever YOU say

[32EBoozer]

2 hours ago, Beerfish said:

Agree on all counts but this is where the jets botched it up bad.   This should have been done ages ago at a bargain basemen price.  As time went on the jets handed the packers some leverage by showing all of their plan B thoughts were bunk and both them and rodgers openly stating he was going to be the jets QB, before any deal had been agreed on.

Agree on all counts but this is where the jets botched it up bad.   This should have been done ages ago at a bargain basemen price.
It was less than a month ago Rodgers came out of the darkness and stated he’d like to continue playing and intended to play for the Jets. You keep saying this should have been done ages ago. Do you mean trade assets to GB before knowing if Rodgers intended on retiring?

As time went on the jets handed the packers some leverage by showing all of their plan B thoughts were bunk and both them and rodgers openly stating he was going to be the jets QB, before any deal had been agreed on.

“As time went on” the jets handed the packers some leverage by showing all of their plan B thoughts were bunk and both them and rodgers openly stating he was going to be the jets QB, before any deal had been agreed on.

So in one instance they should trade for him immediately w/o knowing if he intended to play, now you complain that Rodgers states he’d like to QB Jets before a contract is signed. 
 

Make up your mind. You want the Jets to commit Draft picks & $110 million before knowing his plans or have Rodgers not tell anyone his plans until a contract is signed?

You are going to look like an even bigger idiot on this contract negotiations when the details come out.

Edited April 10, 2023 by 32EBoozer

[choon328]

2 hours ago, AFJF said:

Eh.  The only plan B that could have been a threat at all was Derek Carr and he signed before Rodgers decided what he was going to do.

It was also leaked that Woody told the FO not to offer Carr anything because he was all in on Rodgers.  That gave the Packers all they needed to keep holding out for more.  They're playing the long game to see if Woody will get impatient and tell Joe D. to just "give them what they want".

Source on the leak about Woody? Haven't heard that one

[AFJF]

49 minutes ago, SickJetFan said:

lol i give up....whatever YOU say

Sweet.  I was literally just coming back in the thread to say I was giving up.

 

[choon328]

59 minutes ago, AFJF said:

Sometimes people give the right answer:

 

 

 

And sometimes people make mistakes (perhaps after a few beers in some cases) and say things they aren't supposed to say.
 

The rules say what the rules say no matter how much we like Joe Douglas.  Not sure why people are so upset over a thing that won't have any fallout because the Packers are screwed.

I'm sure JD gets leeway since the Packers gave the Jets permission to speak to Rodgers.  And both HC's have up openly spoke about the trade.  The Packers would have to file a tampering complaint, the league doesn't just start investigating it without the complaint. This is a non issue

[AFJF]

3 minutes ago, choon328 said:

Source on the leak about Woody? Haven't heard that one

Matthew Berry from CBS Sports.   Doesn't usually do insider stuff but attended the combine and shared what he heard from people who were there.  One included the Jets FO making Rodgers the priority over Carr because Woody preferred Rodgers.

23 Most Interesting Things I Heard At Combine | Matthew Berry's NFL Combine Buzz (nbcsportsedge.com)

As long as we are talking big-name quarterbacks, despite all the rumors of Derek Carr going to the Jets, one thing that held that up was that Jets owner Woody Johnson really wants Aaron Rodgers. So, the staff has had to be supportive of that. However, secretly, the rest of the team’s front office wanted Derek Carr. Now that Carr is reportedly signing with New Orleans, the Jets are in “Hoping for Rodgers” mode. If that doesn’t work out… who knows?

 

[AFJF]

4 minutes ago, choon328 said:

I'm sure JD gets leeway since the Packers gave the Jets permission to speak to Rodgers.  And both HC's have up openly spoke about the trade.  The Packers would have to file a tampering complaint, the league doesn't just start investigating it without the complaint. This is a non issue

Agreed.  I'm not saying the Packers will take action.  Only that what was said would violate the portion of the rule that says teams should not publicly disclose trade discussions.

Anway, I'm done with it.  They tampered by rule but not in a way that anyone should really give a damn.

Just get the guy here and hope he wins it in '23 because it's likely back to square 1 in 11 months.

[jetblue95]

1 hour ago, AFJF said:

I know a lot of folks get triggered if you question Douglas, but the rules are the rules.  I don't make them.

Telling fans a player is coming doesn't mean you're working on it.  It means you've done it.  The trade being done is a specific detail of the trade.  In fact, I'd argue it's the most important detail, which is what the rules prohibit.

It's great because I've seen fans go from "Joe just told us the deal is done" to "Joe didn't say anything meaningful" once they realized that saying it's done would be tampering.  

Love it.

 

holy crap, you really are arguing over this???

wow, i guess you need to fill the quota of ridiculous posts on this ridiculous thread.

btw - if it is tampering, then it's the league's call.  not the packers' call.  i'll await the league ruling this (perhaps) drunken comment is tampering and then tip my cap to you and give you a cyber atta-boy for being right.  which is what you must be looking for to be arguing over such a mundane thing.  because other than you and some fellow internet posters who need to make this an item, NO ONE CARES...

[AFJF]

1 minute ago, jetblue95 said:

 

holy crap, you really are arguing over this???

wow, i guess you need to fill the quota of ridiculous posts on this ridiculous thread.

btw - if it is tampering, then it's the league's call.  not the packers' call.  i'll await the league ruling this (perhaps) drunken comment is tampering and then tip my cap to you and give you a cyber atta-boy for being right.  which is what you must be looking for to be arguing over such a mundane thing.  because other than you and some fellow internet posters who need to make this an item, NO ONE CARES...

I've never seen somebody use so many words to express how little they care about something.  Well done.

[choon328]

9 minutes ago, AFJF said:

Matthew Berry from CBS Sports.   Doesn't usually do insider stuff but attended the combine and shared what he heard from people who were there.  One included the Jets FO making Rodgers the priority over Carr because Woody preferred Rodgers.

23 Most Interesting Things I Heard At Combine | Matthew Berry's NFL Combine Buzz (nbcsportsedge.com)

As long as we are talking big-name quarterbacks, despite all the rumors of Derek Carr going to the Jets, one thing that held that up was that Jets owner Woody Johnson really wants Aaron Rodgers. So, the staff has had to be supportive of that. However, secretly, the rest of the team’s front office wanted Derek Carr. Now that Carr is reportedly signing with New Orleans, the Jets are in “Hoping for Rodgers” mode. If that doesn’t work out… who knows?

 

Where did it say Woody told them to not make an offer to Carr? That's what you alleged

[jetblue95]

tampering!!!

the packers GM said they want premium picks.  they can't discuss what they are asking for in the trade

tampering!!!!!!!!

https://apnews.com/article/packers-jets-rodgers-douglas-gutekunst-58fa3777ec121e06542df5acbe0eb601

Gutekunst was asked Monday at the NFL annual meeting if there was any way in which he could feel comfortable trading Rodgers without getting a first-round pick in return.

“Yeah, I think that’s not a necessity,” Gutekunst told reporters. “But at the same time, the value of the player – he’s a premier player, so getting premier picks back for (premier) players is important.”

[jetblue95]

1 minute ago, AFJF said:

I've never seen somebody use so many words to express how little they care about something.  Well done.

 

and i've never seen someone make so many posts about something they admit is meaningless

kudos

[AFJF]

Just now, choon328 said:

Where did it say Woody told them to not make an offer to Carr? That's what you alleged

Ever worked for a multi billion dollar organization before?  When the guy in charge says "I would like xyz", it means "do xyz".

[AFJF]

1 minute ago, jetblue95 said:

tampering!!!

the packers GM said they want premium picks.  they can't discuss what they are asking for in the trade

tampering!!!!!!!!

https://apnews.com/article/packers-jets-rodgers-douglas-gutekunst-58fa3777ec121e06542df5acbe0eb601

Gutekunst was asked Monday at the NFL annual meeting if there was any way in which he could feel comfortable trading Rodgers without getting a first-round pick in return.

“Yeah, I think that’s not a necessity,” Gutekunst told reporters. “But at the same time, the value of the player – he’s a premier player, so getting premier picks back for (premier) players is important.”

Wow.  You can't stop proving how little you care about this can you?  LOL

[jetblue95]

13 minutes ago, AFJF said:

Wow.  You can't stop proving how little you care about this can you?  LOL

 

no, just showing how FOOLISH you have been in arguing tampering with something like 5 different posters over the course of the day

but since this seems a topic of great interest to you, tell me how joe's comments are tampering but the packers GM's weren't.

[Larz]

This morning’s shower thoughts.  
 

is grogu going to like , do anything this season?

one possible tampering angle, and the oddest development of this story, is the packers claim that Rodgers did not speak to the Packers during or after the darkness retreat. The packers version of the story is Rodgers just came out of the darkness and suddenly went from 90% retiring to intending to play for the jets.
He stated he was undecided going in, in his version of events, and after the retreat the packers told him they were going with love, and Rodgers decided on the jets. There is also the back channel for communication with Hackett.
It’s possible the packers put that statement out there to establish that although they did eventually give the Jets permission to speak to rodgers, prior to that, he was influenced by the Jets and the Packers were not able to make a case directly to rodgers. 

it’s possible that the packers are making lots of noise and drama to squeeze something out of JD rather than going to the NFL  

It’s not likely, but it was just so odd for them to claim that after Rodgers version of events. 

[AFJF]

6 minutes ago, jetblue95 said:

 

no, just showing how FOOLISH you have been in arguing tampering with something like 5 different posters over the course of the day

but since this seems a topic of great interest to you, tell me how joe's comments are tampering but the packers GM's weren't.

Still not caring, I see.

[jetblue95]

Just now, AFJF said:

Still not caring, I see.

 

when i said no one cares, i meant the nfl is never going to fine a team for this type of tampering

we have discussed many, many, many things in this thread.  you seem to be the one who went to the mat saying how joe tampered.  you debated this with multiple posters.  after catching up on the thread, i asked for clarification on what you meant.  when you responded, i said - THAT'S what you are making a big deal about???

but i see that you now are playing some game and not answering why in your opinion, joe tampered but the pack GM didn't.

my guess, and what most posters here will assume, is you've been foolish in pursuing this "tampering" argument, and you have no response.  i'm sure you will give me the obligatory "you still don't care" post, confirming that indeed, you got no answer.

have a pleasant evening.  i look forward to your next faux outrage post...

[AFJF]

3 minutes ago, jetblue95 said:

 

when i said no one cares, i meant the nfl is never going to fine a team for this type of tampering

we have discussed many, So y, many things in this thread.  you seem to be the one who went to the mat saying how joe tampered.  you debated this with multiple posters.  after catching up on the thread, i asked for clarification on what you meant.  when you responded, i said - THAT'S what you are making a big deal about???

but i see that you now are playing some game and not answering why in your opinion, joe tampered but the pack GM didn't.

my guess, and what most posters here will assume, is you've been foolish in pursuing this "tampering" argument, and you have no response.  i'm sure you will give me the obligatory "you still don't care" post, confirming that indeed, you got no answer.

have a pleasant evening.  i look forward to your next faux outrage post...

So now you're saying you do care?

Edited April 11, 2023 by AFJF