Aaron Rodgers to the Jets rumor: Merged

[#27TheDominator]

1 hour ago, JetPotato said:

There's no scenario where Rodgers sits on the bench or ever wears a Packers uniform again, no matter how many times you say it.

The idea is so awesome that I would get almost as much pleasure from watching the Packers games as the Jets winning.  People are worried about the Rodgers torpedoing the Jets and he said he wants to be here.  Can you imagine what he would do to the Packers if they kept him and tried to keep him on the bench for an obviously inferior QB?

[Tooooon]

On to 500!

[nj meadowlands]

1 minute ago, #27TheDominator said:

The idea is so awesome that I would get almost as much pleasure from watching the Packers games as the Jets winning.  People are worried about the Rodgers torpedoing the Jets and he said he wants to be here.  Can you imagine what he would do to the Packers if they kept him and tried to keep him on the bench for an obviously inferior QB?

All fair.  Still doesn't save me from being held hostage by my negative Jets energy.

[#27TheDominator]

Just now, nj meadowlands said:

All fair.  Still doesn't save me from being held hostage by my negative Jets energy.

Embrace it.  This is New York.  Energy is energy.

[PS17]

[jtomm]

3 minutes ago, Tooooon said:

On to 500!

[y2k8]

[oatmeal]

[JetPotato]

19 minutes ago, #27TheDominator said:

The idea is so awesome that I would get almost as much pleasure from watching the Packers games as the Jets winning.  People are worried about the Rodgers torpedoing the Jets and he said he wants to be here.  Can you imagine what he would do to the Packers if they kept him and tried to keep him on the bench for an obviously inferior QB?

Either way, I'm going to enjoy the Packers this year, especially when Jordan Love falls flat on his face.

[Alentador31]

1 hour ago, BCJet said:

It’s extremely confusing and disappointing that we couldn’t have added a ton of leverage to this situation AND given the team a capable backup by simply Paul g Gardner Minshew $3 million on a 1 year deal.  
 

Absolutely mind boggling

The idea that signing Minshew would create any type of leverage is laughable. What, you're gonna tell GB, oh nah nvm unless you move forward now were going to go with Minshew.....?? cmon. 

[chirorob]

Page 400!!!

I made it.

[bitonti]

1 hour ago, Sammybighead said:

 

You think it's better to pay a guy 60M, HAVE TO CARRY HIM on the 53 man roster which takes away a spot from someone that can help immediately, and suffer the future cap ramifications

 

If I understand Rodgers contract correctly, (and I don't) the Packers take a 40 m hit this year either way, if they trade him or not. 

Also if Jordan love sucks (which he might) it's good to have another option 

 

 

[Sammybighead]

20 minutes ago, nj meadowlands said:

If no deals are struck before the second round ends, it might be time to panic?

That's a question for each individual person to answer. If you put all your hopes and dreams into AR, maybe a little panic but I'd say end of July (just before training camp) is the real deadline. No way he's on their roster to open training camp, it would be GM/organizational malpractice. 

If you like me, then no panic at all. Use the 2023 draft picks, regroup, and offer them a fair 2024 package that doesn't include a 1st rd pick. If they say no still, explore trade for another vet (tannehill/cousins) or just bring in anybody. Continue to suck for 1 more year, get a high draft pick, draft next heir apparent in 2024 who will have way more established talent around him than zach did. 

I guess it boils down to if you mind sucking for another year. I'm apathetic. We've sucked for a decade, what's 1 more if there is some light at the end of the tunnel?

What I'm not doing is ensuring 5 more years of suck by mortgaging the future for a 1 year rental.

[bitonti]

1 hour ago, jetblue95 said:

do you think the packers are indifferent between paying rodgers $60 million to sit on the bench or paying him nothing? 

boy are you not the sharpest tool in the shed... 

Or ya know they could just bail on Jordan love 

He's Jordan love not Troy Aikman 

[fastmover]

400!!!! 
 

Semper Fi

[Warfish]

Posting on Page 400 in a 400 page thread.

[Sammybighead]

1 minute ago, bitonti said:

If I understand Rodgers contract correctly, (and I don't) the Packers take a 40 m hit this year either way, if they trade him or not. 

Also if Jordan love sucks (which he might) it's good to have another option 

 

 

That's this year. Then they pay 60M week 1 and incur further cap hits for a guy that may very well tear the team apart simply by sitting on the bench. Add to that love's 5th year option at 20M. And the fact they would forgo draft comp from us. They now have zero cap space, have to cut guys, and can't bring in cheap additional guys from our extra draft picks.

How is this a reasonable plan?

It's the type of thing a little kid would when he's losing at monopoly, like flip the board over in rage and stomp away crying "you cheated!"

[bitonti]

1 hour ago, bicketybam said:

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

what this all really boils down to is that the Packers GM and HC just got extended in 2022 summer and don't NEED to win now
there's no woody to fire these guys on a whim. They are rebuilding and everyone knows it 
meanwhile JD is on year 5 of 6 of his contract and NEEDS to win now
there is a scenario where the Packers pay Rodgers to sit the bench. He's a living legend to them and they are rebuilding
it's not nearly as bad a scenario for them as JD going into the season with just Zach 

Most top GM's pay their backup QB's 60 million. Makes sense.

If green Bay had as little leverage as this board thinks the deal would have been done months ago 

They have 2 qbs the Jets have none 

They could just keep Rodgers since he's this amazing player and all 

Jordan who? 

[bitonti]

1 minute ago, Sammybighead said:

That's this year. Then they pay 60M week 1 and incur further cap hits for a guy that may very well tear the team apart simply by sitting on the bench. Add to that love's 5th year option at 20M. And the fact they would forgo draft comp from us. They now have zero cap space, have to cut guys, and can't bring in cheap additional guys from our extra draft picks.

How is this a reasonable plan?

It's the type of thing a little kid would when he's losing at monopoly, like flip the board over in rage and stomp away crying "you cheated!"

How is this contract unreasonable for green Bay but amazing for us? It's the same contract and it's not going to be restructured 

The simplest option is to let the first ballot hof play as long as he wants 

[Flightattendant]

3 minutes ago, bitonti said:

If green Bay had as little leverage as this board thinks the deal would have been done months ago 

They have 2 qbs the Jets have none 

They could just keep Rodgers since he's this amazing player and all 

Jordan who? 

We have a bingo.

[The Crusher]

2 minutes ago, bitonti said:

If green Bay had as little leverage as this board thinks the deal would have been done months ago 

They have 2 qbs the Jets have none 

They could just keep Rodgers since he's this amazing player and all 

Jordan who? 

Rodgers going back to Green Bay is not happening. That ship has sailed and sunk. He'll retire first. Jordon love is likely shit though, this we can agree on. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, The Crusher said:

Rodgers going back to Green Bay is not happening. That ship has sailed and sunk. He'll retire first. Jordon love is likely sh*t though, this we can agree on. 

Feels as if GB is hoping someone in the jets org panics and they fork over that 13 pick in the deal.  

[SackExchangeNYJ]

Aaron Rodgers is now the third longest tenured Jets QB in team history, and he hasn't even gotten here.

[Mogglez]

[Lith]

Just now, Mogglez said:

Two more weeks plus one or two days.  Draft weekend.  It stops.

[bicketybam]

If green Bay had as little leverage as this board thinks the deal would have been done months ago 
They have 2 qbs the Jets have none 
They could just keep Rodgers since he's this amazing player and all 
Jordan who? 

I haven't been a regular on this board long enough to say "you can't be this stupid" but I am sensing that you just might be.

[football guy]

48 minutes ago, Zachtomims47 said:

Green Bay seems quite content to wait until after the draft to make a trade," he said. "Both sides seem to be dug in."

I'm personally not ready to say this will happen. I do believe the deal gets done before the draft, but if it doesn't, it's mainly because of the cash and conditions which has been a trouble spot for both parties. Some are suggesting the Packers want to wait until June 1 to trade him they would be in a more favorable cap position this year, but that would mean they take a hit next year. They're using this as a rebuilding year so that doesn't make much sense for GB, who should want to be free-and-clear of the contract by next year. However, they could also rationalize that this isn't a great draft, and they can probably get more "future" compensation (i.e. a guaranteed 1st rounder) if they let this drag out post-draft. Again, I'm not sure what the Packers are thinking I'm just speculating. Worst case scenario for both sides would be to wait deep into August/just before the season. The option must be picked up by September 10, and if the Packers pick up his option they are on the hook for the full $59 million. This also would mean Rodgers misses the entire offseason with his new team. Naturally neither side will let it come to that. 

From the Jets side, I don't think there's significant urgency. if no deal were struck, their negotiations would basically start over from scratch with 2024-25 draft capital headlining the return compensation, so all previous frameworks would be blown to smithereens. I think they would absolutely try to move down from one of #42/#43 in effort to collect future draft capital. For instance, if a team towards the end of round 2/early round 3 wanted to jump up, the Jets could ask for a 2023 2nd/3rd + a future 2024 2nd/3rd in return to move down. A deal post-draft would likely be far less lucrative for the Packers, but it would likely have to include our 2024 first-round pick... my guess it would more closely resemble the Sam Bradford deal (2024 first-round pick + conditional 2025 fourth-round pick) than what they're going over now (2023 second-round pick + conditional 2024 second-round pick). Honestly not the worst thing in the world, but potential for disaster if he were to get injured/underperform/retired early. I think they understand the value of getting him in early, but they also don't think it would be detrimental if he were to miss OTAs. If it dragged past minicamp it would be a problem. 

[ptisme]

5 hours ago, derp said:

Yeah, I'm not exactly sure how that puts your job less at risk than taking what you feel is less than he's worth.

Ultimately, he's worth what the market bears out for him. It'd be different if they had teams banging down their door to acquire him but he said "no, only the Jets". Jets are the team that's interested, they're the team they can trade him to, there's not a better offer on the table from someone else where Rodgers doesn't want to play that they're trying to get closer to.

That said I also hope Joe Douglas is as stubborn as Bakhtiari proposes the Packers could become.

Keeping Rodgers would be akin to cutting off ur nose to spite your face.  But it's a backup option you can use if you think the Jets REALLY NEED this to happen and you think they will blink.   Honestly if this doesn't work out with the Jets they'll probably get another team to eat the contract for a song.

[ptisme]

5 hours ago, T0mShane said:

My favorite part of the interview is where he says “The Packers are rebuilding now. They can say what they want, but they’re a rebuilding team.” Just oozing with confidence in Jordan Love, baby.

My biggest take away from that comment is using the word "they" and not "we".   Sounds like he'd like to go to the jets.

[ptisme]

4 hours ago, slimjasi said:

Yep - if you didn’t know he was a packer, you would never figure it out from that interview. I was actually taken aback by some of the stuff he said and his overall tone. 

He's Rodgers best friend...  Tone could have been Way worse.

[ptisme]

4 hours ago, BigRy56 said:

Green Bay may want to wait until after the draft?? They’re going to let us make 3 picks in the top 43 then trade him to us anyway?

Is this really a thing now? That sounds absolutely fantastic and an awful decision for Green Bay. The picks coming from the Jets next draft will be significantly lower in the draft order

I have to ask: What proof do you have that the Jets are offering the Packers one of those three picks this year?

[ptisme]

3 hours ago, IndianaJet said:

I don't think they can formally trade a 2023 draft pick to the Packers but then have the trade not officially take place until June 1.

 

I could very easily be wrong...but if this were an option it seems like someone in the know like a Florio, would have brought this option up after all the weeks of speculation. 

You are correct.  The NFL doesn't have the lax trade standards the NBA does.

[ptisme]

2 hours ago, bitonti said:

what this all really boils down to is that the Packers GM and HC just got extended in 2022 summer and don't NEED to win now

there's no woody to fire these guys on a whim. They are rebuilding and everyone knows it 

meanwhile JD is on year 5 of 6 of his contract and NEEDS to win now

there is a scenario where the Packers pay Rodgers to sit the bench. He's a living legend to them and they are rebuilding

it's not nearly as bad a scenario for them as JD going into the season with just Zach 

True point.   MLF has more wins in his first few years than any coach in Packers history.  Neither him nor Gute are on the hot seat whatsoever.

[jetblue95]

25 minutes ago, bitonti said:

If I understand Rodgers contract correctly, (and I don't) the Packers take a 40 m hit this year either way, if they trade him or not. 

Also if Jordan love sucks (which he might) it's good to have another option 

 

 

 

no, you do not understand it correctly.

aaron rodgers is due a $58.3 million option bonus, which must be exercised at some point between march 17 and the week 1.  that means, someone is writing him a check for $58.3 million (and no, it literally does not need to be in the form of a check...).  if it is exercised as an option bonus, it can be amortized over the remaining life of the contract.  if it is not exercised as an option bonus, it is due and payable week 1 and the entire amount hits the 2023 cap.  cap accounting notwithstanding, someone MUST pay rodgers this $58.3 million by week 1.  if he remains on the packers, they must pay him this amount.  which is why thinking the packers are indifferent to whether rodgers stays or is traded is foolish, unless you think paying someone an additional $59.5 million is a non-entity.

(rodgers also has $1.165 million base salary for 2023, but that is peanuts compared to the $58.3 million bonus he is due.)

[ptisme]

1 hour ago, Sammybighead said:

Do you actually think before typing idiotic nonsense like this?

You think it's better to pay a guy 60M, HAVE TO CARRY HIM on the 53 man roster which takes away a spot from someone that can help immediately, and suffer the future cap ramifications which will limit your ability to rebuild in next couple years? Not to mention it would tear the locker room apart constantly having AR in the background and half the team wanting him to play.

This is better than sucking with Zach? I'll take suck with Zach, keep all our draft picks, get high pick next year and draft another qb, and no cap crushing hits over the above. Thanks.

 

Ur premise is wrong on that 60 million.  His contract/cap will be VERY team friendly, which is all that matters regarding the team you can field.   The 60 million does have to be paid but Woody is not Mark Davis.   He can easily write that check.