Jump to content

Aaron Rodgers to the Jets rumor: Merged


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Kelly to Allen no huddle said:

Rodgers would be the starter. Love is the future. The succession plan just moves back

I think you are misunderstanding. If the Packers keep Rodgers, as you are suggesting.

2023 - $31m cap hit

2024 - $45m cap hit

2025 - this is a dummy year on his contract. He is either retiring or creating a new contract for more money. This is the year of the $75m dead cap hit. It is also the year where there are no QBs undercontract.

 

If the Packers were to franchise tag Love in 2025, as you suggested, they'd be spending $110m, on the QB position, for 1 year of play from Love. (Rodgers dead hit + Love Tag) This is assuming they use the cheapest tag, the non-exclusive tag, that allows for other teams to negotiate with Love.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sammybighead said:

I'm not doing the homework for you. Google what it would cost cap wise to keep Rodgers this year, 2024 and 2025, add in Love's 5th year option at 20M next year, realize they would effectively have 1 year to evaluate love because he'll throw a fit if you franchise him given all that he's endured, sprinkle in you'll have zero cap flexibility to add around him in order to evaluate him due to the cap constraints. Again, your shtick is getting tiresome.

They can easily keep both for 3 more years. The Packers have never been big free agent spenders regardless. 

 

If you can't acknowledge the basic reality of math, that the cap can be easily manipulated and that Jordan Love is not going anywhere regardless of the Rodgers situation, I can't help you

 

The Packers would like to move on, they don't have to. They don't have to do anything 

  • Thumb Down 1
  • More Ugh 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I think you are misunderstanding. If the Packers keep Rodgers, as you are suggesting.

2023 - $31m cap hit

2024 - $45m cap hit

2025 - this is a dummy year on his contract. He is either retiring or creating a new contract for more money. This is the year of the $75m dead cap hit. It is also the year where there are no QBs undercontract.

 

If the Packers were to franchise tag Love in 2025, as you suggested, they'd be spending $110m, on the QB position, for 1 year of play from Love. (Rodgers dead hit + Love Tag) This is assuming they use the cheapest tag, the non-exclusive tag, that allows for other teams to negotiate with Love.

I’ll admit, i don’t understand the salary cap nearly as well as guys like you. When I read this I ask myself, why do we want any part of this contract?
Are we hoping Rodgers will rework it at some point?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kelly to Allen no huddle said:

They can easily keep both for 3 more years. The Packers have never been big free agent spenders regardless. 

 

If you can't acknowledge the basic reality of math, that the cap can be easily manipulated and that Jordan Love is not going anywhere regardless of the Rodgers situation, I can't help you

 

The Packers would like to move on, they don't have to. They don't have to do anything 

No they can't "easily" keep both for 3 more years. Read the post above yours. You're wrong, as always. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ptisme said:

1. The Packers are desperate but the jets clock expires before the Packers clock.

2. As far as you know no other team will enter the fray.

3. "they aren't going to accept less from another team, just to spite the Jets."  If the report is true that they had an agreement and Woody reneged on it this certainly could be true.   If I had a deal and someone reneged on me my response would be: "I'll sell to someone else cheaper because I sure as hell am not doing this transaction with you after what you tried to pull".

If only you could hear how it sounds to the rest of us when you willingly admit spite is the option you would go with over maximizing return. Bragging about it even. These are the people that eventually get to "capitalism sucks".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I think you are misunderstanding. If the Packers keep Rodgers, as you are suggesting.

2023 - $31m cap hit

2024 - $45m cap hit

2025 - this is a dummy year on his contract. He is either retiring or creating a new contract for more money. This is the year of the $75m dead cap hit. It is also the year where there are no QBs undercontract.

 

If the Packers were to franchise tag Love in 2025, as you suggested, they'd be spending $110m, on the QB position, for 1 year of play from Love. (Rodgers dead hit + Love Tag) This is assuming they use the cheapest tag, the non-exclusive tag, that allows for other teams to negotiate with Love.

All of that is not preferred in 25 but possible... And the potential upside of a greater haul by waiting instead of giving Rodgers away for a second rd pick is obvious. 

You're also not understanding that you can convert certain years to a roster bonus , putting there cap number for that year to zero

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I think you are misunderstanding. If the Packers keep Rodgers, as you are suggesting.

2023 - $31m cap hit

2024 - $45m cap hit

2025 - this is a dummy year on his contract. He is either retiring or creating a new contract for more money. This is the year of the $75m dead cap hit. It is also the year where there are no QBs undercontract.

 

If the Packers were to franchise tag Love in 2025, as you suggested, they'd be spending $110m, on the QB position, for 1 year of play from Love. (Rodgers dead hit + Love Tag) This is assuming they use the cheapest tag, the non-exclusive tag, that allows for other teams to negotiate with Love.

I'm actually upset at you for spelling this out for him. He'll only learn if he does his own homework. 

Actually, chances are he'll learn nothing and still think AR can be the Packers qb next year. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sammybighead said:

No they can't "easily" keep both for 3 more years. Read the post above yours. You're wrong, as always. 

Yes they literally can. Look up what a roster bonus is... Even without the roster bonus conversion it's still possible under the cap. Regardless that's 3 years from now in 2025....

Again the Packers have more potential upside in waiting instead of just giving Rodgers away 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sammybighead said:

I'm actually upset at you for spelling this out for him. He'll only learn if he does his own homework. 

Actually, chances are he'll learn nothing and still think AR can be the Packers qb next year. 

You do realize that the cap is going to explode in 24 and 25 right. 

Once again. It's an established fact they can keep both in 25 even if it gets to that. 

 

The Packers don't have to do anything 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

The Packers will be able to ask for the most compensation as we get closer to camp. If they start going into training camp, that will hurt us from a chemistry standpoint.

No, no they won't. GB is up against a wall and needs to get rid of AR. The Jets may want AR, but they don't have to have him despite what desperate Jets fans may feel. GB has to make a move no matter what, regardless of fan, or media opinions otherwise. The Jets don't. That's called leverage. AR knows the offense already, and the rest of the Jets can practice and learn the offense while GB plays chicken with their salary cap space. In fact, the longer GB holds out the more likely they get less from a potentially spiteful Jets at that point who are the only takers available offering up something which is better than nothing. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Sammybighead said:

I'm actually upset at you for spelling this out for him. He'll only learn if he does his own homework. 

Actually, chances are he'll learn nothing and still think AR can be the Packers qb next year. 

Go look up the total cap ceiling projection for 2024 and 2025... It's easily possible 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Embrace the Suck said:

No, no they won't. GB is up against a wall and needs to get rid of AR. The Jets may want AR, but they don't have to have him despite what desperate Jets fans may feel. GB has to make a move no matter what, regardless of fan, or media opinions otherwise. The Jets don't. That's called leverage. AR knows the offense already, and the rest of the Jets can practice and learn the offense while GB plays chicken with their salary cap space. In fact, the longer GB holds out the more likely they get less from a potentially spiteful Jets at that point who are the only takers available offering up something which is better than nothing. 

The only wall that exists is the imaginary one in jets fans heads. The projected cap ceiling could be 300 million in 2025. They can easily afford both 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

ow in an even more extreme situation, what happens if the Jets say "F*ck it" in the middle of Training Camp, and call Green Bay's bluff of having a $60m backup? Would the Jets be willing to sacrifice week 1? They may feel, even with Zach Wilson, the team is good enough to hold its own for a week.

they better not. 

there is a 50/50 chance he is a one year rental. and now you think he might not even play the whole 17 games? they better walk away from this before then. 

so were going to lose draft picks and be in cap hell for 4 years for 16 or 15 games.? what a disaster this will turn out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, bla bla bla said:

I think you are misunderstanding. If the Packers keep Rodgers, as you are suggesting.

2023 - $31m cap hit

2024 - $45m cap hit

2025 - this is a dummy year on his contract. He is either retiring or creating a new contract for more money. This is the year of the $75m dead cap hit. It is also the year where there are no QBs undercontract.

 

If the Packers were to franchise tag Love in 2025, as you suggested, they'd be spending $110m, on the QB position, for 1 year of play from Love. (Rodgers dead hit + Love Tag) This is assuming they use the cheapest tag, the non-exclusive tag, that allows for other teams to negotiate with Love.

Go look up the projected cap ceiling in 2025...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, doitny said:

they better not. 

there is a 50/50 chance he is a one year rental. and now you think he might not even play the whole 17 games? they better walk away from this before then. 

so were going to lose draft picks and be in cap hell for 4 years for 16 or 15 games.? what a disaster this will turn out to be.

If the Rodgers trade does happen, he'll restructure for the jets obviously 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do people still a have this much energy to argue over speculation... 

All parties will complete this trade before draft day guaranteed... Not worth debating return or who has leverage... 

We will find the answer out shortly. 

It's in everyone's best interest to complete the trade before the draft to get the most value for Rodgers in both directions... It will happen... Everyone will get pissed and in the end it will be fair... 

Deadline spurn action... It will happen quickly once there is pressure to get it done

  • Upvote 3
  • Thumb Down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Green Ghost said:

I’ll admit, i don’t understand the salary cap nearly as well as guys like you. When I read this I ask myself, why do we want any part of this contract?
Are we hoping Rodgers will rework it at some point?

Because Green Bays cap hits and the Jets cap hits are not the same. The Packers have to eat the signing bonuses they've already paid out. For the Jets it would be:

2023: $16m

2024: $32m

2025: $58m dead cap (could be split over 2 years)

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Kelly to Allen no huddle said:

All of that is not preferred in 25 but possible... And the potential upside of a greater haul by waiting instead of giving Rodgers away for a second rd pick is obvious. 

You're also not understanding that you can convert certain years to a roster bonus , putting there cap number for that year to zero

Oo no, I do understand that. That is the reason Rodgers cap hits are so low while he's playing. Each bonus, the $60m this year and the $45m next year, get spread over the duration of the remaining years of his contract. In essence, they are 2 additional signing bonuses.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Embrace the Suck said:

No, no they won't. GB is up against a wall and needs to get rid of AR. The Jets may want AR, but they don't have to have him despite what desperate Jets fans may feel. GB has to make a move no matter what, regardless of fan, or media opinions otherwise. The Jets don't. That's called leverage. AR knows the offense already, and the rest of the Jets can practice and learn the offense while GB plays chicken with their salary cap space. In fact, the longer GB holds out the more likely they get less from a potentially spiteful Jets at that point who are the only takers available offering up something which is better than nothing. 

Week 1 is their wall, not training camp. If the Jets don't care about training camp, like Saleh eluded to at the owners meeting, then the Packers do not gain leverage before camp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, doitny said:

they better not. 

there is a 50/50 chance he is a one year rental. and now you think he might not even play the whole 17 games? they better walk away from this before then. 

so were going to lose draft picks and be in cap hell for 4 years for 16 or 15 games.? what a disaster this will turn out to be.

No, if the Jets wait til week 1 then Green Bay is on the hook for that $60m contract and the trade won't happen. OR Green Bay folds, and trade him for whatever they can get to avoid paying out the $60m.

There is no situation where it gets that far and the Jets pay in picks and money.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Reasonable Jets Fan said:

It's in everyone's best interest to complete the trade before the draft to get the most value for Rodgers in both directions... It will happen... Everyone will get pissed and in the end it will be fair... 

Except that isn't true. Why is it better for the Jets to get Rodgers before the draft? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kelly to Allen no huddle said:

Rather than just give a 1st ballot hof QB away for peanuts. Yes absolutely. There's more potential upside on waiting for a better offer. 

What better offer? Besides your misguided opinions on having a boatload of your cap go to 2 QBs, your whole idea is founded on waiting for a mystery team.

AND that mystery has to be willing to give up the premium assets you want, which they wont do for a pissible 1 year rental. AND AR has to want to play for that mystery team or else they wouldn't even attempt to trade for him. 

You are literally cutting off your nose to spite your face. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kelly to Allen no huddle said:

If an unconditional 1st was on the table along with other secondary picks, the deal would've been done. 

My understanding is the Packers want the 2024 first unconditionally AND a 2023 pick. I'd venture to be if this happens AFTER the draft, the Jets would be willing to part with the 2024 first since they would have used their picks this year.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...