It's delightful ironic that a man who spends any and every opportunity to voice how much he loathes ESPN and debate journalism using those very tools to launch this bomb. And then when given the opportunity to have an on the record contestation with Tirico, he declined. Bravo.
Great analysis, Tyler. Basically covered every angle. One thing I'd add is Rodgers' play pre-Love. A little bit of the '19 season but especially the '18 season (he was hurt in '17) were very, very lackluster seasons for Rodgers. He looked like a player who no longer could use his legs and was still too stubborn to operate wholly out of the pocket. Obviously, Rodgers turned it around, but we can't also sit here an act as if that outcome was easily foreseen. Rodgers has the talent, but if he's this dug in, which I now believe he is, maximize your trade value. I think the biggest professional rebuttal the Packers can give to Rodgers is to surround Love with the type of talent they couldn't surround Rodgers with because of the cap implications. And Rodgers will be the one to blame. Grant him his wish to Denver, let him play against Pat Mahomes twice a year, and drain Denver of high draft picks and maybe even a promising young player.
Fantastic point, Jack. The Love pick made so much sense on so many levels and that is a fact that gets lost in the shuffle. I remember watching that Packers/Lions regular season finale in 2017 thinking Rodgers arm was fading fast. He was inaccurate and the zip just wasn't there. Any time the Packers needed a Hail Mary at the end of a half or game, too, the ball just floated and died. Usually those are some pretty telltale signs that a quarterback is losing his fastball -- we saw it with Peyton Manning and Drew Brees both. The Packers' decision to get ahead of the decline and draft Jordan Love was a smart one.
As you added here, Rodgers went ahead and played lights out in 2020. I think we can all agree here that he was phenomenal. But who's the say he looks more '19 than '20 in 2021? Then, the Packers are locked in for two more years? Three? Not sure what Rodgers' demands are but it sure sounds like he wants multiple years and wants the team to basically give up on Love.
I saw that Schefter was EMPHATIC that the timing was completely coincidental the day after but, yeah, not buying that. Makes so much sense that 12 would want this to be a dominant headline the day of the draft.
As a fan whose draft week was just totally ruined by this crap, I agree. Trade him. You can't have the QB calling the shots on AND off the field. His inflated ego is out of control. He might be smart, but he's definitely not as intelligent as he THINKS he is. Just listen to his 5-min KY derby interview. He sounds like every pompous professor I ever had, even if he's just trotting out any racing term he has careening around in his head.
He released this on draft day on purpose, to stoke the flames of what was a behind-the-scenes inferno.
My big questions are where do the Packers go to trade him, and what do they get in return? As far as I can scry, the money situation still sucks after June 1, just not as much. Can they unload some of that money WITH Rodgers, or are they stuck with the bill? How many picks and players (bc I would assume you'd need players, too, for an MVP 1st-ballot HOF QB) do you get? Which players will be most beneficial to this team?
You'd have to assume the front office has some of this ironed out already, they're just waiting for that June 1 deadline. We drafted 3 OL, 1 DL, 2 CB, a WR and a last-round RB. No QB and currently just Love and Rodgers at that position. I'd guess a vet QB would come with the deal.
It would never happen in a million years, but I wish we could trade him to Dallas.
Wouldn't that be funny. Rodgers/McCarthy Part 2... Run it back!
Well said, Sal. I don't think you're far off with any of this, of course.
As far as the timing goes, post-June 1 would be the way to go. It doesn't benefit Gutekunst or the Packers to say anything but "Aaron is our guy" right now. As we've seen, countless GMs for countless teams said the exact same thing before pulling off a trade. The difference here, of course, is that you've got the league MVP. Even factoring in the potential headache he'd be on your roster, I have to think a team out there would be willing to part with a TON of picks and players to bring in Aaron Rodgers and let him do whatever the hell he wants. Denver makes a lot of sense. They've some young assets to package.
The huge question, then, is quarterback in Green Bay. My guess is that they'd still prefer Love sit a little longer but he's still a first-round pick and he'd need to see the field sooner rather than later. I'll hopefully have a story here this week on Love. Stay tuned.
Great piece. I found it very revealing that Rodgers' only words to Tirico were (paraphrasing) that he was sorry this came out. No denials and definitely not an apology. I read some armchair analysis of Rodgers' personality type and it 100% aligns to what you're saying here - that he will dig in. If the man can sever all contact with what is, by all accounts, a loving family then cutting out the Packers will be relatively easy. I suspect that the interest in Jeopardy, and the timing, is convenient but is also honest - he seems to really want that role and by most accounts he would be well received as the host. That's just serendipity though, the issue is respect. He feels disrespected and I do not see him letting this go easily.
And you nailed it - we know nothing about Jordan Love. As a fan, the scenario that we're all-but-banking on is that Jordan Love is a third-in-a-row HoF-caliber QB? Can we acknowledge how preposterous that presumption truly is? And if it comes to pass ... well then I cannot blame the rest of the NFCN for really disliking the Packers.
Was great to "meet" you on the Happy Hour, Paul. Your points then and here now are so spot on.
As callous as it may sound, you're absolutely right. I feel confident in stating that's how he is wired -- he has zero problem completely eliminating people from his life. And report to report, he made it clear the Packers are out.
As for his backtracking via AJ Hawk to McAfee, that's too be expected. He saw the backlash from the Robinson report and, no doubt, wanted to minimize that a bit. Any of us with a brain can see how he really feels. Can only see this situation getting worse. It sounds like both sides have exhausted all contract options, too. Unless the Packers are willing to completely give up on Love, extend Rodgers for several years and/or remove Gutekunst, how does this get better? I'm not so sure.
NFL Management/Ownership might very well disagree with the idea that "getting nothing" for an elite quarterback on a good long-term contract is far worse than letting the player quit. I suspect they greatly fear the emergence of NBA-style player power. Letting a veteran go that Management thinks is overpaid or not as good as once thought (Wentz) is one thing, but letting a top QB force his way out is something very different (Rodgers, Wilson, Watson). I personally don't think it happens but I am not the expert you are!
This is an interesting point that I don't think many have considered. I think it might matter slightly less for Green Bay since there's not an actual owner, but for the rest of the NFL this has to be a real fear.
I personally think this would be good for the players: They should use any and all leverage they have to maximize they're earning throughout their short careers. As a fan I just wish it weren't happening to the Packers.
I am 100% on the player side in terms of leverage for earnings. I seemed like a lonely voice when Kirk Cousins effectively used the franchise tag system as a QB to basically get a guaranteed contract as a free agent. Bravo! And the anti-player aspects of the NFL labor regime is too long to discuss here. It is terrible. But super-well-compensated star players who sign long-term deals and then simply want to walk because they don't like how the team is managed is a very, very different thing. I think it's bad to have a couple of star players who also want to operate as part of the management team. Walk as a free agent like Tom Brady.
I don't know if any player in NFL history this side of Sam Bradford was able to squeeze more money out of less talent than Cousins. He's not bad by any means but, holy, there should be a chapter in a textbook on how he pulled that off. Remarkable.
You should do that. The way he used the (otherwise horrible) Franchise Tag to get major cash twice over on mandated one-year deals, and then, in the end, an effectively guaranteed contract because he was a legit Top Half of the League QB who was an actual free agent, was awesome from a player freedom/power perspective.
The Redskins screwed it up so, so badly from the beginning. Could have signed him for a mid-term, moderate money (for a QB) early on, but kept putting it off. And his numbers were good enough that they could not get anyone else as good and could not bring themselves to "letting him go for nothing" (the whole point of free agency, by the way, if you can't convince someone to sign), so it snowballed out of control.
I think the story is based on three factors, by the way. (1) The Franchise Tag system is awful for most players. But for QBs, least so. They play for longer (because they are protected by the rules and can last for years as a backup) and the average salaries at the top are so big, which is key the FT salary formula. (2) Decent QBs almost never become a free agent. Almost never. A QB who falls in the #10-15 range, where Cousins has been for his career, is way, way better than normal free agents. (3) Lastly, the main risk for players is Big Time Injury. They take the guaranteed money on the OK offer for year that they get franchised and suffer a major injury in that year and lose out. QBs, especially of the non-running variety, have the least to worry about these days. So the pressure most players feel to sign the "long term deal" even if the money and terms are not what they want is least powerful with a non-running QB.
Cousins seems to have grasped all that. That's a smart QB!
That's where I'm at as well, Taylor. I do love players having some control over their situations and trying to get as much leverage as they can. I think it's OK to call balls and strikes, too. Russell Wilson's passive-aggressive trade demand seemed pretty off, too.
I would be really interested to see some workable and viable trade scenarios. I have read it would actually be hard to trade him given how close the packers are to the cap and how much dead money is involved. I would love to see a realistic scenario to trade him to the Broncos or Raiders or what have you.
Great story, I still wonder about the locker room, the old clique "there is no I in team" seems to fit. Winning does fix some of that, while the NFL players are freaks of nature physically , they are still have human emotions, at what point do they get sick of the drama.
Johnny O! Great to see you again. Thanks for reading.
Hey, you were probably right all along. I think all teams are willing to put up with a certain amount of drama, but where do you draw the line? When is enough enough? Sure feels like the Packers should be reaching that point with how Rodgers dropped bomb after bomb last weekend.
Great stuff as always. Wasn't it disgusting to see Rodgers told Tirico he was disappointed news of the riff was public when it was his side that leaked it? Bizarre.
Great minds must think alike. Tom Silverstein wrote a column coming to the same conclusion. In addition to Broncos the Dolphins have a ton of trade capital and a talented roster.
Great stuff as always. Wasn't it disgusting to see Rodgers told Tirico he was disappointed news of the riff was public when it was his side that leaked it? Bizarre.
Great minds must think alike. Tom Silverstein wrote a column coming to the same conclusion. In addition to Broncos the Dolphins have a ton of trade capital and a talented roster.
I know QBs are a little different, but I struggle with what the rest of the guys on the team must think of him. Rodgers probably doesn't care though. The Packers basically drafted Aaron Jones' replacement last year in Dillon, and then he took an arguably below market contract to come back. That's just one example. I have to believe there's resentment towards him in the locker room even if the players know Rodgers gives them the best chance of winning.
I also remember an interview where he lamented that the NFL hasn't gone a route similar to the NBA where players can have contracts that are a percentage of the salary cap instead of defined dollar amounts. I'd be willing to be that his agent has asked for that in the discussions over the past year.
The absolute last thing any teammate is ever going to do is criticize Aaron Rodgers. They're not dumb. They see how the fans turned on Greg Jennings and would prefer to return to Lambeau Field as heroes, not pariahs.
I guess the best sense I get is that players love the fact that Rodgers is unbelievably talented and gives them all a chance to win games, make money, advance their careers, etc. Not sure he's an outright "bad" teammate by any means but he's just older than everybody else, a bit more prickly and far, far more wealthy. He's not relatable to many players on the roster.
It's delightful ironic that a man who spends any and every opportunity to voice how much he loathes ESPN and debate journalism using those very tools to launch this bomb. And then when given the opportunity to have an on the record contestation with Tirico, he declined. Bravo.
Isn't that something, Eric? Always found that humorous as well.
Great analysis, Tyler. Basically covered every angle. One thing I'd add is Rodgers' play pre-Love. A little bit of the '19 season but especially the '18 season (he was hurt in '17) were very, very lackluster seasons for Rodgers. He looked like a player who no longer could use his legs and was still too stubborn to operate wholly out of the pocket. Obviously, Rodgers turned it around, but we can't also sit here an act as if that outcome was easily foreseen. Rodgers has the talent, but if he's this dug in, which I now believe he is, maximize your trade value. I think the biggest professional rebuttal the Packers can give to Rodgers is to surround Love with the type of talent they couldn't surround Rodgers with because of the cap implications. And Rodgers will be the one to blame. Grant him his wish to Denver, let him play against Pat Mahomes twice a year, and drain Denver of high draft picks and maybe even a promising young player.
Fantastic point, Jack. The Love pick made so much sense on so many levels and that is a fact that gets lost in the shuffle. I remember watching that Packers/Lions regular season finale in 2017 thinking Rodgers arm was fading fast. He was inaccurate and the zip just wasn't there. Any time the Packers needed a Hail Mary at the end of a half or game, too, the ball just floated and died. Usually those are some pretty telltale signs that a quarterback is losing his fastball -- we saw it with Peyton Manning and Drew Brees both. The Packers' decision to get ahead of the decline and draft Jordan Love was a smart one.
As you added here, Rodgers went ahead and played lights out in 2020. I think we can all agree here that he was phenomenal. But who's the say he looks more '19 than '20 in 2021? Then, the Packers are locked in for two more years? Three? Not sure what Rodgers' demands are but it sure sounds like he wants multiple years and wants the team to basically give up on Love.
It's poor business to go down that road.
Pretty crappy to do that on draft day, it should have been these young men’s turn to shine and he tried to steel it away from them.
I saw that Schefter was EMPHATIC that the timing was completely coincidental the day after but, yeah, not buying that. Makes so much sense that 12 would want this to be a dominant headline the day of the draft.
As a fan whose draft week was just totally ruined by this crap, I agree. Trade him. You can't have the QB calling the shots on AND off the field. His inflated ego is out of control. He might be smart, but he's definitely not as intelligent as he THINKS he is. Just listen to his 5-min KY derby interview. He sounds like every pompous professor I ever had, even if he's just trotting out any racing term he has careening around in his head.
He released this on draft day on purpose, to stoke the flames of what was a behind-the-scenes inferno.
My big questions are where do the Packers go to trade him, and what do they get in return? As far as I can scry, the money situation still sucks after June 1, just not as much. Can they unload some of that money WITH Rodgers, or are they stuck with the bill? How many picks and players (bc I would assume you'd need players, too, for an MVP 1st-ballot HOF QB) do you get? Which players will be most beneficial to this team?
You'd have to assume the front office has some of this ironed out already, they're just waiting for that June 1 deadline. We drafted 3 OL, 1 DL, 2 CB, a WR and a last-round RB. No QB and currently just Love and Rodgers at that position. I'd guess a vet QB would come with the deal.
It would never happen in a million years, but I wish we could trade him to Dallas.
Wouldn't that be funny. Rodgers/McCarthy Part 2... Run it back!
Well said, Sal. I don't think you're far off with any of this, of course.
As far as the timing goes, post-June 1 would be the way to go. It doesn't benefit Gutekunst or the Packers to say anything but "Aaron is our guy" right now. As we've seen, countless GMs for countless teams said the exact same thing before pulling off a trade. The difference here, of course, is that you've got the league MVP. Even factoring in the potential headache he'd be on your roster, I have to think a team out there would be willing to part with a TON of picks and players to bring in Aaron Rodgers and let him do whatever the hell he wants. Denver makes a lot of sense. They've some young assets to package.
The huge question, then, is quarterback in Green Bay. My guess is that they'd still prefer Love sit a little longer but he's still a first-round pick and he'd need to see the field sooner rather than later. I'll hopefully have a story here this week on Love. Stay tuned.
Dallas! I have to think about this but I mean, forget the financial / transactional aspects ... just Rodgers in Dallas under McCarthy. Next level.
Great piece. I found it very revealing that Rodgers' only words to Tirico were (paraphrasing) that he was sorry this came out. No denials and definitely not an apology. I read some armchair analysis of Rodgers' personality type and it 100% aligns to what you're saying here - that he will dig in. If the man can sever all contact with what is, by all accounts, a loving family then cutting out the Packers will be relatively easy. I suspect that the interest in Jeopardy, and the timing, is convenient but is also honest - he seems to really want that role and by most accounts he would be well received as the host. That's just serendipity though, the issue is respect. He feels disrespected and I do not see him letting this go easily.
And you nailed it - we know nothing about Jordan Love. As a fan, the scenario that we're all-but-banking on is that Jordan Love is a third-in-a-row HoF-caliber QB? Can we acknowledge how preposterous that presumption truly is? And if it comes to pass ... well then I cannot blame the rest of the NFCN for really disliking the Packers.
Was great to "meet" you on the Happy Hour, Paul. Your points then and here now are so spot on.
As callous as it may sound, you're absolutely right. I feel confident in stating that's how he is wired -- he has zero problem completely eliminating people from his life. And report to report, he made it clear the Packers are out.
As for his backtracking via AJ Hawk to McAfee, that's too be expected. He saw the backlash from the Robinson report and, no doubt, wanted to minimize that a bit. Any of us with a brain can see how he really feels. Can only see this situation getting worse. It sounds like both sides have exhausted all contract options, too. Unless the Packers are willing to completely give up on Love, extend Rodgers for several years and/or remove Gutekunst, how does this get better? I'm not so sure.
NFL Management/Ownership might very well disagree with the idea that "getting nothing" for an elite quarterback on a good long-term contract is far worse than letting the player quit. I suspect they greatly fear the emergence of NBA-style player power. Letting a veteran go that Management thinks is overpaid or not as good as once thought (Wentz) is one thing, but letting a top QB force his way out is something very different (Rodgers, Wilson, Watson). I personally don't think it happens but I am not the expert you are!
This is an interesting point that I don't think many have considered. I think it might matter slightly less for Green Bay since there's not an actual owner, but for the rest of the NFL this has to be a real fear.
I personally think this would be good for the players: They should use any and all leverage they have to maximize they're earning throughout their short careers. As a fan I just wish it weren't happening to the Packers.
I am 100% on the player side in terms of leverage for earnings. I seemed like a lonely voice when Kirk Cousins effectively used the franchise tag system as a QB to basically get a guaranteed contract as a free agent. Bravo! And the anti-player aspects of the NFL labor regime is too long to discuss here. It is terrible. But super-well-compensated star players who sign long-term deals and then simply want to walk because they don't like how the team is managed is a very, very different thing. I think it's bad to have a couple of star players who also want to operate as part of the management team. Walk as a free agent like Tom Brady.
I don't know if any player in NFL history this side of Sam Bradford was able to squeeze more money out of less talent than Cousins. He's not bad by any means but, holy, there should be a chapter in a textbook on how he pulled that off. Remarkable.
You should do that. The way he used the (otherwise horrible) Franchise Tag to get major cash twice over on mandated one-year deals, and then, in the end, an effectively guaranteed contract because he was a legit Top Half of the League QB who was an actual free agent, was awesome from a player freedom/power perspective.
The Redskins screwed it up so, so badly from the beginning. Could have signed him for a mid-term, moderate money (for a QB) early on, but kept putting it off. And his numbers were good enough that they could not get anyone else as good and could not bring themselves to "letting him go for nothing" (the whole point of free agency, by the way, if you can't convince someone to sign), so it snowballed out of control.
I think the story is based on three factors, by the way. (1) The Franchise Tag system is awful for most players. But for QBs, least so. They play for longer (because they are protected by the rules and can last for years as a backup) and the average salaries at the top are so big, which is key the FT salary formula. (2) Decent QBs almost never become a free agent. Almost never. A QB who falls in the #10-15 range, where Cousins has been for his career, is way, way better than normal free agents. (3) Lastly, the main risk for players is Big Time Injury. They take the guaranteed money on the OK offer for year that they get franchised and suffer a major injury in that year and lose out. QBs, especially of the non-running variety, have the least to worry about these days. So the pressure most players feel to sign the "long term deal" even if the money and terms are not what they want is least powerful with a non-running QB.
Cousins seems to have grasped all that. That's a smart QB!
That's where I'm at as well, Taylor. I do love players having some control over their situations and trying to get as much leverage as they can. I think it's OK to call balls and strikes, too. Russell Wilson's passive-aggressive trade demand seemed pretty off, too.
*their, not they're. ugh.
As a die hard Packers supporter....great piece Tyler.
Thank you, JJ!
I would be really interested to see some workable and viable trade scenarios. I have read it would actually be hard to trade him given how close the packers are to the cap and how much dead money is involved. I would love to see a realistic scenario to trade him to the Broncos or Raiders or what have you.
Not gonna lie, the Raiders would be wild. I honestly don't know how long he and Gruden could coexist. My bet would be disaster.
...and I would be here for it
Great story, I still wonder about the locker room, the old clique "there is no I in team" seems to fit. Winning does fix some of that, while the NFL players are freaks of nature physically , they are still have human emotions, at what point do they get sick of the drama.
Johnny O! Great to see you again. Thanks for reading.
Hey, you were probably right all along. I think all teams are willing to put up with a certain amount of drama, but where do you draw the line? When is enough enough? Sure feels like the Packers should be reaching that point with how Rodgers dropped bomb after bomb last weekend.
Great stuff as always. Wasn't it disgusting to see Rodgers told Tirico he was disappointed news of the riff was public when it was his side that leaked it? Bizarre.
Great minds must think alike. Tom Silverstein wrote a column coming to the same conclusion. In addition to Broncos the Dolphins have a ton of trade capital and a talented roster.
Great stuff as always. Wasn't it disgusting to see Rodgers told Tirico he was disappointed news of the riff was public when it was his side that leaked it? Bizarre.
Great minds must think alike. Tom Silverstein wrote a column coming to the same conclusion. In addition to Broncos the Dolphins have a ton of trade capital and a talented roster.
This is just such an amazing piece.
I know QBs are a little different, but I struggle with what the rest of the guys on the team must think of him. Rodgers probably doesn't care though. The Packers basically drafted Aaron Jones' replacement last year in Dillon, and then he took an arguably below market contract to come back. That's just one example. I have to believe there's resentment towards him in the locker room even if the players know Rodgers gives them the best chance of winning.
I also remember an interview where he lamented that the NFL hasn't gone a route similar to the NBA where players can have contracts that are a percentage of the salary cap instead of defined dollar amounts. I'd be willing to be that his agent has asked for that in the discussions over the past year.
The absolute last thing any teammate is ever going to do is criticize Aaron Rodgers. They're not dumb. They see how the fans turned on Greg Jennings and would prefer to return to Lambeau Field as heroes, not pariahs.
I guess the best sense I get is that players love the fact that Rodgers is unbelievably talented and gives them all a chance to win games, make money, advance their careers, etc. Not sure he's an outright "bad" teammate by any means but he's just older than everybody else, a bit more prickly and far, far more wealthy. He's not relatable to many players on the roster.