Packers 2022 Offseason Thread - Adams Traded to Raiders for 2022 1st and 2nd Rd Picks

[JimmyTheKid]

Well, this will definitely test my ability to separate the player from the person over the next 4 years.

I finally solved it this offseason. Something finally clicked and I broke any attachment I had outside of just winning football games. I was deep into the " **** Rodgers, if he's going to be a diva just get him out of here" stuff last time around. This time I have just completely avoided any Rodgers discourse at all. I don't care who is reporting what or what the rumors are about what Rodgers may or may not be thinking. I'm over his whole act but I enjoy the fact that he is really good at football and that's now all I care about. Fully realize that is harder for some people to do, it was hard for me up until recently.

Congratulations and welcome to the club! The "noise" is just that. If you or your siblings or kids or nieces and nephews need a role model, look somewhere other than sports. (Although the Milwaukee Bucks have a pretty solid group of humans to emulate.)

[Ron Swanson]

Rodgers apologists couldn't wait to take their victory laps even before Love played an NFL snap, but all this proved is that it never had anything to do with Love and everything to do with money. Again, I'll ask why Rodgers signing an extension would force your hand in trading him at all. He's still only entering Year 3 of his cheap rookie deal and this could just as easily be a 2-year extension with his age and contract layout, which would still align perfectly with Love's contract (depending on what you want to do with the option year). Or are we really pining for the days when we had Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace as our backup signal-callers?

All in all, this was probably the right move. Rodgers wanted his money, he got it. We want to win another Super Bowl, and Rodgers gives us the best chance to do that. It's all on him now though. He regresses with age and stops playing at an MVP level, then the organization and the fanbase suffer.

[JimmyTheKid]

This should be studied as one of the greatest negotiations in sports history from the player/agent side.

Damn well played by Rodgers.

It turns out a back to back MVP has a lot of leverage. Who knew?

Crazy right?

[Cooleyo47]

My guess is that Rodgers won't play out the entire contract and they still move on to Love in two years.

[WeekapaugGroove]

Pat is talking right now about speaking with Rodgers directly and saying this deal that's out there was possibly a deal presented to him but isn't the actual deal. And that the deal will be cap friendly to bring his friends back.

Sounds like Rodgers is using his PR guy to make him look better.

If that were the case, then Rodgers would look worse then. He (Pat) pretty vehemently denied the contract report. So, I guess time will tell. I don't think Rodgers would bury Pat like that though.

Well all that's been said is 4/200 wasn't correct, Rodgers loves technicalities so it could be 4/195 and he could say 'told you 200 was wrong'.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

[LUKE23]

My guess is that Rodgers won't play out the entire contract and they still move on to Love in two years.

I'll be shocked if Love ever starts another game for the Packers.

[RRyder823]

Amazed that people are dunking on people over this. They were set up to win the last two years and kicked so much money down the street. They choked twice.

Long story short, there’s no way this team can bring the same level of talent back in the next 2-3 years but we somehow think they’re going to be a better team.

Rude awakening incoming

Why?

There are ways to improve your team without spending boat loads of money.

Here’s one: Don’t trade up for a QB in the first round and instead, take a high-potential skill player (even if you have to trade up) that our current HoF QB can build chemistry with over time, like he did with, oh idk, the now best WR is football that 90% of this fan base wanted to outright CUT as recently as 4 years ago.

ughhh I dunno. Because they're about to cut legit contributors and only being able to replace them if Gute absolutely nails the draft and gets about 4 instant contributors 2-3 of which are starters in which case they'll be about the same.

But yes continue to ask why?

Sent from my SM-G975U using RealGM mobile app

[Matches Malone]

Rodgers deserves criticism if his deal is restrictive enough to prevent signing talent. If his legacy is important to him, he'd pull a Brady. Not sure what more money does for him at this point.

Pat is talking right now about speaking with Rodgers directly and saying this deal that's out there was possibly a deal presented to him but isn't the actual deal. And that the deal will be cap friendly to bring his friends back.

im sure it'll be "cap friendly" in year one. New contracts almost always are. Years 2.. 3... and 4 however I'd be doubtfully if Rodgers thinks that far ahead when it comes to getting his money

Yeah, that's very true. I guess I'm just waiting to see/hear the final details. It won't be hard to sniff out the bullcrap, if what you're saying ends up coming true.

[Kerb Hohl]

Pat is talking right now about speaking with Rodgers directly and saying this deal that's out there was possibly a deal presented to him but isn't the actual deal. And that the deal will be cap friendly to bring his friends back.

im sure it'll be "cap friendly" in year one. New contracts almost always are. Years 2.. 3... and 4 however I'd be doubtfully if Rodgers thinks that far ahead when it comes to getting his money

Yeah, that's very true. I guess I'm just waiting to see/hear the final details. It won't be hard to sniff out the bullcrap, if what you're saying ends up coming true.

By definition, the big money has to be paid to him at some point. If it's cap-friendly to bring his buddies back, that means it will be cap-crushing at some point in the final 3 years of the deal.

Cap will go up in turn we hope, but it's still going to be hard to keep building around an aging Rodgers.

[JimmyTheKid]

Rodgers apologists couldn't wait to take their victory laps even before Love played an NFL snap, but all this proved is that it never had anything to do with Love and everything to do with money. Again, I'll ask why Rodgers signing an extension would force your hand in trading him at all. He's still only entering Year 3 of his cheap rookie deal and this could just as easily be a 2-year extension with his age and contract layout, which would still align perfectly with Love's contract (depending on what you want to do with the option year). Or are we really pining for the days when we had Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace as our backup signal-callers?

It actually had nothing to do with Jordan Love. My disdain would have been the same if the Packers selected any one of the 20 QB's picked after him. Was all about the time frame. Which obviously made zero sense. But sure, since Love could be a superior backup to Seneca Wallace, I guess one could argue it was still the right move. That would sure be a take.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

For me, the only way this is acceptable is with a SB win. Otherwise, an epic mistake

Wouldn't call it a potentially epic mistake. Their chances of being a Super Bowl contender under Jordan Love next season was pretty remote.

And frankly it's now his legacy not ours. i.e. if he can't win a SB in the next two years, its going to massively damage his legacy. We're going to get a couple 12-win seasons out of it most likely if he stays healthy.

Honestly I compare it to bucks trading for Jrue. High risk and high reward. If we win an Owl, no one will ever say it was a bad move. If we don't and are second level, ooof that is a lot of money for an aging guy that might not be good enough to get you over the top. Like guys will be fired if we don't win. But then again guys would be fired anyways

[th87]

Y'all are exhausting.

Bringing Rodgers back was 100% the right choice. He's back to back MVP. Stop it.

Drafting Love was arguably the right choice at the time. Rodgers was slumping bad the 2 years prior. Love for sure lit a fire under Rodgers.

Everyone always emphasizes we "traded up" to get Love. We traded a 4th round pick to move up. Who the hell cares.

Maybe Love will be good maybe he won't. But Rodgers is that dude.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Again, this is not just about Rodgers verses Love. Everyone knows Rodgers is better than Love. It's about what is the correct move for the future of the organization - Rodgers at the biggest contract in NFL history entering a season he turns 39, or multiple first round picks, young players, cap flexibility, and seeing what Love has (or drafting a new QB in 2023).

I also urge you to look at Rodgers playoff game log lately. Regular season MVP is great and all, but when you are paid what he is at the age he is, there is only one outcome that matters - SB. And he needs to play a whole **** of a lot better for that to happen.

Multiple picks - unlikely these picks make the impact Rodgers would. The draft is a crapshoot to begin with, so you'd need to come away with at least one pick high enough to mitigate risk, and then hit on a lower one. Let's say it's 9, 41, and Jeudy. Let's say 9 ends up as a Jaire type player, and 41 is an intermittent Pro Bowler. Jeudy is a 85% replacement of Adams. All this is very generous.

Cap flexibility - keep your talent, but you're not getting external FAs to come to GB now without a QB.

See what Love has - Let's say he's mediocre at a Jimmy G level.

At best, this team is a low-tier contender with a new weakness (QB) that prevents a SB. Which is worse than where we are now (and should be for the next two years if Rodgers doesn’t fall off).
And then if Love is replacement level, we are drafting too low to actually draft his replacement, so that's out.

By taking your "future considerations" route, at best we end up right where we are now. And that's if everything goes well.

[Ron Swanson]

Rodgers apologists couldn't wait to take their victory laps even before Love played an NFL snap, but all this proved is that it never had anything to do with Love and everything to do with money. Again, I'll ask why Rodgers signing an extension would force your hand in trading him at all. He's still only entering Year 3 of his cheap rookie deal and this could just as easily be a 2-year extension with his age and contract layout, which would still align perfectly with Love's contract (depending on what you want to do with the option year). Or are we really pining for the days when we had Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace as our backup signal-callers?

It actually had nothing to do with Jordan Love. My disdain would have been the same if the Packers selected any one of the 20 QB's picked after him. Was all about the time frame. Which obviously made zero sense. But sure, since Love could be a superior backup to Seneca Wallace, I guess one could argue it was still the right move. That would sure be a take.

Dude, you literally kept advocating that the Packers should trade Love for whatever as an admission of guilt by the front office. It had everything to do with Jordan Love in the eyes of the unflinching Rodgers supporters.

[Profound23]

Rodgers apologists couldn't wait to take their victory laps even before Love played an NFL snap, but all this proved is that it never had anything to do with Love and everything to do with money. Again, I'll ask why Rodgers signing an extension would force your hand in trading him at all. He's still only entering Year 3 of his cheap rookie deal and this could just as easily be a 2-year extension with his age and contract layout, which would still align perfectly with Love's contract (depending on what you want to do with the option year). Or are we really pining for the days when we had Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace as our backup signal-callers?

All in all, this was probably the right move. Rodgers wanted his money, he got it. We want to win another Super Bowl, and Rodgers gives us the best chance to do that. It's all on him now though. He regresses with age and stops playing at an MVP level, then the organization and the fanbase suffer.

More than likely Love will ask for a trade now. Not going to ride the pine my entire rookie deal.

[WeekapaugGroove]

Rodgers apologists couldn't wait to take their victory laps even before Love played an NFL snap, but all this proved is that it never had anything to do with Love and everything to do with money. Again, I'll ask why Rodgers signing an extension would force your hand in trading him at all. He's still only entering Year 3 of his cheap rookie deal and this could just as easily be a 2-year extension with his age and contract layout, which would still align perfectly with Love's contract (depending on what you want to do with the option year). Or are we really pining for the days when we had Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace as our backup signal-callers?

All in all, this was probably the right move. Rodgers wanted his money, he got it. We want to win another Super Bowl, and Rodgers gives us the best chance to do that. It's all on him now though. He regresses with age and stops playing at an MVP level, then the organization and the fanbase suffer.

More than likely Love will ask for a trade now. Not going to ride the pine my entire rookie deal.

Probably. And if he's actually good he should want to because playing is how he could earn a huge second contact.

... Now if Love has any doubts that's he's actually good then he should want to stay for 2 years and enter FA as an unknown. Some team would take a chance and throw a little cash at him.

Getting traded then being bad is the worst option for him financially.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

[th87]

Rodgers apologists couldn't wait to take their victory laps even before Love played an NFL snap, but all this proved is that it never had anything to do with Love and everything to do with money. Again, I'll ask why Rodgers signing an extension would force your hand in trading him at all. He's still only entering Year 3 of his cheap rookie deal and this could just as easily be a 2-year extension with his age and contract layout, which would still align perfectly with Love's contract (depending on what you want to do with the option year). Or are we really pining for the days when we had Scott Tolzien and Seneca Wallace as our backup signal-callers?

It actually had nothing to do with Jordan Love. My disdain would have been the same if the Packers selected any one of the 20 QB's picked after him. Was all about the time frame. Which obviously made zero sense. But sure, since Love could be a superior backup to Seneca Wallace, I guess one could argue it was still the right move. That would sure be a take.

Dude, you literally kept advocating that the Packers should trade Love for whatever as an admission of guilt by the front office. It had everything to do with Jordan Love in the eyes of the unflinching Rodgers supporters.

I highly doubt anyone advocated this for any purpose other than acquiring talent that would play immediately. To attribute anything personal to this is probably a gross mischaracterization of Rodgers supporters.

[Treebeard]

Gute's legacy rides on Rogers living up to the impact of this contract (whatever its final form). For many of us, myself included, that requires a SB win - nothing less. Otherwise, Gute go become the assistant director of seven man flag football scouting for an online junior college. Murphy can become his caddy too

[WeekapaugGroove]

Read on Twitter

?t=S9lRTal-2YpqWRP4LKHdlg&s=19

If that's on the table Love should be off this team by sunset.

Bring back Bortles as the backup.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

[coolhandluke121]

Love still has a decent chance to pull a Matt Flynn at some point. I don't know what he's worth in a trade, but unlike most positions in sports, I think it's arguably better to develop backup QB's in a successful system to improve their trade value even if they aren't playing much, rather than trade them when they're really young. Youth is not as valuable at the QB position.

I don't like the decision and would have strongly preferred a trade with Denver, but it's understandable to go all in under the circumstances. The devil is in the details with regard to how much talent they'll have to sacrifice the next couple years.

I think the real issue for me, and possibly for others as well, is the Groundhog Day feeling of thinking this just means more playoff losses with a ~12 win team. I'm just ready to build around defense and the run game and see if that works better. Rationally one might assume this gives them a better chance of winning the super bowl soon, but it's not so easy to convince myself of that after watching the last 10 years, even though I think Rodgers gets too much of the blame for that from many people (though he deserves some).

[Ron Swanson]

Read on Twitter

?t=S9lRTal-2YpqWRP4LKHdlg&s=19

If that's on the table Love should be off this team by sunset.

Sent from my SM-G986U using RealGM mobile app

If this is true, then absolutely. I don't know if I'd buy multiple teams unloading a 2nd rounder for him, but all you need is one.