Steelers???
I would support that move.
I just want him out of GB so they can finally be a losing team in my lifetime.
1 Like
It’s coming eventually, he aint getting any younger. He will be 39 years old after the 2022 season. I think 2022 will be his last year as a packer. His contract expires after next season.
I want him to stay in GB until 2029, by then we should be good.
The Packers off-season is going to be very interesting.
- I don’t see a way that the Packers keep Rodgers, using OTC’s cap calculator, I had to renegotiate 11 contracts, extend Adams, plus Rodgers agree to restructure again and I had them $24M under the cap . . . this is signing no UFA’s or Rookies, no extensions other than Adams or having money for in-season. I don’t see any way Rodgers is with the Packers in 2022, unless he gives them a huge discount and agrees to play for the league minimum ($1.2M).
- Since Rodgers won’t play for the Packers in 2022, it’ll be interesting to see if they can trade him. Keep in mind, that Rodgers is going to have to be on board with a trade. There is no team that will ever give up the draft compensation for Rodgers, without requiring him to show up and play (he can’t just retire or the trade will void).
- If the Packers can’t find a trade partner before the start of the league year, they may have to cut Rodgers (or some important people), it’s going to be very hard for the Packers to franchise/extend Adams and keep Rodgers on the roster at his current salary.
5 Likes
I just brought this up in another thread…but what if the Rams don’t do well in the playoffs? Can they just cut Stafford and sign Rogers? I feel like McVay would definitely do that if he had the chance. It would be funny if we got all that draft capital out of them, they cut Stafford the very next off season and we sign him back as a free agent 
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing. Didn’t realize their cap situation was so rough. Couldn’t they cut a few guys to make room to keep Rodgers!?
Adams is due for a massive payday for sure.
Sure there are a few Preston Smith ($12.5M), Da’ Zarius Smith ($15.75M), Cobb ($6.8M), Clark ($5.65M), Amos ($4.65M), Turner ($3.2M), Lowry ($3.9M) . . . but all are starters, you’re getting Rodgers, but you are depleting the talent around him . . . doesn’t make sense to me, it’s time to usher in the Love ERA and get what you can for Rodgers.
1 Like
I hope you are right! Rodgers would look great in the AFC and the NFC North would be wide open.
Here’s a couple of tweets from a Ken Ingalls on the Packers cap. He knows his stuff, especially on the Packers cap.
Packers are in trouble come next season. Not only are they hard pressed to keep Rodgers. Even if they trade Rodgers, they are going to be hard pressed to franchise Adams.
1 Like
Whether Rodgers gets traded or extended, I doubt his $43 mil cap hit will stay that way. If one or the other happens, they don’t have any issue tagging Adams, right?
I kind of feel like this guy is ignoring the elephant in the room.
Regardless Rodgers has over 20mil in cap that is guaranteed to count against the 2022 cap. One of his biggest issues is the Packers committing to him long term. He is going to want a lot of guaranteed cash in that contract. So even if somehow they structure a way where he only has roughly a 25mil cap hit in 2022 and extend him, they still need to cut a bunch of guys, won’t have much money to retain their own FA’s, and can’t add anybody. If you are Roders, would you want to come back to that team when you know you don’t have the years to waste?
Green Bay should know its time to purge this roster of bad contracts, get the value you can for Rodgers, and see what you have in Jordan Love. I would trade Rodgers, franchise and trade Adams and cut guys like Zadarious Smith, Cobb, Preston Smith, Crosby, and maybe a couple other older guys with large contracts and start fresh.
They have a good enough young core to turn it around pretty quick, especially on defense.
They do have a pretty good young defensive core. That’s why I expect both Smiths to be FAs next year. Campbell and Douglas are probably casualties as well.
Gut tells me Rodgers and Adams are here to terrorize us for the next few seasons.
Not a chance and I think that was Ingalls point. No way they keep both and if they don’t keep both, they probably don’t keep one of them.
Next season starts the Love ERA.
Ingalls didn’t even mention Rodgers cap hit or how extending or trading him could dramatically lower it? Kind of poor analysis if you ask me. I think it’s pretty simple. They’re a packaged deal. If they want to stay, they stay. If they don’t, they get traded.
If Rodgers does get traded, it still won’t be the Love era. It will be the (insert veteran QB FA name here) era.
I think if you don’t start Love if Rodgers is gone then he clearly isn’t the answer. The current GM made the pick, he will get 2022.
I agree that they are a packaged deal, but with the right moves, plus trading Rodgers, they can franchise tag Adams. If you are going to move forward without Rodgers they need to maximize their picks and Adams would fetch a 1st I bet. Could even package Rodgers and Adams togther. Would Denver trade Jerry Jeudy plus their 1st and both 2nds and maybe a 2nd in 2023 for Rodgers and Adams?
I personally don’t think Rodgers gets much more then what we got for Safford given his age. Adams and Jeudy is a fair swap considering Jeudy was a 1st rounder whos shown a lot of promise, and Adams needs a monster extension. Keeps Rodgers happy staying with Adams, and makes Denver Super Bowl contenders, if not favorites.
He has already sent that message.
I expect them both back in GB next year. Definitely not getting my hopes up about Rodgers leaving.
This just makes the Jordan Love pick even more questionable.
I’ll take my words back if Jordan Love becomes a good QB.
This was their window. They could have taken somebody to help ARod get them over the top.
Not that I’m complaining. More like gleefully laughing at their predicament to make me feel better about my team’s hapless existence.
5 Likes
He’ll get shipped out I imagine, if my assumptions are correct.