Packers/Rodgers Headed for Divorce?

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,380
Name
Burger man
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #81
If he's worried that those last 2 years will cost him a SB that's stupid pure and simple.

A first round WR would have been nice weapon to have though, right?

Fact is I used to like Rodgers but I've seen him change especially the last 3-4 years.

I’ve sort of felt the same. Normally I warm more to aging vets... appreciate what they’ve done over a career, etc. Rodgers seems colder now, or something.
 

Merlin

Enjoying the ride
Rams On Demand Sponsor
ROD Credit | 2023 TOP Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
37,598
“It was just one of those situations where there were a couple guys targeted that had just previously been picked and Jordan was the next guy on the board, and so we went with the best player at the time,” LaFleur said on ESPN Radio in Wisconsin.
Fuckin LaFleur man. :ROFLMAO:

He learned from one of the best in McVay of course. But honestly... He could have gone the "Age is undefeated" route in his answer, or "we wanted to get better in our QB room" and didn't need to downplay the move. His answer is obviously BS coachspeak though because of them moving up for the guy.

I get the advantages of coachspeak btw. But there's a point where you can come across as being duplicitous with it and LaFleur is right on that line IMO. Rodgers certainly won't be fooled by that.
 

Mackeyser

Supernovas are where gold forms; the only place.
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
14,322
Name
Mack
I think the Packers realize that as hard as it is to find a QB, it's almost harder to find a HC worthy of such a storied franchise. The Packers aren't the franchise to do a Browns with the HC position.

If the rumors are true that Rodgers just runs what he wants, then let him be the much more talented brother of Jay Cutler...
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,337
I think the Packers realize that as hard as it is to find a QB, it's almost harder to find a HC worthy of such a storied franchise. The Packers aren't the franchise to do a Browns with the HC position.
Arent they though? Holmgren steps down, and they give Rhodes 1 season. Mike Sherman wins 53 games in 4 seasons, has 1 losing year and gets fired. McCarthy wins a SB, makes playoffs 10 of 11 years, gets fired. Then they replace him with LaFleur who basically gets to alienate the HOF QB? It may not be Cleveland losing but it sure has a Cleveland-esque stink of dysfunction if you ask me
 

FarNorth

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
3,063
If you think Love is the future, you draft him now in hopes that he can learn and grow for a couple years. This idea that every first round QB should be starting as a rookie is absurd. It's also absurd that when you have an aging QB - franchise or not - that you don't take the opportunity to draft a QB you think could be your next signal caller if he is still there at the end of the first. So what if AR gets pissy about it. So what if you don't start your first rounder for a year or two. You can't wait until your QB is needing a walker before you draft his successor.

In general you may be correct. But I think this situation is different and the timing was really, really wrong. And Jordan Love will never be Aaron Rodgers, not as a championship contender and not even as a backup as was Rodgers, though the better QB, when sitting on the bench waiting for Brett Favre to retire.

I apologize in advance for a long post....

A bit of history: The Packers have apparently never used a first round pick on an offensive skill player in Rodgers' entire career. My ex Navy Seal buddy from Wisconsin has been pounding the table for the Pack to take an elite receiver in the draft for the last decade, only to be sorely disabused after each draft. Now he's looking for another team to root for. Imagine the Rams having drafted Aaron Rodgers and never over many years getting him elite receivers to work with? it blows my mind!

This year the Packs' only good receiver was Devonte Adams. Rodgers sorely lacked another receiver with big play potential, and it showed in the conservative offense they ran.

The Pack could have taken Higgins, Pittman, Shenault, Hammler, Mims, Van Jefferson or even Chase Claypool. They could also have had any RB in the draft, with Jonathan Taylor being my choice because of his power, 4.39 speed and receiving ability. (While the Pack had an outstanding year from RB Aaron Jones, he is on the last year of his rookie contract and will have to be paid a lot after next year. Think of Taylor on a four year rookie contract instead...) Any of these picks would have contributed in the next year and more so going forward, giving Rodgers much more to work with offensively and the Pack a strong basis for future playoff runs. It is worth pausing to recall what Rodgers has done to win games with capable receivers (such as Jordy Nelson) in the past.

Rodgers is an all time great qb who is still elite. Rodgers is also under contract for the next 4 years. He will play for a contender probably every year until he retires, though it may not be GB much longer. If you put him on the Dallas Cowboys or San Francisco 49ers or maybe several other teams, he would likely win a championship sooner rather than later. He has a much stronger arm than Tom Brady, Drew Brees, or Phillip Rivers and will still have when he's 40. And if the Pack thought he couldn't play that long, they shouldn't have resigned him.

The Packers just diminished their opportunity to win a Super Bowl in the next 4 years while they may have Rodgers-- not just because he is pissed off and may leave, but first because once again they have gotten him NO HIGH SKILL PLAYERS to work with.

Instead they have drafted a strong armed qb who, to date, has shown little sign of potential mastery of reading NFL level defenses or making good decisions with the ball. He will certainly sit for at least two years-- because he needs to, because Rodgers for cap reasons can't really be cut or traded until the last two years of his contract, and because if and when Love does start, Rodgers will demand and get a trade.

And if you're thinking that Jones might step in to play at Rodgers' level any time in the next 4 years, dream on. Nothing Love has done supports that expectation, while Rodgers has proven himself to be one of the very best ever to play the game. Rodgers is the Packers window of opportunity to win the Super Bowl in the foreseeable future-- which actually doesn't extend more than 4 years in the not for long league.

The result of all this is that either Rodgers will be forced out in a couple of years, or Love will sit on the bench for most of his rookie contract. Neither scenario makes any sense. Either way it is a massive waste of championship opportunity and draft resources.

And if LaFleur is being honest-- which to be sure seems doubtful-- the GM did this without any real discussion of the strategy implications because Love was the supposed BPA.

Drafting the next QB would have made sense two years from now. It makes no sense when the result is that the Pack won't be able to maximize their Super Bowl window under Rodgers' contract, won't be able to maximize that opportunity if Jones starts in two years because there is imo NO CHANCE he will be as good as Rodgers by then, and won't be able to make maximum use of Jones' rookie contract either.

Compare this situation say with KC when they drafted Mahomes and sat him for a year while starting Alex Smith in the last year of his contract. Perfect timing. And Smith, though a capable QB, never had the arm to really lead a team to a championship and Reed knew it. The opposite of the situation of the Pack with Rodgers.

I have taken the time to write this just to explain why some of us who are Packers' fans (though never over the Rams) are really ticked off. We will probably stay ticked off as long as Rodgers plays for the Packers because we will not have the chance to see Green Bay compete at the possible highest level with one of the greatest qbs ever.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,337
Great post @FarNorth
Only thing I think you missed is the major flaw in the "Its the same thing as when Rodgers got drafted" theory. Favre had started his retirement talk before Rodgers was drafted, while Rodgers has emphatically stated he wants to retire as a Packer after playing in to his 40's.

Edit: Btw your friend is correct. Since drafting Rodgers the Packers haven’t drafted any offense playmakers in the 1st round. In addition, 12 of the 14 1st round picks have been defensive players.
Crazy
CD041699-1C76-4B67-9912-40FA3B9CA4F8.jpeg
 
Last edited:

Rynie

Cowboys rudeboy.
Joined
Sep 18, 2014
Messages
1,922
Name
Rynie
I'd like to know why "passive-aggressive" is considered such a bad thing. I'm tired of it. Just accept the man for how he is.


Would it be better if he let fists fly?
Would it be better if he were lazy?
Would it be better if he didn't perform?
Would it be better if he constantly barked at coaches during live broadcasts?

SHUT UP with the passive-aggressive crap. It's a fine way of expressing one's self.
It's sad that society is at a place where we think criminals should be freed from prison, but if someone makes a back-handed comment he's considered a bad person.
GROW UP
Passive aggressive is the pussy way of letting someone know your feelings are butthurt. Why are you defending this clown?
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
22,601
Name
Dennis
History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes. IMO, the Packers get all caught up in that because of past success. I really believe that played a part and it should not have. First off, I do believe that somebody had to like Jordan Love and it very well could have been Matt LaFleur and then with him and GM Brian Gutekunst started having discussions, I could see them thinking this is what worked before and was highly successful, we could do it again.

It happen with the Rams & Mike Martz when they drafted Guard Travis Scott out of Arizona, Martz fell in love with Scott during a workout and scouts told Martz, he would not be drafted and Martz scoffed because he wanted another player and the scouts told him that player would go in the 3rd or 4th round and he went at the end of the 2nd (don't remember the player) so Martz dismissed them and made the Rams take Scott, who never played.

IMO, I believe as Jordan Love continued to fall and many wrote about the possibility of the Packers making a move to get him, it began to LaFleur & Gutekunst to seem like their destiny to make this move....A little Hollywood, but it's June.
 

kurtfaulk

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
16,156
Great post @FarNorth
Only thing I think you missed is the major flaw in the "Its the same thing as when Rodgers got drafted" theory. Favre had started his retirement talk before Rodgers was drafted, while Rodgers has emphatically stated he wants to retire as a Packer after playing in to his 40's.

Edit: Btw your friend is correct. Since drafting Rodgers the Packers haven’t drafted any offense playmakers in the 1st round. In addition, 12 of the 14 1st round picks have been defensive players.
Crazy
View attachment 36780

and their defense still blows.

.
 

kurtfaulk

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
16,156
.

rodgers brought this onto himself. he railroaded mccarthy out of town and the new coach isn't gonna take the same treatment.

he probably doesn't want to deal with rodger's bullshit so it will be adios aaron after this season.

not sure what the people who don't understand what the packers are doing are seeing.

it's gonna be a running team and the coach wants the qb to run his plays and not white ant him.

.
 

Mackeyser

Supernovas are where gold forms; the only place.
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
14,322
Name
Mack
Arent they though? Holmgren steps down, and they give Rhodes 1 season. Mike Sherman wins 53 games in 4 seasons, has 1 losing year and gets fired. McCarthy wins a SB, makes playoffs 10 of 11 years, gets fired. Then they replace him with LaFleur who basically gets to alienate the HOF QB? It may not be Cleveland losing but it sure has a Cleveland-esque stink of dysfunction if you ask me

Other than Rhodes, they haven't had 1 yr coaches like Cleveland and the number of HCs for GB has been pretty low. As an org, they tend to want long time coaches for the stability and McCarthy would still be there if Rodgers wasn't such a prima donna...
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,337
Other than Rhodes, they haven't had 1 yr coaches like Cleveland and the number of HCs for GB has been pretty low. As an org, they tend to want long time coaches for the stability and McCarthy would still be there if Rodgers wasn't such a prima donna...
Cleveland has had 2- 1 and done coaches in the same time frame where GB had 1. Browns had 8 head coaches to GB 5. Not such a huge disparity given the difference in team record during that time frame.
I'm not sure if Green Bay is worse with stability of HC considering they've had more HC (5) in the last 20 years than they've had losing seasons (4)
Just seems nonsensical that they let McCarthy go in a power struggle between he and Rodgers, and then replace him with an inexperienced HC who immediately has the same fight for power and yet he seemingly wins it.
If Rodgers was the problem all along, why not keep the SB winning coach?
The whole deal just seems bassackwards, and rest assured that if GB goes 6-10 this year LaFleur will be on the hot seat if not fired
 

FarNorth

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 23, 2014
Messages
3,063
History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes. IMO, the Packers get all caught up in that because of past success. I really believe that played a part and it should not have. First off, I do believe that somebody had to like Jordan Love and it very well could have been Matt LaFleur and then with him and GM Brian Gutekunst started having discussions, I could see them thinking this is what worked before and was highly successful, we could do it again.

It happen with the Rams & Mike Martz when they drafted Guard Travis Scott out of Arizona, Martz fell in love with Scott during a workout and scouts told Martz, he would not be drafted and Martz scoffed because he wanted another player and the scouts told him that player would go in the 3rd or 4th round and he went at the end of the 2nd (don't remember the player) so Martz dismissed them and made the Rams take Scott, who never played.

IMO, I believe as Jordan Love continued to fall and many wrote about the possibility of the Packers making a move to get him, it began to LaFleur & Gutekunst to seem like their destiny to make this move....A little Hollywood, but it's June.
Yeah, and my buddy also theorizes that Gudenkunst and LaFleur felt that taking Love would show that they're in charge and have decisively set the direction for the future... while also p*ssing on the previous regime. We'll see how that turns out.
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
22,601
Name
Dennis
Yeah, and my buddy also theorizes that Gudenkunst and LaFleur felt that taking Love would show that they're in charge and have decisively set the direction for the future... while also p*ssing on the previous regime. We'll see how that turns out.

That is exactly how I read it and kudos to your friend and thank him for his service, quite impressive!
 

CGI_Ram

Hamburger Connoisseur
Moderator
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
48,380
Name
Burger man
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #96
Why Matt LaFleur's account of why they took Jordan Love doesn't add up

The revisionist history has already begun in Green Bay. Didn't even take a month. Color me not surprised.

The Green Bay Packers sacrificed a fourth-round pick to move up in the first round to select quarterback Jordan Love to replace Aaron Rodgers in two years. Period. Them's the facts. Any attempt to skew that decision made on April 23 in another way is disingenuous at best. Might even enter the realm of gaslighting.

I knew it would only be a matter of time before the powers that be in Green Bay tried to couch this in the same vein as when Rodgers fell all the way to them in 2005 when they already had an aging Brett Favre in the fold. I dissected that faux dynamic in realtime right after the first round was complete last month, when the Packers had executed the most controversial transaction of that Thursday night. They had put an expiration date on their Hall of Fame QB in Green Bay -- everyone saw it and knew it and Rodgers would eventually infer as much himself when he recently Zoomed with the media -- and gone out of their way to trade for his replacement.

Again, facts.

But to hear second-year head coach Matt LaFleur tell it this week, Green Bay was just sitting back and following its board, and, darn it, they had no choice but to use a pick (that they didn't even own yet!) on Love because he was so clearly the best player available after everyone else they liked had been scooped up. Here's LaFleur's tall tale, as told to ESPN Radio in Wisconsin:

"It was just one of those situations where there were a couple of guys targeted that had just been previously been picked and Jordan was the next guy on the board, and so we went with the best player at the time."

Huh?

Poor Packers! I really feel awful for them. They just got stuck and had to follow their board. Had no choice! They were stuck! Any team -- with a generational quarterback already under contract for four more years through his 30s -- would have done the same thing! What else could they have done, guys and gals? Aw shucks!

Why did the NFL table the 4th-and-15 rule proposal? And why did Jadeveon Clowney turn down the Browns? Will Brinson and the Pick Six Podcast Superfriends debate those topics and more; listen below and be sure to subscribe for daily NFL goodness.

Then again, facts.

The player who went directly before Green Bay traded up for Love was receiver Brandon Aiyuk to the 49ers at No. 25; the Packers, mind you, sat out the entirety of the wide receivers in this draft despite its historical depth and their need, so, sorry, they weren't moving up for him. Receivers also went at picks 21 and 22, and, again, the Packers never selected a WR in the entire draft. So you can rule them out too. The Saints took center Cesar Ruiz one pick before Aiyuk, and the Packers already have one of the better centers in the NFL in Corey Linsley, who they are set to pay $8.5M this year. Could they have been looking to draft his replacement should he depart in free agency in 2021? I suppose one could make that case, but does it pass your smell test? Maybe we'll take a backup center for this year … or maybe we'll take a guy we think could be our franchise QB -- could go either way. Um, OK.

The Chargers moved up to pick No. 23 for a specific player -- linebacker Kenneth Murray -- who would have filled a need for Green Bay, and had been tied to the Packers in the pre-draft process, but there were also two very highly regarded linebackers who went immediately after Green Bay took Love, so if upgrading at that spot was a priority, options abounded with Patrick Queen and Jordyn Brooks, who Green Bay also did a lot of work on and who multiple teams have told me they had graded very closely together.

So, sorry, I'm not buying they jumped up a few spots very early with a focus on Murray primarily. And if they were silly enough to trade into 26 just hoping he would still be there, then that is actually a worse indictment of their process than anything else. Would anyone be that naïve?

If LaFleur is trying to maintain that the Packers honed in on the 26th pick just because they liked that number, and had a group of players they thought might could still be there, and were not trying to land Love in particular (despite Green Bay and other teams hearing chatter that the Colts were keen on moving up to grab Love themselves), that's simply a high level spin job. That's not how it works -- especially in the first round and especially when planning to replace a Hall of Fame quarterback.

No, what actually happened was they moved up to take a QB to replace Rodgers with a quarterback who most teams I talked to did not have a first-round grade on. No one fell to them; this wasn't Rodgers 2.0. They moved up to, if anything, reach for the younger, cheaper guy to take over for Rodgers when they don't want to pay him $34M a year anymore to manage games for them in a risk-averse offense. That's the deal. Just own it, guys.

This wasn't some predicament you fell into. This wasn't a passive, path-of-least-resistance decision. This was you putting Rodgers on the clock for two more seasons and making a massive organizational shift to the point that now the development of Love is the most paramount element in the entire franchise. This was one of the most significant decisions in the history of the storied franchise. Don't try to couch it as anything less.

The fact that the coach is already seemingly trying to hedge his bets or pretend this was something other than what the entire league saw … is probably not a good sign. You had the conviction -- albeit, in the eyes of many, misguided conviction -- to grab a QB you are banking on being a more cost-effective replacement for Rodgers come 2022.

Wear it. Embrace it. And by all means, sell it. If you can't, no one can.

Get your messaging straight and let Cheesehead Nation know how smart and calculated and shrewd this maneuver was. Get your story straight and stick to it. Because if this is the best sales job or re-imagining of what went down the night of April 23, 2020 that this brain trust can come up with, it's not particularly inspiring. And I can promise you that Rodgers is listening to every word.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,337
My guess is in keeping relationship with Rodgers as good as possible until they trade him
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,149
Name
Stu
In general you may be correct. But I think this situation is different and the timing was really, really wrong. And Jordan Love will never be Aaron Rodgers, not as a championship contender and not even as a backup as was Rodgers, though the better QB, when sitting on the bench waiting for Brett Favre to retire.

I apologize in advance for a long post....

A bit of history: The Packers have apparently never used a first round pick on an offensive skill player in Rodgers' entire career. My ex Navy Seal buddy from Wisconsin has been pounding the table for the Pack to take an elite receiver in the draft for the last decade, only to be sorely disabused after each draft. Now he's looking for another team to root for. Imagine the Rams having drafted Aaron Rodgers and never over many years getting him elite receivers to work with? it blows my mind!

This year the Packs' only good receiver was Devonte Adams. Rodgers sorely lacked another receiver with big play potential, and it showed in the conservative offense they ran.

The Pack could have taken Higgins, Pittman, Shenault, Hammler, Mims, Van Jefferson or even Chase Claypool. They could also have had any RB in the draft, with Jonathan Taylor being my choice because of his power, 4.39 speed and receiving ability. (While the Pack had an outstanding year from RB Aaron Jones, he is on the last year of his rookie contract and will have to be paid a lot after next year. Think of Taylor on a four year rookie contract instead...) Any of these picks would have contributed in the next year and more so going forward, giving Rodgers much more to work with offensively and the Pack a strong basis for future playoff runs. It is worth pausing to recall what Rodgers has done to win games with capable receivers (such as Jordy Nelson) in the past.

Rodgers is an all time great qb who is still elite. Rodgers is also under contract for the next 4 years. He will play for a contender probably every year until he retires, though it may not be GB much longer. If you put him on the Dallas Cowboys or San Francisco 49ers or maybe several other teams, he would likely win a championship sooner rather than later. He has a much stronger arm than Tom Brady, Drew Brees, or Phillip Rivers and will still have when he's 40. And if the Pack thought he couldn't play that long, they shouldn't have resigned him.

The Packers just diminished their opportunity to win a Super Bowl in the next 4 years while they may have Rodgers-- not just because he is pissed off and may leave, but first because once again they have gotten him NO HIGH SKILL PLAYERS to work with.

Instead they have drafted a strong armed qb who, to date, has shown little sign of potential mastery of reading NFL level defenses or making good decisions with the ball. He will certainly sit for at least two years-- because he needs to, because Rodgers for cap reasons can't really be cut or traded until the last two years of his contract, and because if and when Love does start, Rodgers will demand and get a trade.

And if you're thinking that Jones might step in to play at Rodgers' level any time in the next 4 years, dream on. Nothing Love has done supports that expectation, while Rodgers has proven himself to be one of the very best ever to play the game. Rodgers is the Packers window of opportunity to win the Super Bowl in the foreseeable future-- which actually doesn't extend more than 4 years in the not for long league.

The result of all this is that either Rodgers will be forced out in a couple of years, or Love will sit on the bench for most of his rookie contract. Neither scenario makes any sense. Either way it is a massive waste of championship opportunity and draft resources.

And if LaFleur is being honest-- which to be sure seems doubtful-- the GM did this without any real discussion of the strategy implications because Love was the supposed BPA.

Drafting the next QB would have made sense two years from now. It makes no sense when the result is that the Pack won't be able to maximize their Super Bowl window under Rodgers' contract, won't be able to maximize that opportunity if Jones starts in two years because there is imo NO CHANCE he will be as good as Rodgers by then, and won't be able to make maximum use of Jones' rookie contract either.

Compare this situation say with KC when they drafted Mahomes and sat him for a year while starting Alex Smith in the last year of his contract. Perfect timing. And Smith, though a capable QB, never had the arm to really lead a team to a championship and Reed knew it. The opposite of the situation of the Pack with Rodgers.

I have taken the time to write this just to explain why some of us who are Packers' fans (though never over the Rams) are really ticked off. We will probably stay ticked off as long as Rodgers plays for the Packers because we will not have the chance to see Green Bay compete at the possible highest level with one of the greatest qbs ever.
All excellent points. I just don't think it has to be a case of the front office giving AR the finger by wasting a 1st rounder. I don't see Love as the answer necessarily. But it is possible that they saw him as someone they could develop into a franchise QB. The QB position is definitely hard to nail. But I suppose we'll see if he amounts to anything. I have my doubts but what do I know. Some of you are way more versed in college players. I've never even seen the guy play.

Taking a WR at the bottom of the first is also dicey and wouldn't necessarily be an instant weapon for Rodgers.

I like GB. But I don't really care if they win games or championships.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,337
Taking a WR at the bottom of the first is also dicey and wouldn't necessarily be an instant weapon for Rodgers.
Well, that is something the GB brass seemingly has a handle on. Where they haven’t drafted an offense player in 1st round in a long time, they have done pretty well with the WR they’ve drafted in the 2nd round since Rodgers came on the scene
3DE4F959-6270-46F4-8D27-FE58BFCE8717.jpeg


I think with the group available this year, and the obvious need GB has, they could/should have gone WR. Just can’t get my head around how this makes sense.
Unless the plan is to move Rodgers