2022 NFL Discussion Thread

[Fear The Chorizo]

31 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

Isn't it pretty much impossible to trade Rodgers with his new deal? I thought I've seen several articles alluding to this. 

Depends on the timing of when a trade would happen for how some of the bonus/salary structure would be paid out and how cap hits would be diviied up between the Packers and the team he's headed towards and if/when the Packers exercise the option in his contract.  It would be tricky but not impossible - no contract makes a player untradeable.  If Rodgers has a strong finish to the season it's all but certain there would be a few teams interested if the Packers opt to want to deal him this offseason and move forward with Love.

[HarryDoyle]

Looks like Arizona may be a trade partner this off season now. Classic ACL knee buckle by Kyler.

[UpandIn]

3 hours ago, adambr2 said:

Isn't it pretty much impossible to trade Rodgers with his new deal? I thought I've seen several articles alluding to this. 

No...it's really not even difficult. It's impossible to cut him and it's kill us if he retired, but a trade would be fine. 

They'd just make it a post June 1. They'd have to work it out like an NBA draft...basically agree to a trade, have them draft a player for us and then wait until the 1st of June to push it through officially. 

15M cap hit next year, 25 in '24. 

[UpandIn]

23 hours ago, adambr2 said:

So we're going to commit $65M in cap to the QB position in '24?

Nah...something has to give with Rodgers/Love next year. No one has a $23M backup QB on their team. 

Well...for starters, I didn't say they were going to do that, I said they're not going to trade Jordan Love because he requests a trade. It should have also been a little obvious I wasn't being completely serious with the wording, but yes, they would be able to navigate their way around the 5th year option and Rodgers cap hit. A salary cap that will be at ~255 at least and could very easily creep closer to 275. By '24, the NFLPA will definitely have paid back the Covid loan(very likely it's done earlier than that).

You're also making a lot of assumptions on that cap hit. Will Rodgers be playing in two years? Will it be his final year?

I don't know what they'll do, but I know the Packers have effectively said they've seen enough from Love to pick up his 5th year option and they believe he's a starting QB. So I suspect that means they're not trading him now after the Eagles game. 

 

Rodgers may well get traded, or he'll play one more year or...I have no idea. All I said was they're not going to trade Love and that he'll have to sit and wait until Rodgers moves on.

 

 

 

[UpandIn]

2 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

If Rodgers has a strong finish to the season it's all but certain there would be a few teams interested if the Packers opt to want to deal him this offseason and move forward with Love.

I think there are a LOT of teams that would gladly take Rodgers. I don't think teams are worried about Rodgers ability to play....they'll be more worried about how long he'll play for. They'd have to feel confident he wouldn't be a one and done or it'd be pointless, save for maybe SF who would be trading a future 1st and could win a SB with him right now(hell, they might win one with Brock Purdy that team is so loaded).

There are plenty of other teams I could see being interested in Rodgers...IF the Packers are going to take a more long term view. The Rams, the Titans, the Raiders with all their weapons may be a good spot. And a team acquiring him, they don't take on the terrible cap situation we do. They've got a ton of cap space. They could trade Carr for a 2nd(or even a 1st) and then turn around and trade for Rodgers. It COULD in theory be similar to the Buccs when they signed Brady. 

They could get ~70M below the cap WITH Rodgers next year, get a nice pick back for Carr and try and add a bunch of FAs. 

This is not going to be a fun off-season for Gutekunst. I think he can move on from Rodgers at this point with less criticism than Thompson did, but you'd still be giving up on a QB who just won back to back MVPs for another young guy.

2 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

Looks like Arizona may be a trade partner this off season now. Classic ACL knee buckle by Kyler.

He's gonna be CRUSHING it in COD though! Now that he doesn't have to spend 45 minutes a week looking at film?

[CheezWizHed]

14 hours ago, UpandIn said:

No...it's really not even difficult. It's impossible to cut him and it's kill us if he retired, but a trade would be fine. 

They'd just make it a post June 1. They'd have to work it out like an NBA draft...basically agree to a trade, have them draft a player for us and then wait until the 1st of June to push it through officially. 

15M cap hit next year, 25 in '24. 

Trading him after June 1st is the only realistic way to get rid of him next year. And I have my doubts any team would really wait that long to shore up the QB spot.

• $31.6M Cap hit if he plays for the Packers
• Pre 6/1 Release: $99.8M cap hit ($68M additional to cap)
• Pre 6/1 Trade: $40M cap hit ($8.7M additional to cap)
• Post 6/1 Release: $75.3M this year, $24.5M next ($43M additional to 2023 cap)
• Post 6/1 Trade: $15.8M this year; $24.4M next ($15.8M Cap savings)
• Retirement: $40M cap hit ($8.7M additional to cap)*

* The other numbers are from SportTrac.  I'm inferring the retirement number based on some articles/tweets. Looks to be the same as a pre June 1 trade. 

I suppose if he refuses to play for us next year, trading him is just as "painful".  Maybe we can package in Savage to balance the cap hit? 

[UpandIn]

36 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

Trading him after June 1st is the only realistic way to get rid of him next year. And I have my doubts any team would really wait that long to shore up the QB spot.

• $31.6M Cap hit if he plays for the Packers
• Pre 6/1 Release: $99.8M cap hit ($68M additional to cap)
• Pre 6/1 Trade: $40M cap hit ($8.7M additional to cap)
• Post 6/1 Release: $75.3M this year, $24.5M next ($43M additional to 2023 cap)
• Post 6/1 Trade: $15.8M this year; $24.4M next ($15.8M Cap savings)
• Retirement: $40M cap hit ($8.7M additional to cap)*

* The other numbers are from SportTrac.  I'm inferring the retirement number based on some articles/tweets. Looks to be the same as a pre June 1 trade. 

I suppose if he refuses to play for us next year, trading him is just as "painful".  Maybe we can package in Savage to balance the cap hit? 

It's not like they'd just open the bidding on June 1st. They'd obviously be talking to teams well before then. Rodgers would need to be included in the discussion, the Packers would almost certainly give Rodgers permission to speak with that team to avoid any tampering charges. 

Seems most likely they're both back in GB for another year, if not two, but the June 1st thing would be accounting. 

And I really doubt he's going to refuse to play for us next year given his comments this year. About how he'll sit down with "Brian" and talk with the Packers about his future, "see if they want me back." If you watch his McAfee interviews, he still seems pretty excited about this team.

 

Whatever they do, they've pretty much said they're picking up Love's 5th year already(a decision that has to be made this year) and that they believe he can be a starting QB. They control love for the next 2 years and then...not that they would, but they could tag him 3 times, they could put a transition tag on him...and Love has looked good in one game. He looked really good and like an NFL QB, but I don't see that he has a whole lot of leverage here. 

 

What's more, lets say the Falcons rumors were true and they loved...uh...Love and were willing to do "whatever it took" to get a deal done last year. Obvious hyperbole, but maybe this year they offer their 1st. IF the Packers think Love is that good, is that worth it? Kinda impossible to know from the outside, but I'd guess Rodgers finishes his career outside GB at this point and that Love takes over and that it all happens in a less acrimonious manner than the Favre-Rodgers transition. At least publicly. 

[jerichoholicninja]

What an interesting NFL offseason if Rodgers is available. Brady will probably be looking for a new team as well. Quite likely Jimmy G is will be available and Geno Smith might be able to turn his dream season into a lucrative deal somewhere. And there should be plenty of teams looking for a starter that don't have a high draft pick.

[CheezWizHed]

1 hour ago, UpandIn said:

It's not like they'd just open the bidding on June 1st. They'd obviously be talking to teams well before then. Rodgers would need to be included in the discussion, the Packers would almost certainly give Rodgers permission to speak with that team to avoid any tampering charges. 

Seems most likely they're both back in GB for another year, if not two, but the June 1st thing would be accounting. 

And I really doubt he's going to refuse to play for us next year given his comments this year. About how he'll sit down with "Brian" and talk with the Packers about his future, "see if they want me back." If you watch his McAfee interviews, he still seems pretty excited about this team.

 

Whatever they do, they've pretty much said they're picking up Love's 5th year already(a decision that has to be made this year) and that they believe he can be a starting QB. They control love for the next 2 years and then...not that they would, but they could tag him 3 times, they could put a transition tag on him...and Love has looked good in one game. He looked really good and like an NFL QB, but I don't see that he has a whole lot of leverage here. 

 

What's more, lets say the Falcons rumors were true and they loved...uh...Love and were willing to do "whatever it took" to get a deal done last year. Obvious hyperbole, but maybe this year they offer their 1st. IF the Packers think Love is that good, is that worth it? Kinda impossible to know from the outside, but I'd guess Rodgers finishes his career outside GB at this point and that Love takes over and that it all happens in a less acrimonious manner than the Favre-Rodgers transition. At least publicly. 

Trading him after June 1st isn't about the transaction.. its about him not being able to work with the new team, new WRs, new offense, etc... until training camp essentially. That is a lot of risk on the new team. 

Also, I didn't say he wouldn't want to play for us.  "I suppose if he refuses to play for us" is indicative of a hypothetical. As in it wouldn't be impossible to trade him before June 1st if he pushed us that way.  But I don't think we would trade him unless he pushed for it.

[UpandIn]

3 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Trading him after June 1st isn't about the transaction.. its about him not being able to work with the new team, new WRs, new offense, etc... until training camp essentially. That is a lot of risk on the new team. 

Also, I didn't say he wouldn't want to play for us.  "I suppose if he refuses to play for us" is indicative of a hypothetical. As in it wouldn't be impossible to trade him before June 1st if he pushed us that way.  But I don't think we would trade him unless he pushed for it.

I don't think Rodgers would show up before camp either way. What makes you think he's suddenly going to attend all the OTAs and what not?

He didn't this year with a whole new receiving core saying there was plenty of time in camp. I just don't think that it's a real big deal. Particularly if he goes to a team like Oakland. He could still spend time with the HC or OC.

[UpandIn]

4 hours ago, jerichoholicninja said:

What an interesting NFL offseason if Rodgers is available. Brady will probably be looking for a new team as well. Quite likely Jimmy G is will be available and Geno Smith might be able to turn his dream season into a lucrative deal somewhere. And there should be plenty of teams looking for a starter that don't have a high draft pick.

It's really gonna be wild. I never thought Rodgers would leave at any point in the past two years. I have no clue what'll happen this year. Again, I'd guess he'll be back, but I could 100% see the Packers meeting with him, telling him, "we're going younger, our window has closed...if you'd like, we'll work with you to find a good situation next year." And I don't think you NEED to get the best possible pick. A couple 2nds would be fine as well. 

Hell, at that point, like I said before, trade Bakh. I bet there'd be 20 teams more than happy to take him for a 6M cap hit. 

Probably a team that'd take Savage. 

Aaron Jones?

Or they'll add void years and restructure and try and run it back. It's gonna be interesting and again, I think by the 1st day of the next league year, we're gonna have a good idea what they're doing.

[CheezWizHed]

13 hours ago, UpandIn said:

I don't think Rodgers would show up before camp either way. What makes you think he's suddenly going to attend all the OTAs and what not?

He didn't this year with a whole new receiving core saying there was plenty of time in camp. I just don't think that it's a real big deal. Particularly if he goes to a team like Oakland. He could still spend time with the HC or OC.

I'm not following.  Are you saying that while being under contract with us, he'd go spend time with the new HC/OC to learn their offense? Yeah, I don't think anyone would do that and clearly it is against tampering rules.  Trade in place or not.  It isn't official until it is official.

Yes, I think if traded to a new team, he would show up more in the offseason.  If I were the trading team, I'd expect it.  The only team that will take him will have SB expectations.  SB teams don't lounge around in the offseason and expect to suddenly turn it on in 4 weeks.  

Packers 2022 season is exhibit #1 for that.  And that is with Rodgers actually knowing 90% of the team and 100% of the offense.  

[UpandIn]

5 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I'm not following.  Are you saying that while being under contract with us, he'd go spend time with the new HC/OC to learn their offense? Yeah, I don't think anyone would do that and clearly it is against tampering rules.  Trade in place or not.  It isn't official until it is official.

Yes, I think if traded to a new team, he would show up more in the offseason.  If I were the trading team, I'd expect it.  The only team that will take him will have SB expectations.  SB teams don't lounge around in the offseason and expect to suddenly turn it on in 4 weeks.  

Packers 2022 season is exhibit #1 for that.  And that is with Rodgers actually knowing 90% of the team and 100% of the offense.  

It's not tampering if the Packers are allowing it. This has happened numerous times before, usually just giving a team a window for negotiations, but where they allow an Agent or player to speak with another team. So they wouldn't have to worry about tampering.

And the new team could like for him to show up more. I'm pretty sure the Packers would have liked that. But that wouldn't be possible. 

And who said the SB team would "lounge around in the offseason and expect to suddenly turn it on in 4 weeks?" You think just because Rodgers wouldn't get there until June 1st the rest of the team would just be sitting by the pool? And it'd be quite a bit more than 4 weeks. He'd basically be missing the month of May and ONE OTA. The Packers 2021 OTAs started May 23rd, May 30th and June 13th. So you're saying a team that wants Rodgers is going to pass on him because he'd miss 1 and MAYBE two OTAs(depending on the schedule) and be there in time for the mini-camps? 

Packers 2022 season is absolutely NOT exhibit 1 of anything. This suggests that if only Rodgers had shown up and worked with OTAs the Packers season would have gone entirely differently. Would Watson have caught that 1st pass? Would he have been healthy rather than in and out of the lineup? Would the defense have been better?

Holding up this past off-season as exhibit 1 of why a team can't win a Super Bowl with a QB missing OTAs is...an enormous reach. I don't think the Packers were just a few more reps with the WRers was the difference in literally anything. Not only is Rodgers on a pretty strict pitch count in the off-season(And even early into camp)...you've got 2 a days for a couple weeks and then an 18 weeks during the season. 

You're placing a silly level of importance on what amounts to like...6 team practices.

We'll see though. I don't think a team that wants Aaron Rodgers is going to say, "well, if we can't have him until June 1st, we're gonna stick with...Ryan Tannehill or Derek Carr. And this also ignores the fact that about half the teams in the NFL run the same offense. So if for instance the Jets...who look pretty damn good. Same offense. Rams, 49ers, Vikings, Broncos...Bears, Bengals, Dolphins, Jets among others I can't think of off the top of my head. 

 

 

I don't have any clue if the Packers are going to trade Aaron Rodgers. I feel pretty confident the June 1st timeline is not going to stop the teams that want him from pursuing him. 

[CheezWizHed]

On 12/14/2022 at 3:30 PM, UpandIn said:

It's not tampering if the Packers are allowing it. This has happened numerous times before, usually just giving a team a window for negotiations, but where they allow an Agent or player to speak with another team. So they wouldn't have to worry about tampering.

Negotiating contracts yes.  Game planning, reviewing offense, etc... no.

 

  

On 12/14/2022 at 3:30 PM, UpandIn said:

And who said the SB team would "lounge around in the offseason and expect to suddenly turn it on in 4 weeks?" You think just because Rodgers wouldn't get there until June 1st the rest of the team would just be sitting by the pool? And it'd be quite a bit more than 4 weeks. He'd basically be missing the month of May and ONE OTA. The Packers 2021 OTAs started May 23rd, May 30th and June 13th. So you're saying a team that wants Rodgers is going to pass on him because he'd miss 1 and MAYBE two OTAs(depending on the schedule) and be there in time for the mini-camps? 

This isn't an OLB that comes in and rushes the passer or a CB that is on an island to shutdown a WR.  We are talking about a QB that is the lifeblood of the offense - the person that holds onto the football more than anyone one else on the team.  All plays, positioning, audibles, etc... goes through him.  If the QB isn't there, whatever the offense does is only about 50% effective because is isn't him barking the calls, doing the cadence, nor throwing the ball. 

  It also isn't just a couple practices.  You realize there is a lot of film study and meetings that go on behind the scenes, right?  In fact, I'd say the "behind the scenes" is probably more important than the practice field.

On 12/14/2022 at 3:30 PM, UpandIn said:

Packers 2022 season is absolutely NOT exhibit 1 of anything. This suggests that if only Rodgers had shown up and worked with OTAs the Packers season would have gone entirely differently. Would Watson have caught that 1st pass? Would he have been healthy rather than in and out of the lineup? Would the defense have been better?

Holding up this past off-season as exhibit 1 of why a team can't win a Super Bowl with a QB missing OTAs is...an enormous reach. I don't think the Packers were just a few more reps with the WRers was the difference in literally anything. Not only is Rodgers on a pretty strict pitch count in the off-season(And even early into camp)...you've got 2 a days for a couple weeks and then an 18 weeks during the season. 

Packer 2022 season is exhibit 1 for a QB not on the same page as 80% of his WRs.  It wouldn't have helped with Watson as he was injured.  But it certainly would've helped Romeo, Watkins, and many of the other younger guys.  

I didn't say a team couldn't reach the SB with a QB missing OTAs.  I said it puts the team at a higher risk that I doubt they would even try it. Team unity is a HUGE aspect of winning the SB.  We clearly didn't have it this year (and that goes way beyond the QB - but he was part of it). 

I can't think of a single example of a starting QB traded after June 1.  Do you have one?  

[UpandIn]

8 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Negotiating contracts yes.  Game planning, reviewing offense, etc... no.

They can talk about whatever they want. And I'm sure that'd include a playbook. The Packers obviously aren't going to be filling a tampering complaint in this possible scenario as they'd have literally given written permission for Rodgers to speak with the new team. 

LOL...I mean, c'mon, the aggrieved team here would be the team literally allowing the contact. Just because the CBA doesn't explicitly state you can legally tamper to speak with the coaches to discuss the scheme, only contracts, doesn't mean it's not legal. Stands to reason it would be, particularly in this scenario when all sides would be in agreement.

And he can certainly work out with whatever WRers he wants to. So say it's LV. He can work out with Adams, Renfrow, Waller, Hollins(whoever he'd want) without violating any tampering rules.

Of course this is a guy who's talked at length the past couple years about needing to get away from the game.

8 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

This isn't an OLB that comes in and rushes the passer or a CB that is on an island to shutdown a WR.  We are talking about a QB that is the lifeblood of the offense - the person that holds onto the football more than anyone one else on the team.  All plays, positioning, audibles, etc... goes through him.  If the QB isn't there, whatever the offense does is only about 50% effective because is isn't him barking the calls, doing the cadence, nor throwing the ball. 

  It also isn't just a couple practices.  You realize there is a lot of film study and meetings that go on behind the scenes, right?  In fact, I'd say the "behind the scenes" is probably more important than the practice field.

Again, you're talking about missing probably ONE mini-camp(if Rodgers has any plans to show up in the off-season at all for anyone). 

This was the Raiders schedule last off-season(again, just using the current betting favorite to land Rodgers as an example) so he missed exactly 3 days.;

OTA practices – May 23-24, 26, June 1-3 & 13-14

Mandatory minicamp – June 7-9

So he missed exactly 3 days.

8 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Packer 2022 season is exhibit 1 for a QB not on the same page as 80% of his WRs.  It wouldn't have helped with Watson as he was injured.  But it certainly would've helped Romeo, Watkins, and many of the other younger guys.  

I didn't say a team couldn't reach the SB with a QB missing OTAs.  I said it puts the team at a higher risk that I doubt they would even try it. Team unity is a HUGE aspect of winning the SB.  We clearly didn't have it this year (and that goes way beyond the QB - but he was part of it). 

Packers 2022 season is exhibit 1 for losing the NFL's best WRer, the NFL's best LT not being healthy and in and out of the lineup, the NFL's #1 CB in coverage(overall) dropping off...I really don't think Rodgers not showing up for the off-season had anything to do with that. Jimmy G couldn't throw all off-season and the 49ers seemed to be doing just fine with him(until he broke his foot). 

It's NOT because Rodgers didn't show up until camp. 

How about Packers 2021? 

8 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I can't think of a single example of a starting QB traded after June 1.  Do you have one?  

Yeah...BRETT FAVRE!!! The last time a situation like this played out. He wasn't traded until August.

Baker Mayfield this past off-season...I'm sure there are a lot more, but I don't have an exact memory of when QBs in the past have been traded.

I can also think of teams who WANTED to trade for QBs after June 1st...like two years ago when teams wanted Aaron Rodgers and trade rumors persisted well into June through July that he'd be traded. So teams were certainly willing to do it and they were willing to give the Packers a bounty. The rumored price then was 3 1sts and 3 day 2 picks. It's probably going to be a 1st this year.

 

There's also a whole list of things that have never happened in the past 1 or so with regard to QBs being traded around the league that I could write about at length like Jimmy G taking a pay-cut, not working out or even being ABLE to throw a ball all off-season, coming back, having an outstanding season and then going down.

The Browns traded for a QB, gave him the largest GTD contract EVER, 230M...and they were under the impression he wouldn't be available for half of the season, if not the whole season. When has that ever happened?

 

 

I don't know what the Packers plan on doing next year...but the one thing I'm reasonably confident of...IF the Packers choose to trade him, another team that wants him isn't going to pass because he can't be there until June 1st and "learn the offense."

Rodgers may not want to do that. He may be the issue there, but I sincerely doubt that will stop anyone from pursuing him IF they can come to an agreement with the Packers before the trade.

[CheezWizHed]

TLDR

Clearly we disagree.  Favre and Mayfield were low draft pick dumps to teams that had little chances to win the SB.  

[Fear The Chorizo]

Thinking I'm going to put my life savings on whomever the Vikings play their 1st playoff game against...and its probably a safer bet that leaving it in my 401k.

 

They are such frauds....

[HarryDoyle]

Wouldn't it be great to see the Vikings somehow choke away the division title to Detroit?

[homer]

nice first half, Minny: blocked punt for a TD, fumble, failed 4th down conversion, failed fake punt

[homer]

22 minutes ago, homer said:

nice first half, Minny: blocked punt for a TD, fumble, failed 4th down conversion, failed fake punt

add INT for TD

 

SKOLOLOLOLOL

[HarryDoyle]

For the love of Pete, are the Colts really going to find a way to blow a 33 point halftime lead and lose? Another second half field goal would've effectively ended it. Too much to ask I guess.

 

Regardless of what happens, I think this game still showed what frauds the Vikings are.

[HarryDoyle]

Memo to Kirk Cousins: When it's 4th and 15 with the game on the line, throw the ball.

[young guns]

The colts are baaaaaaaad

[young guns]

2 hours ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

Thinking I'm going to put my life savings on whomever the Vikings play their 1st playoff game against...and its probably a safer bet that leaving it in my 401k.

 

They are such frauds....

Not that it contradicts your bet, but right now I would bet the colts will lose this in regulation.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Guessing the Colts are going to expand their search for a new HC...

Also - a miraculous Viking comeback against a team that's been mailing it in for a month + doesn't change my opinions of them come playoff time.  They've been skating through this season winning games they deserve to lose.