Packers 2023 Discussion Thread

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Best case scenario for the Packers is for Rodgers to basically be an iron man (which wouldn't be surprising), but also show his age and have the team hovering around .500. After he breaks that 65% threshold, lose the rest. Bench him, I don't care. 

Chances are good that the Jets are solid, and that pick would be in the 20s. But there is also a pretty strong chance that it's in the teens. Pretty outside shot of it being a top 10 pick, because if the Jets are playing that poorly, they'll bench Rodgers so they don't lose a high 1st.

[Fear The Chorizo]

14 minutes ago, Ron Robinsons Beard said:

Best case scenario for the Packers is for Rodgers to basically be an iron man (which wouldn't be surprising), but also show his age and have the team hovering around .500. After he breaks that 65% threshold, lose the rest. Bench him, I don't care. 

Chances are good that the Jets are solid, and that pick would be in the 20s. But there is also a pretty strong chance that it's in the teens. Pretty outside shot of it being a top 10 pick, because if the Jets are playing that poorly, they'll bench Rodgers so they don't lose a high 1st.

I will have my popcorn ready to enjoy watching the train wreck if the Jets' management entertains benching a healthy Rodgers at any point, no matter what their record is in effort to avoid losing their 2024 1st rounder.  They don't yet realize they no longer run the show - Rodgers now does.

I think if they don't get off to a good start, they're all going to be looking for work elsewhere...this is what happens when you use a 2nd overall pick on a franchise qb you are giving up on after year 2.

[OldHeidelberg]

After thinking about it a while it seems like we pretty much got the same deal that has been rumored the last few weeks. We didn't get the unprotected first and the Jets didn't get a potential 25 pick if Rodgers retires. I do think the jets sort of won the narrative here, nobody believed Rodgers was really 90% thinking retirement but they reportedly used it as leverage. Seattle and Detroit picking in top 10 hurt us too but that's not really fair as the Rams got a Lombardi for their trouble. I saw on NFL network an estimate that everything the Packers got(of course '24 pick is variable) was worth about pick #21. Since I said I thought the #13 pick alone was fair comp I guess I can't complain too much.

I think it will be key for this trade if moving up to #13 pans out. If the Packers pick at that spot there is probably a good chance they could have had the same player at #15 and end up just paying more for him. On the other hand the higher you are the better chance you are sitting in a key trade up or trade down position, especially with 4 QB's going high possible.

 

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

15 minutes ago, OldHeidelberg said:

I think it will be key for this trade if moving up to #13 pans out. If the Packers pick at that spot there is probably a good chance they could have had the same player at #15 and end up just paying more for him. On the other hand the higher you are the better chance you are sitting in a key trade up or trade down position, especially with 4 QB's going high possible.

I think it's important to note that it's the Patriots who the Packers jumped going from #15 to #13. The Patriots are a well-run organization, and seem to more often than not have many of the same draft "needs" that the Packers typically do year-to-year. And right now, the Patriots biggest draft needs are WR at tackle ... two spots where it can be assumed the Packers are also looking at with #13. If a WR like Jaxon Smith-Njigba or a tackle like Paris Johnson, Broderick Jones  or Peter Skoronski are there, they could very well be the pick. Bahktiari is likely gone after this year.

[sveumrules]

On 3/21/2023 at 8:35 AM, sveumrules said:

I’ll guess it ends up something like…

Rodgers, #15

for

#13, 2023 3rd (#74), 2024 2nd & 3rd

Maybe a player gets thrown in or some conditions get added to the 2024 picks based on Jets postseason results or if Rodgers comes back for 2024.

Not sure what the big board pick values are, but feel like I ended up pretty close here.

Only real difference is getting the 2nd rounder this year instead of 3rd rounders in both of this year & next year, plus I missed the crucial 5th/6th swap.

[patrickgpe]

2 hours ago, homer said:

Has there been a published update on GB's cap situation? I guess they can't do that until deal is final final.

Best I could find.

https://www.packersnews.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2023/04/24/heres-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-aaron-rodgers-trade-to-the-jets/69924094007/

in short, some cap relief in 2023 (~15.8MM), but in 2024 they are free and clear. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

2 hours ago, homer said:

Has there been a published update on GB's cap situation? I guess they can't do that until deal is final final.

Not really, but I think Silverstein layed it out informally in an article yesterday pretty well without seeing final/final trade details.  Basically, the Packers have enough cap space to get all of their current draft picks signed and not much else.  If they want to add anyone in free agency they'd have to get pretty creative with what's left of their roster to make it happen.

Realistically, they're not going to be players in free agency, and I'd rather they use 2023 as a retool year with Love to see if he warrants an initial extension, then have a much cleaner cap situation headed into 2024 after all of this season's dead money falls off the books.

[OldHeidelberg]

Since the Jets want the contract reworked before the trade does that mean the Packers are going to eat some more salary/bonus in exchange for the jet's "generosity" in pick compensation? I guess it could work either way but I think I heard it was the Jets asking for the new contract before the trade.

[OldHeidelberg]

11 minutes ago, Ron Robinsons Beard said:

I think it's important to note that it's the Patriots who the Packers jumped going from #15 to #13. The Patriots are a well-run organization, and seem to more often than not have many of the same draft "needs" that the Packers typically do year-to-year. And right now, the Patriots biggest draft needs are WR at tackle ... two spots where it can be assumed the Packers are also looking at with #13. If a WR like Jaxon Smith-Njigba or a tackle like Paris Johnson, Broderick Jones  or Peter Skoronski are there, they could very well be the pick. Bahktiari is likely gone after this year.

That is a good point, there probably is a fair chance the Pat's or Jets would pick our top player. I think Skoronski or Smith-Njigba would be a pleasant surprise at 13. 

[adambr2]

I'm assuming it's a near certainty that the Packers will pick up the 5th year option on Love. It's not ideal with the information they have, but they are pretty much hitching their wagon to him for at least the next 2 seasons anyway. May as well just go that route rather than do what the Giants did and miscalculate and end up paying more with no leverage on Jones other than the franchise tag.

 

[OldHeidelberg]

9 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I'm assuming it's a near certainty that the Packers will pick up the 5th year option on Love. It's not ideal with the information they have, but they are pretty much hitching their wagon to him for at least the next 2 seasons anyway. May as well just go that route rather than do what the Giants did and miscalculate and end up paying more with no leverage on Jones other than the franchise tag.

 

I think Gutes has already said they planned on doing that, not directly but more like he said Love has shown them enough to warrant it. Now of course it is a given. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

18 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

I'm assuming it's a near certainty that the Packers will pick up the 5th year option on Love. It's not ideal with the information they have, but they are pretty much hitching their wagon to him for at least the next 2 seasons anyway. May as well just go that route rather than do what the Giants did and miscalculate and end up paying more with no leverage on Jones other than the franchise tag.

 

There's also still a ton of time between now and when that 5th year option kicking in to get Love signed to what would likely be a pretty team-friendly extension and make his 2024 cap hit really reasonable and set the organization up to add significant talent without salary cap concerns...kind of the same thing they did with Rodgers in the middle of his 1st year as a starter after the Favre saga was done and over with.

Worst case scenario would be Love stinking up the joint and not deserving an extension - then they just have a $20M quarterback scuffling through a 2023-2024 rebuild phase that likely results in a new Packer front office and a new franchise qb picked in one of the next two drafts.

 

[MrTPlush]

13 hours ago, adambr2 said:

4-7 would be interesting. That's about 64.7% but could wind up on either side of 65.

My assumption is that they'd still go for it, they have too much invested not to, unless Rodgers was somehow so disastrous that they had a good excuse to switch.

The Jets have a pretty good defense and some good skill players on offense so I doubt this is a factor though. 

That clause is just injury protection. If Rodgers goes out there and breaks a collarbone, misses the season, and then retires the entire Jets trade package is a complete and utter waste. Not only that, but the first rounder's value would sky rocket if Rodgers isn't the QB for at least half the season. Think of it like NBA trades where the team protects their first rounder if it is high enough...that is what the Jets are in essence doing. 

Any thought of the Jets intentionally benching a healthy Rodgers to save their pick is complete utter nonsense, imo. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 hour ago, adambr2 said:

I'm assuming it's a near certainty that the Packers will pick up the 5th year option on Love. It's not ideal with the information they have, but they are pretty much hitching their wagon to him for at least the next 2 seasons anyway. May as well just go that route rather than do what the Giants did and miscalculate and end up paying more with no leverage on Jones other than the franchise tag.

 

I'm sort of expecting an extension for Love if goes like 3 weeks and doesn't look completely lost. I don't hate it. It would be really nice to have an above average QB locked in for a while at a discount.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

38 minutes ago, MrTPlush said:

Any thought of the Jets intentionally benching a healthy Rodgers to save their pick is complete utter nonsense, imo. 

If it gets to that point, their season has already turned into a dumpster fire. But knowing the Jets media and fanbase, that is a topic that will most definitely come up.

[homer]

https://twitter.com/mattschneidman/status/1650999601644683269?t=XZ5dU3bkqeF832vozu1zVg&s=19

[KeithStone53151]

13 hours ago, MrTPlush said:

That clause is just injury protection. If Rodgers goes out there and breaks a collarbone, misses the season, and then retires the entire Jets trade package is a complete and utter waste. Not only that, but the first rounder's value would sky rocket if Rodgers isn't the QB for at least half the season. Think of it like NBA trades where the team protects their first rounder if it is high enough...that is what the Jets are in essence doing. 

Any thought of the Jets intentionally benching a healthy Rodgers to save their pick is complete utter nonsense, imo. 

Even in an extreme case? Let's say the jets are 1-8 to start the season and Rodgers looks old/bad but is healthy? In that case they are also in serious risk of that pick being an ultra valuable top 5 pick. I generally tend to agree that the 4-7 jets are not punting on the season, I think it takes a very extreme scenario for them to consider benching Rodgers to save the draft pick. I'll add the GM would almost certainly be fired at the 1-8 mark if Rodgers was bad and potentially benched.

[MrTPlush]

5 hours ago, KeithStone53151 said:

Even in an extreme case? Let's say the jets are 1-8 to start the season and Rodgers looks old/bad but is healthy? In that case they are also in serious risk of that pick being an ultra valuable top 5 pick. I generally tend to agree that the 4-7 jets are not punting on the season, I think it takes a very extreme scenario for them to consider benching Rodgers to save the draft pick. I'll add the GM would almost certainly be fired at the 1-8 mark if Rodgers was bad and potentially benched.

Sure, I almost mentioned the one exception…but is that really even possible? They managed, what, 7 wins last years with an absolute hack job at QB? Plus they added quite a bit to the team outside of Rodgers. I don’t know much about the Jets team, but you would need a total Aaron Rodgers meltdown along with the rest of the team…which defensively I think was pretty great last year. 

At that point though Rodgers isn’t benched because of the draft pick. He is benched because he just flat out sucks and a waste of space. 

[SeaBass]

Even if the Jets have an epic fail of a season and they bench Rodgers to preserve a high 1st round pick all that means is the Packers will receive a high 2nd round pick. In my mind that worst case 2nd round pick is still a really nice get. I didn't have much faith that a conditional chance at a 1st round pick in 2024 would be so much in favor of the Packers. I was expecting it to be tied to playoff success.

[KeithStone53151]

1 hour ago, SeaBass said:

Even if the Jets have an epic fail of a season and they bench Rodgers to preserve a high 1st round pick all that means is the Packers will receive a high 2nd round pick. In my mind that worst case 2nd round pick is still a really nice get. I didn't have much faith that a conditional chance at a 1st round pick in 2024 would be so much in favor of the Packers. I was expecting it to be tied to playoff success.

Agreed. An epic fail by the jets likely means Rodgers was trash, and in that case getting literally anything is better than having bad Rodgers in 2023 and the cap problem in 2024. There are far more scenarios that the Packers win this trade than the jets. The jets basically need Rodgers to be MVP Rodgers, but even in that case it would be a win/win if Jordan love is the real deal.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Even if Jordan Love doesn't end up being "it", drafting him lit a fire under Rodgers, which led to two MVP awards and two NFC Championship game appearances, which then enabled the Packers to deal a near 40-year-old Rodgers for a package that arguably has a higher value than the 26th pick in the 1st round, plus the 4th rounder, that they used to draft Love. I have never bought the argument that Love was a bad pick because that 2019 Packers team was "one player away" from being a Super Bowl team. That 2019 team was winning on smoke and mirrors, and Rodgers didn't look particularly great that year. But in 2020 and 2021 he was miraculous. 

Maybe I'm looking at the situation with green and gold-tinted glasses, but IMO, Jordan Love would need to be pretty terrible for that 2020 pick to end up looking bad. 

[LouisEly]

Rodgers apparently signed his revised contract yesterday before 4pm, thus allowing the trade papers to be filed after 4pm today and then the trade becomes official.

[CheezWizHed]

10 hours ago, KeithStone53151 said:

Even in an extreme case? Let's say the jets are 1-8 to start the season and Rodgers looks old/bad but is healthy? In that case they are also in serious risk of that pick being an ultra valuable top 5 pick. I generally tend to agree that the 4-7 jets are not punting on the season, I think it takes a very extreme scenario for them to consider benching Rodgers to save the draft pick. I'll add the GM would almost certainly be fired at the 1-8 mark if Rodgers was bad and potentially benched.

R-E-L-A-X. 😉

This is an "all-in" move for the Jets.  If Rodgers is healthy and they can't win, the GM's job is probably in jeopardy anyway.  Benching Rodgers is going to just make it worse.  He is going to push all he can to get into the playoffs to give them every chance to win a SB.  

Rodgers doesn't have many more chances and this just gave him another chip on his shoulder to prove people wrong and motivate him this year.  Realistically, injury is the only way they don't hit the conditions for a 1st round pick. 

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, Ron Robinsons Beard said:

Even if Jordan Love doesn't end up being "it", drafting him lit a fire under Rodgers, which led to two MVP awards and two NFC Championship game appearances, which then enabled the Packers to deal a near 40-year-old Rodgers for a package that arguably has a higher value than the 26th pick in the 1st round, plus the 4th rounder, that they used to draft Love. I have never bought the argument that Love was a bad pick because that 2019 Packers team was "one player away" from being a Super Bowl team. That 2019 team was winning on smoke and mirrors, and Rodgers didn't look particularly great that year. But in 2020 and 2021 he was miraculous. 

Maybe I'm looking at the situation with green and gold-tinted glasses, but IMO, Jordan Love would need to be pretty terrible for that 2020 pick to end up looking bad. 

Completely agree.  Love's pick has already been justified, IMO.  Anything he does now is gravy. 

I saw and article that said "the Packers lose if Love isn't good".  I think that is ridiculous.  Rodgers leaving had nothing to do with Love pushing him out or the GM choosing Love over Rodgers.  It had to do with salary cap and the ability to win with Rodgers at the helm (you can add personality/relationships there also, but if the first item isn't there, I'm sure the GM makes nice). Once you decide Rodgers can't take your team to the SB anymore (regardless of whether he can take another team), you need to move on, evaluate Love, and rebuild a team so you can win a SB. 

[Fear The Chorizo]

If Love sucks, this Packers roster gets fun bad for the next two seasons and GB can then draft their next franchise quarterback in the next 1-2 seasons and restock an aging roster quickly - likely under new management/coaching.  However, if he's good, this roster is still good enough to build a contending team around and will likely have a pretty team-friendly longterm deal in place with Love to avoid significant salary cap problems to fill holes over the next 4-5 seasons.

At this point it's really a no-lose situation, as there were many other ways the Rodgers/Packers saga could have ended that put Green Bay in worse shape (both short and longterm outlooks).