NFL: Aaron Rodgers wants out of Green Bay? (not anymore?)

[TheGreenTBer]

Isn’t there a big dead cap hit if they trade him this season? I thought I read somewhere that if they trade him they take a big dead cap hit but next season is not as bad.

Aaron Rodgers

Roughly just over 17 million dead cap penalty if I’m reading this right.

Without Rodgers, dead cap is the least of their problems.

 

[jcs0218]

When you’re a top QB, yes, you are bigger than the team. Sports is entertainment, and entertainment is built around stars, and the biggest stars are quarterbacks. Anyone who thinks that the star quarterbacks aren’t bigger than the team they’re on has a painfully archaic view of sports and its relationship to business.

The Green Bay Packers are going to survive, prosper, and see their franchise value continue to go up and up long after Aaron Rodgers plays his last game.

Aaron Rodgers isn't bigger than the Gren Bay Packers. Not even close.

10 years from now, he will be just a memory and the Packers will continue to rake in the profits and see their franchise value go up.

The Indianapolis Colts didn't die when Peyton Manning was no longer part of the team., and they aren't the American brand that the Packers are. Plus, Manning was a better player and bigger star than Rodgers.

 

[GKJ]

The Green Bay Packers are going to survive, prosper, and see their franchise value continue to go up and up long after Aaron Rodgers plays his last game.

Aaron Rodgers isn't bigger than the Gren Bay Packers. Not even close.

10 years from now, he will be just a memory and the Packers will continue to rake in the profits and see their franchise value go up.

The Indianapolis Colts didn't die when Peyton Manning was no longer part of the team., and they aren't the American brand that the Packers are. Plus, Manning was a better player and bigger star than Rodgers.

The Packers aren't going to survive and prosper because they're the Packers, it's because they're in the NFL and have revenue sharing regardless of whether they're winning or losing. Every team prints money, that's why none of them are hardly ever for sale. The Colts are not even close to the same level they were even though they've generally still been a good team. Maybe you can tell us about how the Bills did between Jim Kelly and Josh Allen and what the difference was in the generation in between.

 

[jcs0218]

The Packers aren't going to survive and prosper because they're the Packers, it's because they're in the NFL and have revenue sharing regardless of whether they're winning or losing. Every team prints money, that's why none of them are hardly ever for sale. The Colts are not even close to the same level they were even though they've generally still been a good team. Maybe you can tell us about how the Bills did between Jim Kelly and Josh Allen and what the difference was in the generation in between.

When you say things like:

"The Colts are not even close to the same level they were even though they've generally still been a good team."

And

"Maybe you can tell us about how the Bills did between Jim Kelly and Josh Allen and what the difference was in the generation in between."

It seems as though you are steering the discussion towards team performance.

But in an earlier post, you were debating the merits of a star QB from a business perspective.

Those are two different things.

From a team performance perspective, yes obviously the Packers will suffer if they lose Rodgers, whether it be via trade or allowing him to hold-out. I never denied that.

I acknowledged the impact it might have when I said: "3-3 or 3-13 or 0-16. Whatever their record ends up being..." in the post you quoted.

I then steered that towards the business side of things, saying: "it isn't really going to hurt their bottom line or popularity, as much as some people may disagree with that."

Yes, Green Bay probably isn't going to repeat last season's winning percentage as a result of everything that has gone on.

But your original angle was from a business perspective, and I am saying the Green Bay Packers won't suffer any at all if they play hardball with Rodgers. He will lose financially more than the Green Bay Packers will, as a result of everything. That isn't to say Aaron Rodgers is ever going to cry poor, because he already has more money than he will ever spend.

But, if you think that Aaron Rodgers is bigger than the Green Bay Packers (not only an NFL team but one of the most popular teams in American professional sports), then I don't agree with you.

My reason for mentioning the Indianapolis Colts wasn't to debate whether they have been a "good team" (your words) or not. It was to say that even the Colts have survived and prospered from a business standpoint, even though they lost a bigger star than Aaron Rodgers.

Again, I was only discussing things from a business standpoint, since you originally said:

When you’re a top QB, yes, you are bigger than the team. Sports is entertainment, and entertainment is built around stars, and the biggest stars are quarterbacks. Anyone who thinks that the star quarterbacks aren’t bigger than the team they’re on has a painfully archaic view of sports and its relationship to business.

I don't agree with that at all.

If the Colts can survive and prosper despite losing Peyton Manning, then what do you think is going to happen with a much more popular team such as the Green Bay Packers?

The Packers are probably one of the 5 most popular teams and brands in the NFL. Not quite the Cowboys, but up there with teams like the Steelers. They are one of the only franchises that have fans all over the North American continent. They have been much more consistently popular than the Colts, regardless of how they perform in the standings.

The Packers have sold-out every game since 1960 and currently have a massive waiting-list for season tickets, according to many articles that you can Google on the internet.

Some statistics: 137,000 waiting list length, and 1682 seats were claimed. That would take 81 years to clear the list.

People who try to get Packers season tickets die before they ever make it to the front of the line.

Green Bay Packers waiting list down slightly; prices of coming games climb

The Green Bay Packers also have one of the largest ticket prices in all the NFL, and they still sell-out every game.

Average NFL ticket price | Statista

And you think this team is going to suffer from a business standpoint and that Aaron Rodgers is bigger than them?

I don't agree with that at all.

Lastly, you bring up the Buffalo Bills.

Yes, the difference in the Kelly/Allen eras and in-between is noticeable. But again, I don't know whether you were talking about team performance or business.

If team performance, I have already acknowledged that the Packers are probably not going to repeat last season's record as a result of everything that has gone on.

But, again, you were originally discussing things from a business standpoint, and I don't think they suffer at all. Because of the reasons I have mentioned through this post.

Comparing Buffalo to Green Bay in terms of business and market, is like comparing apples to oranges.

The Bills popularity isn't nearly as widespread on a continental basis, and even locally they don't compare in terms of regional fanbase.

Maybe if Aaron Rodgers was on the Buffalo Bills, then you could argue for his overall impact on team revenue and popularity. But he isn't. He is on of the most popular teams in the NFL, so whether he decides to play or decides to sulk on the sidelines doesn't really matter financially for Green Bay.

It is for these reasons that Green Bay shouldn't cave to this guy. Their win-loss record might suffer for a couple of seasons, but that is short-term performance pain. That short-term pain in the standings is worth it if you send the message that the team isn't going to allow any player to bend them over a barrel.

And let it be emphasized that it is short-term pain. Rodgers isn't a 25 year old QB who you feel pressured to please because of how he might deliver for you during the next 15 years. He only has a few years left.

And who even knows what those few years will be like?

Will you agree that Rodgers was declining for multiple seasons before last season?

If you agree with that, then how long will his resurgence from last season last?

I think it is obvious from all the off-the-field drama that his head isn't 100% directed towards on-the-field performance this offseason. He clearly isn't focussed on doing everything it takes to prepare for the next season.

What if he mentally doesn't have it anymore to play at a Pro Bowl level? Then what?

The Packers have no reason to cave to this guy, for whatever reason or angle to want to discuss.

 

[Hasbro]

I’ve never got much of a thrill from the Forbes valuation of the Broncos. My best memories tend to come from on field moments.

Drafting Love they are clearly thinking about a future beyond Rogers and the trade return from him would help that future, which would be a reason to cave.

 

[Hasbro]

The Packers are dumber than the Texans

I'm sure the Texans are quietly kicking themselves for not giving into Watson's trade demand before the assault scandal came out.

 

[GKJ]

When you say things like:

"The Colts are not even close to the same level they were even though they've generally still been a good team."

And

"Maybe you can tell us about how the Bills did between Jim Kelly and Josh Allen and what the difference was in the generation in between."

It seems as though you are steering the discussion towards team performance.

But in an earlier post, you were debating the merits of a star QB from a business perspective.

Those are two different things.

From a team performance perspective, yes obviously the Packers will suffer if they lose Rodgers, whether it be via trade or allowing him to hold-out. I never denied that.

I acknowledged the impact it might have when I said: "3-3 or 3-13 or 0-16. Whatever their record ends up being..." in the post you quoted.

I then steered that towards the business side of things, saying: "it isn't really going to hurt their bottom line or popularity, as much as some people may disagree with that."

Yes, Green Bay probably isn't going to repeat last season's winning percentage as a result of everything that has gone on.

But your original angle was from a business perspective, and I am saying the Green Bay Packers won't suffer any at all if they play hardball with Rodgers. He will lose financially more than the Green Bay Packers will, as a result of everything. That isn't to say Aaron Rodgers is ever going to cry poor, because he already has more money than he will ever spend.

But, if you think that Aaron Rodgers is bigger than the Green Bay Packers (not only an NFL team but one of the most popular teams in American professional sports), then I don't agree with you.

My reason for mentioning the Indianapolis Colts wasn't to debate whether they have been a "good team" (your words) or not. It was to say that even the Colts have survived and prospered from a business standpoint, even though they lost a bigger star than Aaron Rodgers.

Again, I was only discussing things from a business standpoint, since you originally said:



I don't agree with that at all.

If the Colts can survive and prosper despite losing Peyton Manning, then what do you think is going to happen with a much more popular team such as the Green Bay Packers?

The Packers are probably one of the 5 most popular teams and brands in the NFL. Not quite the Cowboys, but up there with teams like the Steelers. They are one of the only franchises that have fans all over the North American continent. They have been much more consistently popular than the Colts, regardless of how they perform in the standings.

The Packers have sold-out every game since 1960 and currently have a massive waiting-list for season tickets, according to many articles that you can Google on the internet.

Some statistics: 137,000 waiting list length, and 1682 seats were claimed. That would take 81 years to clear the list.

People who try to get Packers season tickets die before they ever make it to the front of the line.

Green Bay Packers waiting list down slightly; prices of coming games climb

The Green Bay Packers also have one of the largest ticket prices in all the NFL, and they still sell-out every game.

Average NFL ticket price | Statista

And you think this team is going to suffer from a business standpoint and that Aaron Rodgers is bigger than them?

I don't agree with that at all.

Lastly, you bring up the Buffalo Bills.

Yes, the difference in the Kelly/Allen eras and in-between is noticeable. But again, I don't know whether you were talking about team performance or business.

If team performance, I have already acknowledged that the Packers are probably not going to repeat last season's record as a result of everything that has gone on.

But, again, you were originally discussing things from a business standpoint, and I don't think they suffer at all. Because of the reasons I have mentioned through this post.

Comparing Buffalo to Green Bay in terms of business and market, is like comparing apples to oranges.

The Bills popularity isn't nearly as widespread on a continental basis, and even locally they don't compare in terms of regional fanbase.

Maybe if Aaron Rodgers was on the Buffalo Bills, then you could argue for his overall impact on team revenue and popularity. But he isn't. He is on of the most popular teams in the NFL, so whether he decides to play or decides to sulk on the sidelines doesn't really matter financially for Green Bay.

It is for these reasons that Green Bay shouldn't cave to this guy. Their win-loss record might suffer for a couple of seasons, but that is short-term performance pain. That short-term pain in the standings is worth it if you send the message that the team isn't going to allow any player to bend them over a barrel.

And let it be emphasized that it is short-term pain. Rodgers isn't a 25 year old QB who you feel pressured to please because of how he might deliver for you during the next 15 years. He only has a few years left.

And who even knows what those few years will be like?

Will you agree that Rodgers was declining for multiple seasons before last season?

If you agree with that, then how long will his resurgence from last season last?

I think it is obvious from all the off-the-field drama that his head isn't 100% directed towards on-the-field performance this offseason. He clearly isn't focussed on doing everything it takes to prepare for the next season.

What if he mentally doesn't have it anymore to play at a Pro Bowl level? Then what?

The Packers have no reason to cave to this guy, for whatever reason or angle to want to discuss.

You wrote a lot of things here about not trying to directly equate quarterback play to team success and popularity even though that’s exactly what you did. The Bills were one of the most popular teams in the league by the mid-90’s, and then when they weren’t a good team for the better part of 20 years, they started testing the waters for a move to Toronto. This is exactly what the Packers did with Milwaukee as they too went 20 years between hall of fame QB’s. They weren’t even strong enough to get new stadiums, they had to upgrade what they had.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

I'm sure the Texans are quietly kicking themselves for not giving into Watson's trade demand before the assault scandal came out.

Can't really predict that. The Texans are dumb as hell but I wouldn't point to that as the reason.

 

[Finlandia WOAT]

Why would they punish Rodgers by forcing him to sit out rather than just trading him?

Sometimes relationships just sour. It happens. No need to be a petty dick about it, especially if you're hurting yourself to do it.

 

[GKJ]

Can't really predict that. The Texans are dumb as hell but I wouldn't point to that as the reason.

They knew this was out there. Wasn't the lawyer connected to the owner somehow?

 

[Spring in Fialta]

They knew this was out there. Wasn't the lawyer connected to the owner somehow?

No. Just live in the same area/neighborhood/gated community. I think.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Why would they punish Rodgers by forcing him to sit out rather than just trading him?

Sometimes relationships just sour. It happens. No need to be a petty dick about it, especially if you're hurting yourself to do it.

The dead cap hit on the trade is probably the main reason

 

[Richard]

The entire league ownership and front office will curb this nonsense. Rogers will be a Packer or retire. Look what they did to Kapernik.

The NFL doesn't want this to become the NBA. Listen, the owners may pay their players more now, they may associate with them more, they may even like some of them .... BUT.... they still don't eat a their table.

 

[Richard]

Why would they punish Rodgers by forcing him to sit out rather than just trading him?

Sometimes relationships just sour. It happens. No need to be a petty dick about it, especially if you're hurting yourself to do it.

You sign a contract you honor it. Simple.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

You sign a contract you honor it. Simple.

Simplistic to the utmost extent. This lacks, essentially, all context.

 

[Richard]

Simplistic to the utmost extent. This lacks, essentially, all context.

Nah. Its the difference between good companies (for the customer/client) and bad ones, good people and bad people, good countries and bad countries etc.

At its core, life is about fulfilling one's obligations. That is why going into anything or agreeing to anything should be completely thought out and reasoned.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Nah. Its the difference between good companies (for the customer/client) and bad ones, good people and bad people, good countries and bad countries etc.

At its core, life is about fulfilling one's obligations. That is why going into anything or agreeing to anything should be completely thought out and reasoned.

But circumstances and relationships change. Besides, doesn't that then become a two-way street for teams and their ability to cut players, for example? Like, that's it? You think if you sign a contract, there's nothing else to be said, ever? I don't know...sounds like a pushover mentality to me.

I don't see why a player signing a contract should give his team carte blanche to dick it all up. Commitment to being the best you can be should be a two-way street. It's obvious Rodgers doesn't hold that trust towards the Packers anymore - if he ever did, really. One can maybe argue that a disgruntled Rodgers is still the best option for the Packers as a franchise, but if he's not willing to come back and to forego everything, they're really just hurting themselves by letting it end like that.

 

[Spring in Fialta]

The entire league ownership and front office will curb this nonsense. Rogers will be a Packer or retire. Look what they did to Kapernik.

The NFL doesn't want this to become the NBA. Listen, the owners may pay their players more now, they may associate with them more, they may even like some of them .... BUT.... they still don't eat a their table.

Oh...just saw this. Ah, yeah, makes sense...eum, yeah, I don't know, this lacks balls.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

But circumstances and relationships change. Besides, doesn't that then become a two-way street for teams and their ability to cut players, for example? Like, that's it? You think if you sign a contract, there's nothing else to be said, ever? I don't know...sounds like a pushover mentality to me.

I don't see why a player signing a contract should give his team carte blanche to dick it all up. Commitment to being the best you can be should be a two-way street. It's obvious Rodgers doesn't hold that trust towards the Packers anymore - if he ever did, really. One can maybe argue that a disgruntled Rodgers is still the best option for the Packers as a franchise, but if he's not willing to come back and to forego everything, they're really just hurting themselves by letting it end like that.

Player A renegotiates every few years for more money to stay the top paid player...then complains about "no help"

BTW, Rodgers's "no help" the last 5 years has been:

Davante Adams
Aaron Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jimmy Graham
Randall Cobb
Eddie Lacy
Martellus Bennett

 

[Spring in Fialta]

Player A renegotiates every few years for more money to stay the top paid player...then complains about "no help"

BTW, Rodgers's "no help" the last 5 years has been:

Davante Adams
Aaron Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jimmy Graham
Randall Cobb
Eddie Lacy
Martellus Bennett

Don't think it's his offensive weapons that's had Rodgers disgruntled.

 

[Unholy Diver]

Player A renegotiates every few years for more money to stay the top paid player...then complains about "no help"

BTW, Rodgers's "no help" the last 5 years has been:

Davante Adams
Aaron Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jimmy Graham
Randall Cobb
Eddie Lacy
Martellus Bennett

Lacy had 2 good full years in 2013-14
Bennet played less than half a season with GB
Cobb was a decent 3rd WR who had one pro bowl season in 2014
Graham was pretty much washed when he got to GB
Nelson had a few good seasons but his peak was 2011-2014

Jones and Adams are very good but other than those two, Rodgers weapons have not been very good in the last 5-6 years

 

[Hasbro]

The entire league ownership and front office will curb this nonsense. Rogers will be a Packer or retire. Look what they did to Kapernik.

The NFL doesn't want this to become the NBA. Listen, the owners may pay their players more now, they may associate with them more, they may even like some of them .... BUT.... they still don't eat a their table.

JJ Watt forced his way out this very off season. Trade demands are hardly novel or career enders in the NFL.

 

[Hasbro]

Player A renegotiates every few years for more money to stay the top paid player...then complains about "no help"

BTW, Rodgers's "no help" the last 5 years has been:

Davante Adams
Aaron Jones
Jordy Nelson
Jimmy Graham
Randall Cobb
Eddie Lacy
Martellus Bennett

He's been living in Boulder. The prospect of leaving here to go to Wisconsin for the winter would make me consider employment changes.

 

[donghabs98]

The level of pettiness and stubbornness on both sides is something to marvel at. Packers management knows how Rodgers operates and thinks, they shouldn't have let things get this back with their star player.

 

[Blitzkrug]

The best part of that appearance is Rodgers was quoted as saying "it's the type of quiet offseason you dream of"

I can't even be mad. That's a level of pettiness unreachable for mere mortals.