Reigning MVP Aaron Rodgers is so disgruntled with the Green Bay Packers that he has told some within the organization that he does not want to return to the team, league and team sources told ESPN on Thursday.
#Packers GM Brian Gutekunst to ESPN: "As we've stated since the season ended, we are committed to Aaron in 2021 and beyond. Aaron has been a vital part of our success and we look forward to competing for another championship with him leading our team."
Originally Posted by : Aaron Rodgers doesn't want to return to Green Bay Packers, sources say
Reigning MVP Aaron Rodgers is so disgruntled with the Green Bay Packers that he has told some within the organization that he does not want to return to the team, league and team sources told ESPN on Thursday.
The Packers are aware of his feelings, concerned about them and have had team president Mark Murphy, general manager Brian Gutekunst and head coach Matt LaFleur each fly out on separate trips to meet with Rodgers at various points this offseason, sources told ESPN.
"As we've stated since the season ended, we are committed to Aaron in 2021 and beyond," Gutekunst told ESPN. "Aaron has been a vital part of our success and we look forward to competing for another championship with him leading our team."
Rodgers has not budged this offseason, but neither have the Packers, who have made it known they are not interested in trading Rodgers anywhere.
The San Francisco 49ers called the Packers on Wednesday night, a source told ESPN, and the Los Angeles Rams inquired about Rodgers in January before they traded for Matthew Stafford.
The Packers quickly dismissed the Rams' overtures, the source said.
The Packers have offered to extend Rodgers' contract, sources told ESPN.
Rodgers is unhappy for a variety of reasons, with some of it dating back to last year's draft when the Packers didn't inform him before trading up to draft a quarterback with their first-round pick. Some took this as a sign that his days in Green Bay could he numbered.
He also is at a different point in his personal life, having recently gotten engaged to actress Shailene Woodley. Rodgers also has hosted "Jeopardy!" and said it would be a dream to become the full-time host. He could play football and host Jeopardy! together.
Rodgers has made cryptic comments about his future in Green Bay, but he has told others that he does not want to return.
On draft night, the Packers' biggest issue isn't who they land, but whether they can keep the former NFL MVP.
Rodgers' contract contained a $6.8 million roster bonus due in March. It could have been converted into a signing bonus that would have freed up more than $4.5 million in salary-cap space for this season but instead it "vested as scheduled," a source told ESPN at the time. It's listed as an automatic conversion in Rodgers' contract but even that has to be signed off on by both parties. It's not known if the Packers tried to convert and Rodgers refused to sign off on it, or if they did not attempt a conversion.
Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco:
IMHO, Broncos fans should be opposed to the team putting together an offer so generous that the Packers couldn’t refuse it. It’s just a bad bet on a desperate long shot.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Well if I was a team with a good roster and no QB in a division with Patrick Mahomes, I’d do nearly anything it took to get that guy.
If that guy were 32 years old, okay. Maybe then. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Well if I was a team with a good roster and no QB in a division with Patrick Mahomes, I’d do nearly anything it took to get that guy.
It's such a risk, though.
The Broncos did this with Manning and it paid off but that is actually the exception rather than the rule.
Plus, all they paid for Manning was his salary. The Broncos are looking at trading away decent players and possibly 1st round picks that will still be paid after Rodgers is gone.
If I were a Broncos fan, I'd rather not. If it doesn't work, they're looking at another half decade of 5-win seasons. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
FWIW John Clayton said he thinks Aaron has played his last snap in GB
I have listened to Rodgers on Pat Mcafee several times, and he is a different kind of person. I think if Aaron Rodgers says he won't play for Green Bay, he won't play for them period, even if it's out of stubbornness or spite.
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
He’s 0-4 in NFCCG’s since beating Chicago and their back-up QB in the NFCCG 10 years ago (a game where Aaron Rodgers had a 55.4 QB rating and threw 2 INT’s and 0 TD’s).
His stats in the four championship game losses since then were mostly inflated in garbage time as Green Bay was blown out in two of those games (with Rodgers playing horribly).
In Green Bay’s close championship game losses, Rodgers had a 55.8 QB rating in their OT loss to Seattle and last year despite playing probably his best career championship game he still had a terrible INT in the second half (leading to a Bucs TD).
Thanks. I was looking at overall playoff stats. Wasn't aware of the specific championship game stats. It's a team sport, though. I'm guessing Mahomes' stats in the two Super Bowls don't look that hot.
Rodgers is like Brees in that his overall playoff numbers are good but the win/loss record is average. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
It's such a risk, though.
The Broncos did this with Manning and it paid off but that is actually the exception rather than the rule.
Plus, all they paid for Manning was his salary. The Broncos are looking at trading away decent players and possibly 1st round picks that will still be paid after Rodgers is gone.
If I were a Broncos fan, I'd rather not. If it doesn't work, they're looking at another half decade of 5-win seasons.
I would have drafted Justin Fields, but I don’t see the downside to trading for Rodgers. You automatically become the 2nd best team in the AFC with a real shot at a Super Bowl.
You also have the guys at a high level for at least 5 more years IMO. Rodgers didn’t have a piddly arm when he was drafted. He had a rifle. And he didn’t have neck surgery like Manning.
I think he lasts well into his early 40’s. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco:
IMHO, Broncos fans should be opposed to the team putting together an offer so generous that the Packers couldn’t refuse it. It’s just a bad bet on a desperate long shot.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
It's such a risk, though.
The Broncos did this with Manning and it paid off but that is actually the exception rather than the rule.
Plus, all they paid for Manning was his salary. The Broncos are looking at trading away decent players and possibly 1st round picks that will still be paid after Rodgers is gone.
If I were a Broncos fan, I'd rather not. If it doesn't work, they're looking at another half decade of 5-win seasons.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
I would have drafted Justin Fields, but I don’t see the downside to trading for Rodgers. You automatically become the 2nd best team in the AFC with a real shot at a Super Bowl.
You also have the guys at a high level for at least 5 more years IMO. Rodgers didn’t have a piddly arm when he was drafted. He had a rifle. And he didn’t have neck surgery like Manning.
I think he lasts well into his early 40’s.
If they have to trade away key pieces of that offense to get Rodgers, they're actually hurting their chances of being a contender.
If Rodgers were a free agent, it would be a no-brainer.
The potential price tag is simply too steep. [Reply]
Originally Posted by ChiefsFanatic:
I have listened to Rodgers on Pat Mcafee several times, and he is a different kind of person. I think if Aaron Rodgers says he won't play for Green Bay, he won't play for them period, even if it's out of stubbornness or spite.
Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk
Yep. There are family member he doesn't talk to anymore. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
If they have to trade away key pieces of that offense to get Rodgers, they're actually hurting their chances of being a contender.
If Rodgers were a free agent, it would be a no-brainer.
The potential price tag is simply too steep.
So settle for a strong roster and no QB winning maybe 8 games or a pretty good roster with a HOF QB as a real SB threat.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
If they have to trade away key pieces of that offense to get Rodgers, they're actually hurting their chances of being a contender.
If Rodgers were a free agent, it would be a no-brainer.
The potential price tag is simply too steep.
Exactly... unless this type of deal would get it done, I'm just out.
Originally Posted by staylor26:
GoForIt is a troll. That was just an attempt to suck Brady’s dick some more.
Seriously. "After watching Brady in the Super Bowl".. lol Guy can go fuck himself. I think I remember reading Brady was only pressured on 4% of his dropbacks in that game. As if Mahomes wouldn't have set new Super Bowl passing records if he'd faced that type of pressure.
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
He’s 0-4 in NFCCG’s since beating Chicago and their back-up QB in the NFCCG 10 years ago (a game where Aaron Rodgers had a 55.4 QB rating and threw 2 INT’s and 0 TD’s).
His stats in the four championship game losses since then were mostly inflated in garbage time as Green Bay was blown out in two of those games (with Rodgers playing horribly).
In Green Bay’s close championship game losses, Rodgers had a 55.8 QB rating in their OT loss to Seattle and last year despite playing probably his best career championship game he still had a terrible INT in the second half (leading to a Bucs TD).
You remind me of those douchebags on Twitter who say Mahomes has played like shit in his two Super Bowls and then post stats like they tell the whole story. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
If they have to give up 3 first round picks and 1 or 2 of their offensive playmakers, they aren't a real SB threat. Just look at Rodgers in Green Bay.