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.
Green Bay isn’t going to trade Rodgers without getting at least a decent young QB back in return, which disqualifies Denver’s offer involving garbage Drew Lock.
Baker Mayfield... that should be their minimum threshold IMO.
And it doesn’t matter that they have Jordan Love. He’s on a rookie contract and Green Bay is now in a position by potentially trading Rodgers and getting a proven young QB in return that they were not in when drafting Love.
Also Rodgers does not have a no trade clause in his contract which gives Green Bay trade flexibility. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88:
Green Bay isn’t going to trade Rodgers without getting at least a decent young QB back in return, which disqualifies Denver’s offer involving garbage Drew Lock.
Baker Mayfield... that should be their minimum threshold IMO.
And it doesn’t matter that they have Jordan Love. He’s on a rookie contract and Green Bay is now in a position by potentially trading Rodgers and getting a proven young QB in return that they were not in when drafting Love.
Also Rodgers does not have a no trade clause in his contract which gives Green Bay trade flexibility.
GB should not do this but Baltimore should be calling and offering Lamar [Reply]
Chiefspants 05-05-2021, 05:31 PM
This message has been deleted by Chiefspants.
Reason: Checked. I was wrong.
All these media guys fail to mention that it’s GB who holds the cards here. They want to talk about who Rodgers would consider going to but since he doesn’t have a no trade clause they can send him to whoever offers a good match for them or he can also just sit out and continue losing money. And Eisen wants to say it’s about getting Love on the field but wasn’t he third string and inactive most if not all weeks last year… [Reply]
I trust his old close teammate more than some of these sources. We’ll see
Former #Packers John Kuhn tells @CBSSportsRadio he's spoken to @AaronRodgers12 this week. "At age 37 he's hoping to insure his career in GB DOES get to 40. He's seen what's happened to other QB's. It may take drastic measures to get there." Still a chance he stays? "Absolutely!"
And it's why I ultimately don't think a trade ends up happening.
The price Rodgers is going to command will defeat the purpose of acquiring him in the first place, as you alluded to.
I just don't think a deal that would satisfy both sides is realistic in this scenario.
If I’m Denver and I can swap a decent TE and pass rusher (plus a few picks) for an MVP QB, I’d do it with no hesitation. You guys are acting like they’d be giving up Aaron Donald and Kelce.
Hopefully the Packers get half their team along with the picks and then Rodgers immediately plummets off a cliff like Manning in ‘15. Would be the most hilarious thing ever. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
If I’m Denver and I can swap a decent TE and pass rusher (plus a few picks) for an MVP QB, I’d do it with no hesitation. You guys are acting like they’d be giving up Aaron Donald and Kelce.
Hopefully the Packers get half their team along with the picks and then Rodgers immediately plummets off a cliff like Manning in ‘15. Would be the most hilarious thing ever.
Hopefully all of this Rodgers nonsense fades soon. It's just a distraction, they're not moving him because at the prices proposed, I just don't see a team making that offer. Now, if you told me that Rodgers was going to play for another 5 seasons at a 35+ TD and <10 INT pace, sure - go for it. But, again... just because Brees and Brady played to the age of 42 and beyond doesn't mean every top QB will start doing that. Brees, while still good, was a shell of his former self in his last 2 seasons, only starting 23 games. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mulliganman:
All these media guys fail to mention that it’s GB who holds the cards here. They want to talk about who Rodgers would consider going to but since he doesn’t have a no trade clause they can send him to whoever offers a good match for them or he can also just sit out and continue losing money. And Eisen wants to say it’s about getting Love on the field but wasn’t he third string and inactive most if not all weeks last year…
Green Bay doesn’t want to trot Love out this year and go 3-13, so Rogers certainly has leverage.
But don’t just take it from me.
“A lot of smart Packers writers are essentially saying that it’s all over. Demovsky thinks there’s less than a 5 percent chance Rodgers is the team’s starter going forward. Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wrote on Tuesday that the team should “be prepared” to trade Rodgers. “The Packers undoubtedly will give it time to see if Rodgers changes his mind, but they should set a deadline of June 1 to reconcile. If they can’t convince him to report, they should start shopping him around with the intention of trading him before training camp starts,” he wrote.”
Originally Posted by Cave Johnson:
Green Bay doesn’t want to trot Love out this year and go 3-13, so Rogers certainly has leverage.
But don’t just take it from me.
“A lot of smart Packers writers are essentially saying that it’s all over. Demovsky thinks there’s less than a 5 percent chance Rodgers is the team’s starter going forward. Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wrote on Tuesday that the team should “be prepared” to trade Rodgers. “The Packers undoubtedly will give it time to see if Rodgers changes his mind, but they should set a deadline of June 1 to reconcile. If they can’t convince him to report, they should start shopping him around with the intention of trading him before training camp starts,” he wrote.”
You clearly don’t understand how any of this works.
Rodgers has no leverage outside of the empty threat of retirement, which his buddy AJ Hawk has already said isn’t happening.
Also, as you can see just a few posts above yours, somebody that is a friend and has actually spoke to Rodgers obviously doesn’t agree with those in the media. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
You clearly don’t understand how any of this works.
Rodgers has no leverage outside of the empty threat of retirement, which his buddy AJ Hawk has already said isn’t happening.
Also, as you can see just a few posts above yours, somebody that is a friend and has actually spoke to Rodgers obviously doesn’t agree with those in the media.
He doesn't have to retire. He can just sit out. If he sits out then GB will be forced to trade him.
