Too early in the process, but the feel from the Packers is that they don't believe Rodgers will act on the possibility of him to 'retiring' and will stand pat on no trade. As much of a fruitcake that Rodgers is, I'd still put that threat at 50:50.
Aaron Rodgers
- Thread starter Peter
- Start date
- Status
Sources: Rodgers unlikely for Packers' minicamp
Aaron Rodgers is subject to $93,085 in fines if he does not show for the entire three-day camp, although ESPN's Adam Schefter reports that the Packers have discussed giving the star QB an excused absence, which would then waive the fines.
www.espn.com
This is the kind of crap that as a fan turns me off when pro athletes try to pull this crap. He signed the contract to play for the Packers and while I understand the frustrations he has with the front office but is there anything in the CBA that says a player can't essentially negotiate a "zero buyout" where he just forfeits everything in his contract if the Packers let him go? This is the thing that always amazes me with NBA players that get traded at the deadline and the team they go to has no intention of keeping them and winds up buying them out for a lesser price. They still have to take on some kind of salary hit to allow a disgruntled or washed up player to move on somewhere else. Is there anything in the CBA agreements that prevents a player from just saying they will void their contract or even pay back part of it in order to move on to a better situation?
These guys get paid millions to play a game that most of us would kill to have an ounce of their talent and have the chance to be in their position. I would be OK getting paid at the upper end of pay for what I do for a living to make it through a few miserable years then be able to retire financially sound by the time I was 40. I've made it 18 years with my current employer and if they keep me around at least that or a few more years more without laying me off I will retire a happy person despite the ups and downs I have had with my satisfaction with my job.
These guys get paid millions to play a game that most of us would kill to have an ounce of their talent and have the chance to be in their position. I would be OK getting paid at the upper end of pay for what I do for a living to make it through a few miserable years then be able to retire financially sound by the time I was 40. I've made it 18 years with my current employer and if they keep me around at least that or a few more years more without laying me off I will retire a happy person despite the ups and downs I have had with my satisfaction with my job.
It’s a two way street. Is it better to have a disgruntled QB leading your team and paying him 10’s of millions? Or is it better to cut ties and use that money to do other things and have harmony in the org?
Ultimate question. Rodgers has covered up a lot of holes for the past decade but he also iirc could have gone the Brady route of taking a pay cut to get better talent there.
There's been plenty of signs that he's difficult but this thing has been full exposure and it may get to a point where Packer fans won't miss him.
I'm not saying I would take less money necessarily than what I was worth but Rodgers has no place to ***** about not getting talent when your making almost 34 million a year. There is a price to pay when one player makes that much money. If you want to win you need to be able to work on a deal like Tom Brady did and still does to help bring in more talent. If Rodgers really was all about winning he would've restructured and made less to help them win more. Just my two cents. He is entitled to all that money, so can't really blame him for taking it either.
I can blame him for taking it is if he was upset that there wasn't better talent around him.
- Mar 27, 2006
- 42,745
- 33,768
- 113
It's not on the player to manage the salary cap, though. That's on the team.
But even so, the Packers had plenty of wiggle room to adjust AR's contract to give themselves more cap room this year. Rodgers was due almost 7 million in a roster bonus. The team could have converted it into a signing bonus and spread the cap hit out over the life of his existing contract, and used the savings to go after additional talent. They didn't. The Packers chose to leave it alone and have the roster bonus apply to this year's cap. Why? Because they are most likely going to get rid of him after this season, and they don't want more dead money on the books.
That's fine. That's within the team's rights to do. But their hand has been tipped. But the team's hands weren't entirely prevented from acquiring free agents by AR's contract. They are actively choosing that path to some degree.
Right. In today's entitlement culture, you think that stands a snowball's chance in hell? In Lombardi's day, maybe.
When the player makes many times more than the coach or GM, it only stands to reason they think they can dictate policy. I'm not saying that's correct, or desirable. And frankly I'm disappointed that both Rodgers and the front office have allowed this to go this far. But that's reality.
Screw what is right or wrong for Rogers to do right now. As a Bears fan, the only question I have is where to toss the zippo and a roll of toilet paper to get this thing rolling.
The Bears should work on their own issues. What happens elsewhere won't matter.
As a fan, I can't remember the last time there was stability there. Heck even the '85 team was fragile.
It's pro football where what happens in your division completely DOES matter. If you don't think it does, tell that to the 7-9 Washington division-winner playoff team last year.
If the Bears were 7-9 and in the playoffs I would say they're a sh*tty team winning a sh*tty division so since there wasn't improvement internally, it doesn't matter.
Sure they might sell out and pull out a playoff win but that won't last long or mean there's stability.
Who knows, but a lot of it may have to do with his 'binary' view of religion.
Guy has been known to be solely about himself for a long time. I was hoping they could bridge this enough to keep Rodgers for one more year and get Love another year to get adjusted as the backup. With Rodgers stubbornness, glad the pack went hard at defense and shoring up the run game. Gives a fighting chance.
This is reminding me of the “why would someone want to get rid of Harbaugh?” talk
- Status
Latest posts
-
If ISU could schedule KSU as non-conference, would you want them to?
- Latest: SolterraCyclone
-
-
-
