There is a fundamental difference of opinion between the Packers front office and Rodgers, in particular. And the success of Tom Brady in Tampa has been the catalyst for a lot of this discontent, IMO. The Packers are a team that has been willing to get rid of a veteran player a year (or two) too early, and try to replace them with a younger, cheaper version. The team is not sentimental, and for the most part, has been correct in their player decisions. It's not pleasant to see fan favorites be let go, but football is a brutal business, with replacement being a constant in the game. And, of course, Rodgers never addressed the possible solution to this problem: that he take less money (ala Tom Brady) so the team can get veteran players ton short term rentals to fill needs for the team. And when a player in New England becomes too expensive, they're summarily shipped off, and it's "next man up." The result was nine SB appearances, with six wins. Also, let's not forget that Rodgers was the beneficiary of the Packers cutting one of the most popular players in team history. So, yes, he is right. But he is also wrong. How much of each he is will be determined by the individual fan.

Rodgers should put his money where his mouth is. Take a pay cut so they can bring in a player or 2 that will get you a SB. NOT hang on to veteran players that are in decline that he is friends with. Don't like the Cobb deal. IIR correctly, he spend a lot of time on IR. Amari will be everything Cobb was and more.

The Packers had two excellent QB's for the past 32 years and what do they have to show for it only 2 Super bowls. Not enough IMO, Packer MGT didn't do enough do provide these QB's with enough Offensive and Defensive playmakers. The Patriots did a much better job of it and their SB record proves it. I followed the Packers during the dry years 1969 - 1994. When free agency & salary cap was implemented in the NFL mid 90's the Packers had a much better chance of acquiring elite talent. They did a good job of it with Brett Farve and should have beat Denver in the SB. But during the years with Aaron Rodgers MGT has not done enough. I agree 100% with what Aaron said. Brady goes to Tampa and they immediately surround him with elite veteran talent on offense and defense and the result is a super bowl victory. Not allowing your MVP QB a chance to to sit at the MGT table and provide some input is WRONG..! And they way MGT treated Brett Farve was down right wrong. A 3rd pick from the JETS for an MVP QB... 65,000 fans one Saturday afternoon in Lambeau field proves me right. No Packer MGT isn't always right...

Using "it's a brutal business" and "we can't become sentimental" as the reasons why management "had to" do what they did is falling prey to this notion that cutting fast, hard, and painfully is always the best option. It's not. It doesn't make you hard, or smart, or successful to "always be a year early rather than a year late." Because sometimes you're five years early. And sometimes that "one year too late" actually translated into better team chemistry that overall paid off.

None of this is black and white and pretending otherwise is not helpful.

Aaron had a long, long time to bring these types of issues up, considering that he's trying to act as a leader now. During his last contract negotiations when he made bank, were these issues part of the conversation? Why didn't he bring this up then? Was it more inconvenient? If so, then this is much less about honesty and much more about convenience. Less Pro-Packers or even Pro-Labor as some are saying and more Pro-Aaron (that just so happens to overlap with an overdue assessment of management's theory on labor).

Cory sided with Rodgers, I am siding with the FO. Gute has made his mistakes, but I have always found him to be forthright and honest. He stated Rodgers has had input. Cory said "If Gutekunst did in fact involve Rodgers in communication with the direction of the organization, then why would Rodgers have so much to say about it?". Simple answer Cory - Rodgers had input but didn't get his way. Rodgers doesn't want input, he wants decision making power.

Rodgers wanted to keep the 12 veterans he listed, the FO disagreed. The FO was correct (based on post-Packer performance) in most of those cases. The two exceptions being the younger guys - Hayward and Hyde. Rodgers is a HOF QB, but his GM viewpoint is biased by his relationships with his fellow teammates. Rodgers should have input, but not decision making power. Unfortunately Rodgers wants the latter and let his ego play diva this Spring to acquire it.

This article will bring out the whiners and screamers.

Yes! Good for Rodgers. We saw the moves. And most were tied to the cap. But what Gute did with Bulaga, Cobb, Linsley, Nelson, Williams. And almost Jones. Was why he had enough. How many RTs,Wrs, RB,OL, did Gute come up with, instead of just signing what he had? Yea out with the old and in with the new. TT was forced to do it. And with the draft and development he still came up short. So how can they just let All-Pros leave ? They wanted to be here. Well the obvious to me was the glory of Gute. But the guy behind the scenes is Murphy. He just couldn't stop throwing gas on the fire either. Instead of keeping his silence about the negotiating. He's ready to show his stick. Maybe #4 just brought up old wounds/thinking. But Gute did make blunders. Good players still know how to play. Lesson Learned. But I doubt you'll teach this FO anything. It isn't fun when your friends leave. It's a burn out. And when he became union rep. The Agreement/ Rules don't allow change. Rodger's is a Packer hero. He is a player that commands respect. The best way to enjoy the Packer games, is to stop thinking like management. And believe in heroes.

Letting Charles Woodson go was just stupid .

I suppose it is possible that getting it off his chest is cathartic. Quite honestly though, I don’t think a lot of what he said helps his case. He wanted more money, he wanted players retained that, for the most part, have proven to have been let go at the right time. Those that were not chiefly fell in a period which we now know was after TT had declined but before the current GM or his pre amendment current contract.

The reaction is interesting given the content. Just as in the Favre era there is a lot of emotion and a clear contingent that see Rodgers as either unimpeachable or simply deserving of sufficient deference to get him to play. Others just view winning now as the only thing worthy of consideration and that that means we should humor Rodgers at any price because he is critical to that. Yet more look at what he said and wonder if this is actually a viable rapprochement even in the short term.

There are, I am sure, other shades, but the point is, the only unity I see in the fan base is for this year. We are agreed, mostly, like it or not, like Rodgers personally or not, that this is the strongest roster in years and this is likely the strongest it’s going to be given cap and age. One thing Rodgers press conference clearly did not do was unite either him with the FO or the fans among themselves.

He’s back. Hopefully what happens now is driven by what goes on the field. Let’s move on from these discussions. They aren’t productive, they are divisive and ultimately futile. Camp is underway, let’s talk football and get back to being focused on what might well be the last hurrah for this group. Rodgers and the team will do what they will after the season, right now we need to play, the roster is pretty much assembled (or will be from this 90).

Time to move on, stop debating or writing about Rodgers’ state of mind and focus on current players, the roster, coaches and camp. Rodgers is our starter this year. That is now settled. Let’s look to what he has around him and what it should look like and who should be part of it and why. Let’s talk, and write, about football until after we win the Super Bowl.

Spot on article...and supported coments from other NFL players praising Rodgers for speaking intellegently and truthfully reguarding culture...Rodgers not just the leader in the Packers locker room, but becoming recognized by past and present NFL players across the league for stepping up and speaking honestly...not for himself, but for the benefit of the Packer organization as well as players.

Two players were not on the mistreatment list:

Jake from Whitewater and Josh Sitton. Curious.

I get what Rodgers is saying and I get that he took a stand to change what he believed to be needed and he used his status to get it done. However, the players he listed, less Hyde and Hayward were all deserving to be let go, Nelson is a toss-up and could have been retained for a 2-year deal, but make no mistake in that all the others merited release, either due to the salary demand and/or the lack of productive play with some showing a decline yearly and riding the coattail of their former selves.

The other issue with Rodgers is that he hasn't been able to attract the elite, though GB creates the illusion of a player becoming elite after he arrives, especially if that player exceeds the play of the former 'elite' designate based on the productivity of the formers worse play.

What elite player has come to GB while in their prime since Rodgers became an assumed elite attraction in 2011 with the SB victory? Perhaps my memory is fading, but I can only think of those that GB drafted and turned elite or were made so by the fans that suffer delusions via their blind optimism.

No, Aaron Rodgers, your belief that players come to play for you is a delusion on your part and some fans, but you should have said you were the reason some players acquire elite status while playing with you, but you surely haven't gotten any to come to GB, and part of the reason is GB isn't a 'vacation resort' and you aren't enough to overcome that in other players of status to endure.

Naturally, getting past the prime players isn't an issue as they just look for the overpay for a couple of years of useless service.

I didn't think Rodgers was coming back because I didn't see a way for him to save face if he came to an agreement with management. But the press conference showed that he could handle this situation brilliantly or just plain ruthlessly, depending on one's point of view. I wonder if management knew that he was going to stab them in the back at the earliest opportunity. Possibly not. It generally goes without saying that when you come to an agreement with somebody you don't immediately trash them in the press. But that's what Rodgers did, and judging by the public response, he completely pulled it off. He really knows how to pull people's heartstrings by talking about well-respected players who were not offered contracts when they were on the downsides of their careers. The vast majority of fans and pundits don't seem to be bothered by the fact that most of those decisions by management were correct.

One question I have about all this is how much pull other star players have with their front offices. I don't think Tom Brady had any decision-making power with the Patriots. What about Ben Roethlisberger? Is he making decisions on which players the Steelers sign? How about Phillip Rivers when he was with the Chargers? Or Patrick Mahomes with the Chiefs? I doubt that these guys have any real say in personnel matters, but I really don't know, and I haven't heard any information or even speculation on this matter. I would be interested to read an article about it, if there is one out there somewhere.

Really, we're into the first week of training camp - enough of these conspicuous click-bait articles.

Actually O I thought Rodgers came off like a horses ass! full of himself and Hair Bun Ego! His greed in salary has been one of the biggest reasons some if not all those guys were low balled and forced to leave! Guy wants people to hang around but he can't keep a relationship with girl friends and his own family Doubt he ever marries this present one!

Heres the irony if you will. First, this is a small market team. No big pocket owners who can take a loss. Packers must balance the books and then some.
This forces them to do contracts different them other teams and are reluctant to back load but rather pay up front.
This forces them to either pony up to the bar and pay going rates of other teams or lose the player in bidding wars. The later has been going on for decades, we lose talent and Rodgers is dead on about this.
What he aint saying, Tom Brady took less money then he was worth to allow the team to buy these players. Rodgers is the PROBLEM that causes us to lose these guys, we cant afford them with his huge salary. End of story.,

So Aaron Rodgers is a working-class hero making a stand for all of the forsaken and forgotten Packers who have been so dedicated to the team but then thrown to the curb by a miserly management?
It seems to me like it's probably emotional and manipulative drivel, or a grandiose delusion of nobility in defense of the lowly laborer in the trenches. Maybe a mixture of both, but in any case self-serving.
As Coldworld points out above, Rodgers had no trouble signing a massive contract with this heartless front office just three years ago, after many of the players he refers to had already been purged so unceremoniously, and even so cruelly.
That was 2018, when Brian Gutekunst was named general manager. Should Gute be blamed for the players who who were supposedly abused previously? Since then, he has re-signed Bakh and Clark and Jones so as to seemingly take care of our own. Is that a significant indication of his good character or merely a charade?
***
Let's investigate. With the help of knowledgeable followers of the Packers, let's go player by player as listed by Rodgers, plus any others, and see if they were mistreated by the front office. Let's look at what they wanted from the Packers at the time of their dismissal, and what they were offered. Let's look at the tone of the negotiations as far as respect and appreciation both ways.
If possible, let's talk to players about their experiences with the front office, and let's try as best we can to get the side of the front office in each of these stories.
Perhaps before he became GM, Gute was a henchman in the front office for a couple of years as director of player personnel, abetting the atrocities against players -- and then became only more cold and calculating after his rise to power. Or is it remotely possible that all along Gute has tried to treat our guys with genuine good will?
***
We often hear players in pro sports say it's a business as they leave a team for greener fields to the heartbreak of fans. After all, they have to take care of themselves and their families, and you can never have too many tens of millions of dollars in the bank. It's also about respect, say the players, the organization has to show it values them in cash.
Even now, it may be that Davante Adams is telling the fans he's outta here unless he's given a new contract as the highest-paid receiver in the league. Maybe it's just a smart negotiating tactic on his part, but maybe Davante is not all that attached to Green Bay if it comes down to more moolah.
Another note is that these aging players in many cases don't seem willing to acknowledge how far their worth to the team has dropped in their declining years. If they are willing to take smaller salaries to reflect their increasing risk of injuries and decreasing skills, then I'm all for keeping them as long as possible as a matter of loyalty, and for the character and experience they will continue to contribute along with their remaining talent still considerable.
It seems a matter of fairness to teammates that these veterans don't take up too much of the salary cap as they account for less production on the field. It's also a matter of fairness to fans that the team develops and retains younger players so that the Packers continue to flourish on the field.
***
I'm usually for players over management. For example, I'm concerned about adding another game or two to the regular season as being too much physical punishment for the players. I'm concerned about Thursday games, although I like them as a fan and wonder if they could be timed with bye weeks to lessen the blow.
I'm concerned about loyalty to veterans already on the Packers who have become cherished parts of our community as fans. I'm also concerned about the younger guys who don't make tens of millions of dollars in their careers and perhaps must deal with the effects of serious injuries afterward.
I'm all for unions and other cooperative efforts among employees. However, unions that are originally good in protecting and promoting workers can become corrupt in exploiting workers for the benefit mostly of the union leaders.
The union can in effect become a crooked corporation in itself that bullies other workers to fall in line.
It seems that Aaron Rodgers is himself a corporation of massive resources and significant sway. Whether or not he is using his power for the good of his teammates is the question at hand.
Again, I tend to seriously doubt his status as a folk hero for the rank-and-file players of the NFL. It seems like a sham of self-absorption and self-delusion on his part. He seems at the least melodramatically misguided in using his teammates past and present to justify his own willfulness and even weirdness as a hold-out and malcontent.
***
I could be way wrong. Let others continue to weigh in on the matter with robust but respectful dialogue. It's a tedious topic, I realize, but one seemingly critical to delve into even further due to the controversial press conference of Rodgers this week.
After all, this guy largely makes or breaks the season for the Packers, including us as fans. His authenticity and reliability are of the utmost importance to be a leader of men all the way to the top.
(Please excuse my length, once again, but I'm trying to be fair to both sides, even if my opinion at this time is strongly against the current ways of Rodgers.)

As sick and tired we all are over the Rodgers drama it's still a topic of discussion because it hasn't been completely played out. How will Rodgers respond this year, on the field and in the press, when the Packers lose a couple of games they should have won, or when he has a couple of bad games, or Cobb gets benched for Amari, or, or, or...?

His presser was a stab in the eye to management, lambasting the FO of this and past management teams for their callous regard for the players, but I think Rodgers was a bit disingenuous. Yes, he wants input. Yes, he feels some of the "high character players" should have been kept. No, he didn't get what he wanted on more than one occasion, but if it has really come to a head for him he could have easily had this discussion behind closed doors. I mean, Rodgers does have leverage.

No, the sub-text of the presser was more important, Rodgers is concerned mainly about one "high character player" who in all likelihood will be released, and that's Rodgers.

Rodgers is often praised for his intelligence, his smarts. I don't think he's quite as smart as he thinks he is. He really does believe he could have found a way to keep those dozen players he alluded to. Like Fredo in the G-dfather, "I can handle things! I'm smart! Not dumb... I'm smart and I want respect!" Hey, It's only numbers. What's the problem?

Rodgers has been a great player, maybe the best QB of all time. The Packers winning fewer SBs than the Patriots isn't because they kept all their "high character players, it's because New England's management was better than the Packers. Because they didn't keep an awful defensive coach like Capers around for way too many years. Because McCarthy was no Belichick. Rodgers generally played well in those losses. He outplayed Brady in the last one.

But now, when the Packers finally have a coach who shows real potential and a GM who has put together a team that has gone to two straight NFC championships, Rodgers decides to make a stink. Is it really because Kumerow was released... or is it because he knows he's next and his ego can't handle it?

He does not care about this team, other than his friends. I think he threw the entire organization under the bus with his comments like ,They only come here to play with me. What utter nonsense. He is living in his own head, an egotistical ass.

So we’re really supposed to feel sorry for guys that made millions playing in Green Bay and then had to sign elsewhere for millions more when the Packers didn’t re-sign them? I guess it’s not about the money when you don’t have to worry about money. I can understand outliving all your friends, but for someone who is apparently so smart it’s unbelievable that he doesn’t seem to understand the NFL is a business. Maybe he needs to intern with John Elway rather than play for him.

I see blame on both sides.

I blame the front office for failing to communicate with Rodgers to at least attempt to show they valued his opinion or would accept some in put. Despite Gutey's comment that Rodgers has had input, obviously it was not enough or we would not be here today discussing this.

I blame Rodgers for being a diva and letting it boil over. Had he made attempts before to keep certain players and was ignored? Or did he just have throw his tantrum in order to make the front office realize that's what he wanted. Like two ships passing in the night, they both missed each other.

The problem with Rodgers' approach, as others have noted on here, was that the vast majority of the players -- except for Micah Hyde and Woodson -- all should have been released. And that approach is an emotional one. You don't run a franchise making emotional decisions like Jerry Jones or some other bonehead owner.

The Packers think long-term and try to balance the needs of the team vs. the cap. Rodgers is mad because some players weren't given an offer or even a "thank you" on their way out. I can see the frustration there and agree with him. The front office should have done better to at least explain their position instead of giving the cold shoulder. You just don't treat people like that. Both sides need to take ownership for their mistakes and move forward together.

And.... This is why players make terrible GMs.

His answer in the press conference to "didn't they play poorly after they left" was the definition of hubris.

Casey Hayward and Micah Hyde. Both knew. Very Interesting.

Idiots…just mostly idiots on the board. Rodgers finally speaks honestly and truthfully and you all slam him for it after begging him for months to do so. Tell him he should take less pay.. honor his contract, be a soldier.. idiots.

I would say Rodgers has been disingenuous at best. So he considered retirement? Really?! Do you honestly think Rodgers was going to retire and write the Packers a check for 36M out of his own bank account, that he would have owed the Packers in unearned bonuses. No way was he ever going to retire and pay that money back! Not a chance!

Also if Rodgers really wanted what's best to help the Packers win a SB he should have been recruiting or trying to work a trade for an upgrade on the DL, instead of a broken down old WR best's friend!

I didn't take sides in any of this all offseason but Rodgers by his comments did not have the best interests of the Packers in mind!

He was never going to retire and bringing a best friend along for the ride didn't make the Packers an appreciably better team! And in the process he put the Packers in an even more precarious salary cap situation in '22.

IMO, Rodgers just tarnished his legacy unless he beings the Lombardi Trophy home in February! Anything less is unacceptable!