Packers QB Aaron Rodgers Reportedly "Frustrated" And "Emotional" Over Lack of Communication From Front Office

-- As many seemed to believe over the last three months, Aaron Rodgers is reportedly on the brink of agitation after some of the personnel decisions made by his front office this offseason.

According to Yahoo Sports columnist Charles Robinson, sources close to the Green Bay Packers' quarterback recall him as "frustrated" and "emotional" with the lack of communication from the front office's new regime prior to major moves.

Rodgers was left completely out of talks concerning his former quarterbacks coach Alex Van Pelt, who chose to pursue other opportunities and ended up under the same job title with the Cincinnati Bengals. And also, wide receiver Jordy Nelson, who Rodgers shared 65 regular season touchdowns with through the span of his career -- the most by any quarterback-receiver tandem in team history.

Two moves Rodgers called "an interesting change" without consulting him.

"Both of those decisions [with Nelson and Van Pelt ] were made without him," one source close to Rodgers said, per Robinson. "In both situations, he had no influence with [the front office] before anything went down."

Rodgers was drafted to Green Bay with the 24th overall pick in 2005, ensuing to back up Hall of Fame quarterback Brett Favre for the next three seasons. When given the reigns in 2008, Rodgers nor the Packers ever looked back, and their run ever since has been illustrious. 

They've made the playoffs eight out of Rodgers' 10 seasons as the starter -- he missed nine games in 2017 -- and captured a Super Bowl title and five NFC North crowns. It's easy to see why Rodgers feels he's earned the right to be somewhat involved in the Packers' personnel decisions moving forward, especially with a massive contract extension on the horizon, but it just doesn't work that way.

"I know he's thinking about that stuff when it comes to the next contract because should have earned a voice by now," the source said. "In other places with [elite] quarterbacks, consideration is given to those guys. I think Aaron wants to be engaged in some decisions. But that's just not the way it works [in Green Bay]. I think that's obviously frustrating and it's going to keep coming out."

Rodgers' current annual salary has been bumped way down to $22 million given a lot of the recent contract signings. His deal, when he signed it in 2013, was the biggest in NFL history. Now, the Packers have been trying to find a way to make him the highest paid player in league history and keep it that way for an extended period of time.

Rodgers will turn 35 in December of this coming season, already nearing the tail-end of his career. This upcoming extension he receives will more than likely take him through the end of it all, but the Packers don't need to be in a rush to get it done.

Rodgers still has two years remaining on his current deal and, if exhausted, can be hit with back-to-back franchise tags in 2020 and 2021, according to Robinson's report.

The Packers didn't absolutely need to strike a deal with Rodgers this offseason -- especially not with these growing tensions that would more than likely require some kind of meeting to be settled and flattened -- but they wanted him to keep pace with the other expanding salaries at his position.

When new general manager Brian Gutekunst moved on from Van Pelt and Nelson, neither move was made with any reckless malice.

The Packers hired Frank Cignetti Jr. to replace Van Pelt as the team's quarterbacks coach and, albeit he has some work to do before forming as strong of a relationship with Rodgers, it's a stepping stone in the influx of change that took place in the Packers' front office this offseason. Cignetti also served under Ben McAdoo's staff with the New York Giants in 2016, and McAdoo previously served under coach Mike McCarthy in Green Bay.

As for Nelson, the Packers went out and signed tight end Jimmy Graham, who is expected to play a significant slot role in the Packers' offense and become a primary red zone target. It's a fine consolation prize to equip Rodgers with.

Whether Rodgers views either replacement as a fitting one is still in limbo, but the Packers return to the facility for the start of their spring training program. Any distraction -- such as reports hinting at Rodgers' rancor -- will likely be tuned out of the building.

__________________________

Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (117)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
TimBackes's picture

April 17, 2018 at 08:41 am

Love Rodgers to death, but you'd think he'd have learned after seeing the end of Favre's career in Green Bay firsthand that no player, not even a generational talent at QB, "deserves" the ability to weigh in on personnel decisions.

I don't necessarily have a problem with teams/GMs occasionally asking for the opinion of a star player, but it should never be the expectation.

Also, who knows how big of a deal this actually is. Rodgers could very well be frustrated, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's unhappy with being a Packer or even with the job Gutekunst is doing--that's a big leap.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 08:46 am

Loved your first paragraph. 2nd paragraph sets a very dangerous precedent, IMO. Even if it's not the expectation.

0 points
0
0
TimBackes's picture

April 17, 2018 at 08:48 am

I mean, if I were an exec, I'd never include players in my discussions. But there are lots of examples of situations of players having influence in some personnel decisions, including Rodgers himself, such as him advocating for new contracts for some of his receivers over the years.

GMs can certainly decide whether they want to listen to their star players. But ultimately, their job is to play. When decisions get made without them, they have to understand that that's just how it works (and should work) in the NFL.

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:02 am

Teams should ask for the opinions of the players, just not in the specific context of hiring moves. I would be shocked if Rodgers didn't have an exit interview when he could have told the Management his opinion on Van Pelt and Nelson. Maybe he should have given them better reviews?

Anyways, what is it that Rodgers expects? Nelson is a wonderful person and maybe VanPelt is too, but they both played huge roles in the abject failure of the passing game last season. Nelson had 28 yards in the Carolina game when Rodgers was back with the playoffs on the lines.

0 points
0
0
TKWorldWide's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:12 pm

Redacted.
(I learned that term from Dwight Schrute.)

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 06:10 pm

I don't care you good he is, Rodgers is a PLAYER. He has NO seat at the table when deciding who to bring in or negotiating player contracts. As a fan, I want NO part of any FO that consults ANY player about ANY FO moves.

If I'm Rodgers and I'm that upset about it, I would force GB to franchise me 3x, thus destroying GB's salary cap, along with any chance I had at winning another Lombardi in GB and building a legacy before I'm 39. Another option is to retire and become a FO exec if I'm so sure I can do better. Another option would be subtle jabs over the course of years through the media. While one such jab isn't so bad, I know after several dozen of these information war type jabs, the FO might possibly get sick enough of it that they finally trade me. A final option would be to go full "Favre" and blow up team continuity for my ego. Waffle with retirement. Then try to work my way to a rival. Cause that worked out so well for BLF...

Or, just STHU and do my dam job, and if I have a problem, I go through the PROPER channels (i.e. to Gute) to address it. And if Gute disagrees with me, I hope I'm wrong and the FO is right, then I, once again, STHU and do my dam job.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 08:47 am

Whoa....not much more to say after that tirade.
Close the thread to additional comments.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:22 am

;)

0 points
0
0
cuervo's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:04 am

Well said BM, IF these reports are true, and that's a big IF, this is looking more and more like Farve 2.0.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:46 am

The proper channel for a Player is not through the general manager.

It is through his position coach, the coordinator, or the Head coach.

I am not saying there can't be talk between the GM and the players, but if we're talking about proper chain of command, players deal with coaches, the Head Coach deals with the GM.

Just my opinion of course. I'm sure there's 32 different structure variations across the league.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:19 pm

Right. I was more assuming that ARod complains to his new QB coach, then MM over losing Jordy. MM says "tough" then ARod goes to Gute... Then perhaps it goes to Murphy. Going up the chain with a grievance in-house, in other words.

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:56 pm

I've never seen an employee that didn't complain about the decisions made by bosses. Apparently Rodgers is no different from anybody else.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 06:12 pm

Difference here is that he is the most important employee of a multi-billion dollar annual business. I'm talking about the entire NFL here. Yes, he's the GOAT.

With that pressure comes a responsibility to be a good role model/ambassador. Charles Barkley's "I ain't no role model" schtick is wrong. If you are the face of a franchise, you ARE a role model.

The BS comments are frustrating as hell to read, ARod.

0 points
0
0
zoellner25's picture

April 17, 2018 at 08:51 am

Unless I hear ARod say or it or deny it, I don't believe it

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:06 am

Good chance this is all media smoke.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:07 am

That was my first thought!

I love to wacth Rodgers play, but everybody is replaceable. Everybody. If someone wants to build legacy somewhere, than he/she has to understand few things. One important one is not to spit into the face there...

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:19 am

Unlike BLF, Arod has always been media savvy. I don't doubt he's upset, but I also doubt we'll ever get anything other than carefully constructed, passive agressive media messages from him.

It's pretty frustrating.

0 points
0
0
TheVOR's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:17 am

Exactly, he makes a few comments, and the media turns it into a big huge story. Look, it's a business, and eventually it's more than likely going to be a business decision around his own future with GB.

He's without question a phenomenal QB. That said, there is a business to run, and he's going to be attached to coaches and players he's comfortable with, that's a given, but perhaps the mark of the "Greater QB" would be a guy that gets it done with the NFL changing around him. He needs to face that change is a given in the NFL, and that this franchise needed it BADLY!

He needs to make it great around him, it's not all on him, even though the results after he went down would seem to indicate that it is, this team will never win a Super Bowl again without it being a "great team", that happens to have a great QB.

Final word, don't want to be in GB, don't extend! Bottom line is he's under contract for 2 years. It's probably best for everyone that they stay focused on winning another Super Bowl, than on talking about hurt feelings or franchise decisions.

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:42 pm

This "league source close to Rodgers" sounds a lot like James Jones to me. Jones seems to have an axe to grind with the Packers and was especially critical of the Jordy Nelson release.

There's always a motive behind everything, I'm guessing the "league source" has one too.

0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:49 pm

More often than not, it's the players agent running his mouth. As mentioned in another post, the Packers have not engaged in contract talks with Rodgers and his agent. Might be the agent's way to put a little bit of pressure, or more likely a 'heads up' that they want to begin talks right away. I also would not be surprised if it were someone like a James Jones being use as a conduit. Wheels within wheels.

0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:06 am

Whoa, here we go.

I see some of this as ARod laying the groundwork for justifying going after as big a contract as he can. I don't see a home-town discount (doublecheck) coming.

0 points
0
0
Hawg Hanner's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:10 am

I believe Rodgers may feel out of the loop. Change ruffles feathers. How good a coach was Van Pelt? Well Hundley made recurrent errors that have to go to coaching to some extent. And Aaron before the injury was not having such a great season. Even superstars need coaching. On Nelson, the guy just looked washed up. Maybe he was injured, but at that age and that salary why fool around? Neither Van Pelt nor Nelson performed at a high level. Rodgers may miss their camaraderie but this is a performance business.

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:59 pm

Reports were that it was Van Pelt's decision to leave to explore other opportunities. If that is the case (and he & Aaron are such close friends) why is Rodgers blaming the Packers?

0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:38 pm

Right Lare, it was known from the end of the 2016 that Van Pelt wanted to move on. He was never fired, his contract expired and Van Pelt, in part, didn't want to renew. That's a full year ARod had to know he was gone. And I'm sure Van Pelt would have let him know why. So what was there to even discuss between ARod and the FO?

Is ARod suggesting MM should have acquiesced to whatever gripes Van Pelt may have had?

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:38 am

After seven years of not playing in another Super Bowl, I can’t blame Aaron Rodgers for sounding frustrated with the Packers organization.

As a Packers fan, I’m frustrated.

0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:48 am

Brett Rodgers without the Good Ol Boy facade.

Not a good look.

Rodgers should know better, I guess the estrangement from family has eliminated any of that good sense being passed down. Relationships matter.

0 points
0
0
Donster's picture

April 17, 2018 at 09:58 am

Allowing Rodgers input on coaching personnel or player decisions is a door that should not be opened.

I always take articles written by sports writers that say "sources close to the (insert player or coaches name here) with a grain of salt.

0 points
0
0
worztik's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:03 am

AVP made it known that he wanted to pursue other options when he chose to not sign a new contract. His title, I believe, was QBs (plural) coach and he failed miserably with the gum chewer. How much coaching of ARod would he have done? He needed to be coaching the 2 backups, which he apparently failed at completely! ARod lost a “friend”, I guess, but, was it a total surprise knowing where AVP’s Head was at? This subject was and is a none issue in my mind... only in ARod’s!!! I’ll miss Jordy’s cool demeanor, as well, but, time stops for no one... especially for fine tuned athletes! Maybe the Jordy move just slapped ARod in the face, showing him that NO ONE is irreplaceable and taking away his best safety valve, as well! Next we’ll be hearing that we didn’t do enough to sign an All-Pro RT when he injures himself rolling right... on on and on it goes!!!

0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:44 am

Let's consider what a GM - ARod personnel discussion might sound like:

Gute: We're thinking of moving on without Jordy.

ARod: But I think Jordy can still help us.

Gute: Well, we studied the tape and we don't see it. We'll offer around the vet min, but that's it.

ARod: That's insulting. You know he won't take it. I'm not happy with this.

Gute: I understand, but we're making hard choices to try and get you another ring.

ARod: You're going to do what you're going to do, but I'm against this. I don't like what you're doing here.

So how does this type of conversation help the personnel people? Total no win situation.

As a GM if you make a decision the player doesn't like and then rebuke him in person, how does that foster a better environment?

The other option is to cave in and keep someone you don't want which is certainly totally contrary to what GM's are trying to do, and if the GM is right, contrary to the goal of the team of trying to win the SB.

It's now become a lose - lose situation for the GB FO. I don't like that ARod is trying to make the FO look bad, much like Favre did to TT. You're all working towards the same goal (I think).

As for whether ARod wants to let his feelings get out, I think he knows what he's doing when he confides in those close to him without putting a gag order on it. He knows they'll blab to the press, which is just what he wants. I don't care for that type of backroom politicking. If he has a grievance with the FO go to them and state it. He might not like what they say, but he's got enough pull that I would expect he would get heard.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:13 am

Simple solution:

FO: Aaron, you are the GOAT, and we appreciate you. But let us do our job.

AR: I disagree.

FO: That is your right to personally disagree, but not to do so professionally. That's my job. I'm sorry that you are upset, but this is the end of the conversation.

And if ARod persists? Then you do what you have to as the FO. Put up with it for as long as you can, or until you find the right deal.

For example, while I don't think this will come to a head this year: Is ARod at 35 worth more than the #1 and #4 overall right now? Yeah. But, if it's that or a BLF situation, and CLE was willing? HELL YES I SHIP HIM RIGHT NOW.

An employee's job is NOT to run the company. If they want to run the company, get a job as a boss somewhere else. If the current bosses run the company into the ground, they'll be fired and you can crow in the media all you want in 10 years. But it will still be a bad look for you.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:41 pm

I respectfully disagree. This is not a typical employee/company situation. It is not even a top sales producer/sales manager situation. It is more akin to a mega, multi-city attorney firm's managing partner selecting the head of a particular city's office without consulting the department leaders within that office.

This is a situation involving intricate team relationships and a combination the best/arguably most intelligent player in the game. Would Adam Gase have been Denver's QB coach and then offensive coordinator unless Peyton Manning had been comfortable with that relationship? Most likely not.

0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:11 pm

Its FOOTBALL you blockhead!!!

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:42 pm

The caveman dialog you have here is definitely not how that conversation would go down. Clearly letting Jordy go and signing Graham was connected, so the conversation would have been Gute, MM and Philbin explaining how they think Adams/Cobb/Graham would be more effective than Jordy/Adams/Cobb. They would have talked about the new scheme they're planning to run, the shortfalls that occur with Jordy on the roster, and the solution that they've come to.

Maybe at the end of the conversation Rodgers would have still disagreed and they would have had to make the decision against his objections, but then he understands the rationale. And who's to say it was the right move? Maybe Rodgers brings up a good counterargument that changes managements mind, making the team better in 2018. We don't know, but that can't happen when you don't consult the smartest guy on your team.

0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

April 17, 2018 at 04:43 pm

It's possible the conversation could revolve around Gute, MM and Philbin trying to convince ARod that Adams/Cobb/Graham is better than Jordy/Adams/Cobb. But IMO it would warp into ARod petitioning for Jordy/Adams/Cobb & Graham(sounds like a rock band).

Then you're still in the same place. ARod pissed about the FO wanting to cut Jordy.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:44 am

I asked a week ago if you all felt we could build a Super Bowl roster around Rodgers's impending contract, considering all the young super-teams building around cheap young QB's.

About 80% of you thought it was unlikely.

That said, if we could get Cleveland's picks at #1 & #4 for Rodgers, would you do it?

And if so, what would you do with those picks?

Me, I'd take Barkley at #1 and either Nelson, Mayfield, or Chubb at #4 (or I'd trade down).

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:53 am

I think an established, proven, healthy ARod is worth more than #1 and #4.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:54 am

Can we keep him healthy with this roster?

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:07 am

Who can say, but that wouldn't be a significant part of how I figure his value in trade. We all know the extent to which he can elevate an offense. Cleveland has put together a pretty solid offensive unit, but has to find help at LT. I don't see Tyrod Taylor winning any SBs any time soon, and he won't get the most out of Gordon, Landry and Coleman.

Cleveland's flush with draft capital including 3 second rounders. I wouldn't expect them to part with all 3 #2s, but there would have to be some discussion there (or discussion of high picks in 2019).

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:26 am

Look, here's the bottom line for me:

1. Rodgers is the league's best QB.
2. Outside of QB, however, Green Bay has a bottom 5 roster--just my opinion.

Ted was fired for a reason. This is a bad, slow, lifeless roster needing a serious infusion of talent. Holding out hope for Aaron's window is a strategy with an enormous pricetag, both in cap dollars and lost opportunities.

Right now, our GM has been left a terrible roster with an elite trade asset at the peak of his powers. I'm not saying this is an easy decision--I'm not even saying I'd do it.

But to dismiss it out of hand seems a bit short-sighted.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:45 pm

I wouldn't say I'm dismissing it out of hand. I just think you've got to get more than #1 and #4 in return for a surefire HOF QB who is still at or near the top of his game...especially with the prospect of significant cap space opening up in 2019. I'm not sure how much more it would take.

No guarantees come either way, whether they deal #12 or try to shore up around him. I just think #1 and #4 doesn't get you enough of his true value in return. Especially if you don't think Kizer can play well enough to make this team go in the short term and you're not going to invest in a high-end QB in this draft.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:56 pm

I am waaaay to lazy to look it up, but I assumed you were talking Cleveland having the 1st pick and the 4th pick in round ONE. 2 1st round picks? (2 picks in the top 4)

If this is the 1st pick, and then the 1st pick in the fourth round, this whole scenario is complete "nutso". Out of your flipping mind, "nutso".

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:59 pm

I am out of my flipping mind nutso, but, yes, #1 and #4 overall.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:16 pm

Sorry, I meant that generally, as in "you're" - any person suggesting trading a 1st and 4th round pick for Rodgers. Not any person specifically - anyone.

2 picks in the top 4, still not enough, but that's where I'd start, then I'd take a couple of defensive starters if they have any worth taking.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:15 pm

No, I definitely mean the 2 high picks in Round 1.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:50 pm

If I'm Cleveland, there's no way I offer more than the 1st and 4th picks in the draft. That's two high-end talents at rookie costs for a superstar in his mid-30's who gobbles $30-32 million/year in cap space.

Cleveland can pay him because they've already formed a cheap young talent base. We haven't.

Look, this would set us up for a complete--and very quick--rebuild, which would be pretty awesome in the wake of Ted's Not-So-Excellent Adventure.

If Gut really believes in his own abilities, then he should jump at the chance if Cleveland's willing. But if he doesn't believe he's a good GM, then he should just give up, stand pat, and let the team continue its decay. After all, anyone who thinks we're catching the Rams and Eagles by picking 14th is kidding themselves.

We have a great opportunity here to turn around a collapsing franchise. The question is, does Gut believe in Gut?

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 04:02 pm

Realistically speaking....there's isn't even a 1% chance of this happening.
It's fun to day dream about, and discuss on blogs though.
Don't shoot the messenger.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:12 am

We can not. His team colleagues can, barring his unnecessary pocket escapes, when nobody can protect him...

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:21 am

At first I wasn't sure I wanted to address this question.
I thought it was ridiculous.
First of all, the premise is a bit flawed, because I'm not even certain Cleveland would make this trade.

After some further consideration, I'd give this trade some serious thought if it were in fact, "on the table", and I was the GM of the Packers.

The 2 factors at play here are:
1.) Rodgers does get injured, and with his age, the probability goes up
2.) The massive contract that will impact the team for the rest of his career

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:53 pm

Aaron Rodgers isn't going to be traded this year. But next year I expect him to demand a trade to either New England or another team who needs only a QB of his quality to win the Super Bowl.

0 points
0
0
Bert's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:45 am

I dunno. I wouldn't trade AR unless he either demanded a trade, was in decline or became such a distraction (i.e Favre) that you had no choice. Especially with no good option waiting in the wings. No amount of draft picks will make up for the loss of 85% of your offense. Sometimes a GM just has to let a superstar player blow off a little steam and move ahead. That's actually the sign of a good manager. He can take a little criticism as long as it doesn't get to the point of blatant insubordination. I don't see any harm done to this point.

0 points
0
0
Mojo's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:15 pm

I think dobber is right, you could get more than just the number 1 & 4 picks for ARod. I'd think possibly Clevelands #1 next year might be in play. Plus Cleveland has tons of cap room to extend ARod if they choose to.

Let's say the above trade went through. Think of the number 1 overall pick this year. You can select who you believe to be the best of a promising QB class. Then get this cra-cra scenario, you double down with the 4th pick. That's right, you select the next best available QB at four.

So now you have two of the drafts top QB's under control for 5 years. If things go as hoped and the first pick looks promising, you look to deal the 4th pick. And think of the healthy competition (ok, yeah right) . If the first guy flames out, you now can look at the 4th pick. Just gives you much more of a chance to hit on the games most important position.

You can reset the clock for another dozen years. And you don't have to pay 20% of your cap to one player, at least for now. For five more years you're on the rookie scale . Think of how many quality FA's come into play then with that amount of extra scratch.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:56 am

Barkley at one, best available QB at 4.
I'd say Barkley at 4, but he probably won't last.

Have them throw in the some defensive talent on top of the two picks.
Interesting discussion.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:11 pm

There is no way I let Barkley get away if I have the top pick. No way. I take him, then grab a QB or another elite player at #4--or trade down.

Look, the big difference between me and others here isn't my view on Rodgers--I see him exactly as everyone else does.

The big difference is my view of:

1. This roster.
2. The challenge of rebuilding this roster with limited high picks and Rodgers's contract.
3. The quality of several ascending teams that were not run by Ted Thompson over the past several years.

With my idea, we'd have a massive influx of talent and a staggering $85 milliin in cap space starting next year.

And finally, we'd no longer have to worry about Gut working miracles in Aaron's remaining (and expensive) window.

0 points
0
0
Bert's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:20 pm

The actual generational QB talents like Rodgers, Favre, Peyton, Brady, Brees are few and far between. The odds of finding one in any given draft aren't very good. I wouldn't trade AR for any amount of draft picks unless I was forced to do it. Big mistake.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:36 pm

AR would never go to Cleveland, if anything he would want to go back to the west coast. All the teams are set at QB out there. Does he have a no trade clause in his contract?

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:43 pm

Yes, Rodgers is a generational talent, which makes him exceedingly rare. He's awesome--more than a franchise QB, he's a franchise-maker.

Again, my big issue isn't with Rodgers at all, but rather with this depleted roster. I just question whether Gut can rebuild this mess with no high picks and Rodgers's huge impending contract.

If it's less than 50/50 Gut can pull off the miracle, then we should strike while the iron's hot and turn around this franchise by trading our one supreme commodity.

But if you think it's, say, 80/20 that Gut can pull off the miracle while keeping Rodgers, then by all means we should keep him.

I just think Ted left a complete mess. I really do.

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:52 pm

I think that's a little pessimistic... but it's a really great point.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:49 pm

The mistake is paying 12 the roughly 30M fans think he deserves. That would be 17% of the salary cap. Since the salary cap went into effect in 1994, the average superbowl winning QB accounted for 6.9% of the cap. No superbowl winning team payed more than 13%. You can't win a championship with one superstar, you have to have a solid team. That's not going to happen. 6.9% of the cap right now is $12M, this is $18M short of what Rodgers is going to collect. $18M buys a lot of talent that GB is forced to go without.

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2018/02/nfl-quarterback-salaries-salary-cap-kir...

0 points
0
0
worztik's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:31 pm

I’d agree here that a trade with Cleveland makes the most sense in the overall team/franchise view... but, I’d get downvotes for just making a comment, as usual, so I won’t!!!

0 points
0
0
worztik's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:18 pm

Can you say, “Eddie Lee Ivory”??? There’s always that chance that he’ll blow out a knee (Bridgewater) and never be the Saquan Barkley we know... and love! I realize that medical procedures have come a long way from the time of ELI’s injury but, I guess I’ve just seen enough to be a bit paranoid at picking a RB so high! It’s a great position to pick... agreed!!! There’s risk everywhere in football... agreed!!! He’s a game changer... agreed!!! So what’s my alternative pick? When I think about which positions seem to get the least devastating injuries, I think of CBs, Ss, and WRs off the top of my head (without doing all the injury research I’m sure someone will do here!)!!! WR not a consideration for me in round 1... that leaves CB or S as my first pick OR a QB!!! Hypothetically, we trade ARod to Cleveland... take Allen at #1... the top corner at #4... top RT or Edge at #14... and wheel and deal for 2-#2s with them or next years #1!!! We’d have an incredible amount of assets to work with and what a start to a rebuild we’d have going on in ‘18!!!!!!

0 points
0
0
worztik's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:23 pm

Ya I know... my Bipolar kicked in....

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:43 pm

No, you take the best player at #1, and that is Barkley by far. You don't overlook a spectacular talent like that because he might get hurt.

As for CB or Safety, there isn't one I'd take at #4. I'd take Nelson, Chubb, or a QB.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:43 pm

I think you have to take a QB if you trade away 12.

Personally, I'd trade away the #1 overall to the top bidder and take the best QB available at 4. The trade would land roughly two 1s and two 2s (according to the draft pick trade value chart of 3000 points), which would leave 3 1s and 3 2s when we add in GBs current draft picks.

At that point I'm negotiating to move around so that the team pulls in 8-9 of the top 100 guys in this draft.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:45 pm

Cubbygold, that too is an excellent option. It leaves us without a spectacular running back who completely alters defensive game plans, however.

But yes, that would be a great move.

0 points
0
0
Bert's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:02 pm

Seems like we would get 8-9 really high draft picks that we probably couldn't pay when their rookie contracts expire in four years. A plethora of high draft picks doesn't always pay off either. Sounds interesting but not really economically feasible as you will find yourself in a financial squeeze just as many of your high picks are developing or hitting their peak.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:23 pm

If GB makes this trade, and the biggest flaw is that in 2022 they have to find a way to pay their 8 or 9 stud draft picks who all have proven worthy of big contracts, then Gute makes this trade 100 times out of 100.

0 points
0
0
Andrew Lloyd Peth's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:17 pm

That, Cubby, would be a wonderful problem to have...

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:33 pm

Then you pick your 5 or so best out of the group and either trade the others or let them move on for comp picks. Chances are that of 8-9 higher picks (days 1-2) at least 25% would be misses.

0 points
0
0
Bert's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:30 pm

25% misses would be wishful thinking. More like 50-60% misses would be realistic. So you would be trading a franchise making HOF QB for basically 8-9 draft picks out of which 3-4 would be keepers. No thanks.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:56 pm

Maybe your comment is meant to indicate that you don't have faith in GBs management, but a 50-60% miss rate would be really high, especially considering 4 of those picks would be first rounders.

0 points
0
0
Bert's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:30 pm

25% misses would be wishful thinking. More like 50-60% misses would be realistic. So you would be trading a franchise making HOF QB for basically 8-9 draft picks out of which 3-4 would be keepers. No thanks.

0 points
0
0
Lare's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:07 pm

I think the only way the Packers make such a trade is if they are completely sold on one of the QBs available in the draft. If that's the case, you take him at #1 as you can't take the chance he isn't there at #4 and you're left with someone else you aren't sold on.

But the idea has some merit, spending $100 million (possibly guaranteed) on an aging QB doesn't leave much room for other team improvements.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:26 pm

Yeah, I can see this being true.

I'm of the thought that identifying talent is difficult and that each of the top 4 QB prospects have similar probabilities of becoming a franchise QB. So I'd trade away #1 and allow someone else to pay the premium for selecting 'their guy' without actually increasing the probability of success.

0 points
0
0
carlos's picture

April 17, 2018 at 06:26 pm

Keep Rogers.

0 points
0
0
oceanstrength's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:49 am

Where are the quotes from Rodgers? Amazing that in this day and age, the information age, the pinnicle of human communication, stories fly around without any real direct information.
What if everyone who used the words 'consulted', and 'interesting', created a controversy.
The internet is interesting but they never consult me before sticking an ad into a video I'm watching. Can you tell if I'm frustrated?

0 points
0
0
jyros's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:56 am

Another article simply manufacturing descent by quoting un-named ‘sources close to’.

No doubt AR has been too busy living his off season life
to be shedding tears for lost free agents.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 17, 2018 at 10:57 am

Does management think Arron Rodgers will turn against them like Brett Favre? Arron Rodgers does have a stake into this. He's the employee that makes money for the packers. The Face of the franchise. How much better would Arron Rodgers be!! Arron Rodgers is like their wife. Happy wife, Happy Life. Management must remain creditable in their decisions. That the moves were made for the "Better of the TEAM". They must show Arron Rodgers that they want to win. Pushing him aside does not create a good working environment.

0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:29 pm

Arron Aaron
stake into stake in
that makes who makes
Arron Aaron
Arron Aaron
creditable credible
That the moves... incomplete sentance
Arron Aaron

Just too much to ignore, even on the interweb

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:35 am

Since Rodgers is in Africa doing hearing aid work, he probably hasn't heard what he has said or felt according to a source close to him but apparently not as close as being in Africa...unless...the source is.....DANICA!!!!!......and another girlfriend is undermining the Packers chances to win another SB....my source is the tabloid about UFO's at the checkout counter...I think...do they even have those anymore...let me check another source close to me...psst....E.T.....sorry...his calling home right now.

0 points
0
0
Arthur Jackson's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:06 pm

She is a bears fan, right?

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:39 pm

What in my comment did you read that had you come to that assertion?

0 points
0
0
CJ Bauckham's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:39 pm

I think he heard/read that assertion somewhere else, and only commented to add additional humorous support to your Danica theory

0 points
0
0
Handsback's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:35 am

Too bad, so sad! I really don't care. I would hope that he has realistic expectations and that management has communication channels that they use to discuss personnel moves to the players. He's a player not a coach, what does he expect?

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:37 am

Charles Robinson is an excellent reporter, and Yahoo Sports does great journalism. It is doubtful that this story was posted without adequate sourcing.

Having said that, last week someone posted the point to the effect that a hiring executive would be remiss in not consulting an organization's top employee when releasing/hiring that person's direct supervisor. I believe that applies to the Van Pelt/QB Coach situation. AR most likely knows more about quarterbacking than any QB Coach he will have in the future. To be clear, a QB Coach still has vital functions to perform. However, that person should be someone that AR trusts to fulfill the role.

I have no problem with AR being consulted about issues related to assistant coaches and offensive players. I believe his opinion is relevant and should be sought, in a discreet manner.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:55 pm

Absolutely. 12 isn't a freakish athlete with a low IQ, he has a great football mind. I can't believe how many people comment that 'he should shut up and do his job'. If I'm gute and MM, I'm absolutely consulting with him because I want that perspective and experience. Consulting with him doesn't mean transferring decision making power, it just means you get the guys thoughts and if he pokes a hole in the plan, you adjust.

"Hey Aaron, we're thinking it'll be best if we cut Jordy and sign Jimmy Graham...here's our logic...we know Jordy is your good friend, but from a strategic perspective it allows us to do X, Y and Z. Do you think this makes us better or worse?"

It's not that hard.

0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:32 pm

If you wanted a vested employee's opinion of AVP, why not ask the gum chewer?

He had the most to learn, did AVP develop his knowledge base adequately?

AR already knows more than AVP ever will about playing the QB position at the highest NFL level.

0 points
0
0
Bure9620's picture

April 17, 2018 at 11:55 am

Brady has been through significantly more change and Belichik could give a rip about including him or asking him about personnel decisions, he throws players away like used Kleenex, many of his WRs included.

Even if BG "asked or consulted" Rodgers, what difference does it make?? "Thanks for the input Aaron, we're releasing Jordy, we are doing this anyway!" Players have no business in personnel.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:20 pm

Hmm, lets think about this. Why does Brady have trust? Maybe because he has one of the best football minds in a generation running the show for his team. If Rodgers had the luxury of a Belichik coach/GM and 5 superbowl rings weighing him down, he'd be a lot more trusting of the teams offseason moves.

0 points
0
0
WKUPackFan's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:00 pm

No one knows whether Brady and Belichick discuss everything, nothing at all, or anything in between. Certainly neither of them are going to reveal that information. BB's reputation leads to the perception that he's "players play/coaches coach" old timer. BB may be more enlightened than that, and recognizes that he should use the resource of probably the second most intelligent player in the league.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:22 pm

This is not new news, it's just off season bullshit to fill the void. Nowadays you can't say anything to anyone and it gets out, then it makes headlines. The trend is QB's are lasting longer and the rest are not. Of course players will be let go and it will be up to the star to make it work. IMO the QB has more pressure than anyone and his word should get some attention. AR is a true professional and he will be the least of our worries this year.

0 points
0
0
Electric Packerland's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:32 pm

Totally agree.
I think of it this way: If I have a friendship and a great working relationship with a co-worker, and that co-worker gets transferred to another state, I will surely be "frustrated" and perhaps a little "emotional" about this turn of events. It would be a huge and incorrect leap to say that I'm disgruntled, which is what the clickbait author is trying to imply about AR. He's just having some normal human feelings and nothing more should be read into it unless AR himself comes out and specifically says he's unhappy with management; something I predict he will not do, being the consummate professional that he is.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:00 pm

Every year in Green Bay under MM, they conduct end-of-season individual interviews with every single player on the roster (and PS) and every single coach as well, before MM and his staff go into detailed review of the season to analyze what worked, what didn't, what needs to change, etc going into the offseason.

It is within those one-on-one interviews that every player and coach has an opportunity to put their $0.02 in. If Rodgers, or any other player or coach, has anything to add about how they feel the direction of the team should go, that's the guaranteed opportunity to get it off their chest. It is on Rodgers if he failed to make his opinions on rosters and coaches heard at that time.

Outside of that opportunity, it's like any other business: you can offer your opinion, but decisions are made by management. If Rodgers is indeed upset he wasn't consulted about a roster/coaching change, I'd only reassert what I mentioned when Jordy was released: it is not only unprofessional, but unethical, to discuss a employee's termination with his peers before informing the to-be terminated employee first.

At any rate, I agree this most likely majority media hoopla. Rodgers has two or three very reliable media outlets that typically are where we get information from, typically guys like Jason Wilde. I take the entire report as probably having a very small kernel of truth, but being overblown by exaggeration and assumption for the sake of a story.

0 points
0
0
Cubbygold's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:34 pm

So I'm the most valuable employee in the company and my boss walks in and says "Hey, I'm thinking about letting Bill go. That area of the business is slowing us down and we need someone with a more impactful skillset to take us to the next level. I was talking to Tom and he's looking for a career move. You think that would be the right step to take?"

That is somehow unethical and a bad business move?

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 17, 2018 at 04:54 pm

If Bill is is your subordinate, if you manage bill, no, that's not unethical, because bill works under you.

If Bill is your peer, you have no say in his employment, and if the decision to fire Bill has been made, it is extremely unethical to tell you "Just so you know, I'm going to fire bill" before Bill has been told he's being let go by management.

I can't imagine you'd think it was ethical if your co-worker walked up to you and said, "Hey, the manager told me he's going to fire you tomorrow after work." You'd probably think to yourself, "Why would my boss think it's okay to tell my co-workers I'm being fired before telling me?"

Aaron Rodgers doesn't hire, he doesn't fire. If management decides they want to ask Rodgers for his feelings about others, that is at their discretion. However, if someone is going to be fired, you don't go tell their co-workers and peers before you tell them. That is a matter for management.

0 points
0
0
Arthur Jackson's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:07 pm

They should just cut him and move on.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:25 pm

You are obviously going for the dislike record,lmao. Good luck!

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:28 pm

Another Click Bait article which originated at Bleacher Report. Their article adds nothing to the Rodgers interview with Hog and is all speculation based on Rodgers stating that “coaches coach, players play, that’s the way they want it”

For such an innocuous comment and interview to be turned into this ridiculous frantic attempt at a story just proves to me how desperate the Packers media is to generate some copy at this time of year.

How about in the next article we use the title “Rodgers considering leaving GreenBay over Van Pelt decision”.

This is stupid and quite frankly disrespectful to Packers fans, bloggers and readers to put this mindless, speculative, drivel out there.

Give some real information about how Bulaga, M. Adams or King or other injured players are progressing with their injury recovery. In other words do some actual work instead of tagging on to BS from Bleacher report or wherever.

Sorry to rant, but enough is enough already. Thanks, Since ‘61

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:02 pm

Rare to see something draw your ire!

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:45 pm

Oppy - I have come to expect better from the CHTV team. We previously hashed this out in an article just a few days ago. Plus just because Rodgers made the comment he made during the Hog interview doesn't mean that he is angry and frustrated, at least he didn't sound that way during the interview.

I'm going to give the author a pass due to the off season and agree that Rodgers is probably disappointed with the way the Packers handled Jordy and Van Pelt, although we were also told Van Pelt told MM he was moving on during the season.

So let's say Rodgers was disappointed or even angry, guess what he is a big boy and he will get over it. Does anyone really expect Rodgers to come to TC and then into the season pouting over Jordy? Was he upset over Jennings leaving in FA or Drivers retirement. Was he consulted about not resigning Jennings? Did he pout over Lacy? He will move on and be fine.

Beyond Rodgers, does anyone expect CM3 to be upset over the trade of Damarious Randall. Was he consulted? Is he frustrated and angry? Did anyone ask Clay? Who knows? Who cares?

My ire\frustration comes from how far are we going to go with this comment? We might as well make it out to be a crime or politically incorrect, God forbid. When I think of all the stupid comments and/or actual crimes professional athletes have said or committed this interview with Rodgers isn't even worth mentioning. It is just the media taking advantage of our fanship and our time. Good writers should have more respect for their audience. Oppy you are a credit to our blog and I look forward to reading your posts. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:10 pm

I agree with everyhthing you stated, Since '61.

There's often a critique of local WI media that they aren't tough on the Packers for fear of being black-balled and cut out of media relations, and there is some truth to that.

However, I believe some of that critique is misplaced and comes from the fact that we're generally spoiled from having a long history of excellent sports coverage in this state, specifically in the form of great sports writing. Too often, people from the outside who critique the local coverage as "soft" are comparing it to the likes of "New York reporting" or "national media", which, quite frankly, is often over-the-top sensationalism and laced with muck-raking. There is a reason Packers beat writers end up only staying here a few seasons before moving on- WI readers demand sound reporting and the local beat writers are typically quite good, and they are scooped up by big market news because they are fine journalists.

Sensationalized stories (like this one) are common in other markets, but don't often pass the sniff test here. We tend to like facts in our sports writing, and while we don't mind some conjecture, we prefer it not be dressed up as though it is anything but.

Thanks for the kind words. You're probably the most widely respected poster on this site.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 06:50 pm

Oppy - your comment is very much appreciated. I think you are correct about the Wisconsin media. They are generally very good. That was part of my disappointment with all the conjecture they presented in this issue. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:11 pm

Made CNN. There is a Burr under his saddle. And Jordy nelson is the name of it!

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:45 pm

With their rep lately, I'm not sure this changes the validity of the story all that much.

They may have sourced their story with the original author, and didn't independently verify it with their own reports. (More than likely)

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:47 pm

Fin - I suspect that you are 100% correct and that is part of my frustration with this entire episode. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:43 pm

Deleted, double post. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Johnblood27's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:42 pm

Really, really FAKE news outlet...

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

April 17, 2018 at 12:44 pm

AR was late to a team meeting. Danica said, I'll drive you. She got pulled over for going 197 in a 45.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:48 pm

If Danica was doing 197 there is no way the police could have caught up to her to pull her over. Even a helicopter would have a problem at that speed.
But at least, if true it would be a better story then turning Rodger's comments into he is angry and frustrated, blah, blah, blah.

I wonder if Rodgers knows or cares that his interview has caused this unnecessary banter. Remember whether in Green Bay or eventually some other NFL city he is laughing all the way to the bank. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

April 17, 2018 at 04:15 pm

He knows '61. As I said up thread, I believe 'the source' was his agent looking to gin up contract talks. Pretty typical with the way the NFL works. I saw Robinson's byline on this, he usually does not do these kind third party message story's. Like you, I was disappointed with both Robinson and the CHTV writer on this. Chalk it up to the curse of the internet news cycle.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 06:52 pm

Agreed. At least it is over now, thanks to Rodgers. Since '61

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

April 17, 2018 at 04:30 pm

I forgot to add that AR shit in his pants. Now has a huge endorsment with Charmin.

0 points
0
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:38 pm

It's worth discussing again whether the Jordy move helped the team There's nothing out there better than Jordy right now so we're left hoping a young receiver is an immediate success. Rarely happens. I still believe Jordy should not have been let go until a suitable replacement, drafted this year, had at least a year of experience. Rodgers is supersmart. He knows full well he won't have the same rapport with any new receiver and that Geronimo Allison is just a guy. If I was him I'd be pissed. WR is as big a need as CB or Edge. Davante is really good but he's not Julio or Odell. Drafting a speed receiver with upside and using Jordy as best needed would have been the way to go and I don't see how we've been improved, and I doubt Rodgers does. Should he show his frustration? I'd prefer he didn't, but that's not Rodgers way. He doesn't hide his feelings well. When the bell rings though he'll play his ass off. He's too proud not to.

0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:52 pm

The worst part about letting Jordy go was Geronimo is JAG, and any receiver in the draft is a development talent, and likely not an immediate impact.

They just didn't want him, bottom line. And if they saw in practice, what I saw in games after Hundley took over, it's probably justified to cut him.
He was awful - and I LOVED the guy!

0 points
0
0
Couch Cleats's picture

April 17, 2018 at 01:39 pm

IMO there are only a handful of players that put in the extra time and have the experience and intellect to contribute to personnel matters.

Rodgers at this point in his career might be one of them. Even so, the most I would offer as a GM would be to possibly sit down with him pre draft and ask "of all the receivers in the league that you see on film, is there anyone that you watch an say "man, if only we had a guy like that"?

If there is a particular skill set that Rodgers thinks could really make a difference with the offense then I would ask my scouts to go find the next version of that player and let's take a look.

It would also be wise to get his feedback on the toughest guys to complete a pass against. His input on topics like that are unique because scouts and coaches don't play the game at a Hall of Fame level like he does.

As far as which players to keep and when to move on (like Jordy) - NO player should ever get to make that call and I would not even ask for their input as a GM.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

April 17, 2018 at 05:13 pm

I could not agree more, Couch Cleats.

0 points
0
0
Ustabeayooper's picture

April 17, 2018 at 02:56 pm

This speculation article is part of the "silly season". Sports writers have to do something during the off season. AR is the highest profile player on the most visible team in the NFL. So why not try and make chicken salad out of chickens---. Mr. Robinson has to justify his existence. The contract will get done. Remember that winning fixes everything.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

April 17, 2018 at 03:51 pm

Agree totally. "Silly season" = sillier media, if that's even possible.
Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0