Will Rodgers Play the Covid Opt-Out Card?

The NFL and the NFLPA reached a side agreement on Covid opt-out rules for 2021 last Tuesday.  Players have until Friday, July 2, to opt out for 2021.  It appears that Aaron Rodgers can opt out if he desires, according to Mike Florio.  So, what would be the pros and cons for the team and for Rodgers if he opted out?

Rodgers would not be subject to any fines.  He could keep the $6.8 million roster bonus (for now).  He would not be subject to forfeiture: that is, he would not have to repay his signing bonus if he plays somewhere in 2022.  He would not have to play for the Packers in 2021, and probably can expect to be traded in 2022, though that might depend on circumstance.  The only pain he inflicts on the front office (and there is no reason to believe that he wants his teammates to do poorly) depends on how the Packers fare in terms of wins and playoff success in 2021 without him.  Time will not stand still, so Rodgers would be a full year older when he returns to play (somewhere) in 2022.  That might affect his career statistics and goals; after all, he would have one year less to accomplish any goals and he has a finite number of seasons left.  If he opts out, he cannot play in 2021: he cannot change his mind and return in 2021.

The Packers would save $29.9 million on the salary cap in 2021 and $9.45 million more in 2022.  His $37.202 million salary cap number for 2021 would be reduced by the $500,000 workout bonus he has already lost to $36.7M while his roster bonus would still count against the cap, for a net of $29.902 million in savings.  Since the contract tolls, his 2022 cap number would no longer be $39.852 million.  Instead, it would be his 2021 cap number of $37.2 million ($2.65M less), further decreased by the $6.8 million paid in 2021, for a net of $30.405 million instead.  $39.852 million (his previously scheduled cap number) minus his new $30.405 million cap number for 2022 provides $9.45 million in savings in 2022.  Total cap savings would be $39.35 million over the two seasons.

The Packers could still trade Rodgers in 2022 when it would be more advantageous for the team since there should be more suitors.  His dead money would be $31.556 million ($14.352 million times two plus the $2.852 million proration in his final year on this contract) which would produce a negative cap savings of $1.15 million ($31.556 - $30.405 million).  That would reduce total cap savings over the two seasons from the $39.35 million (above) to $38.25 million.  

The Packers could also make a trade in 2022 effective after June if the acquiring team would be that kind.  Trades cannot be designated for post June, so it would be awkward, but I assume even though Rodgers would technically still a Packer he could study the acquiring team's playbook and attend if not participate in May OTAs.  Trading Rodgers post-June would push $17.202 million in dead money into 2023 and turn the $1.15 million negative savings into another $16.05 million in cap space for 2022.  That would mean the total cap savings over two seasons would be $55.4 million (with $17.2 million dead in 2023).  Here is a link to an article Jason Fitzgerald wrote on the ramifications of Rodgers deciding to opt out.

The downside for the Packers would be the loss of Aaron Rodgers' play and the effect that might have on their win/loss record and playoff success.  Another possible downside depends on how the coaches view Jordan Love.  Do they think he is not ready or that starting him in 2021 would be bad for him?  Would the Packers spend any of the cap savings on free agents?  Is there a scenario under which Rodgers opts out but is the starting quarterback for the Packers in 2022?  Would Rodgers' trade value be reduced either by virtue of being a year older and/or rusty or because some teams might consider opting out an extreme move? 

I have no way to know whether Rodgers is mad enough at the front office to opt out.  It certainly should galling to him if the Packers were to reach the conference championship game or the super bowl with Jordan Love or Blake Bortles at quarterback.  

  

NFL Categories: 
8 points

Comments (93)

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

June 28, 2021 at 10:30 am

All roads lead to the same place, and that place doesn’t include #12 in a Packers jersey.

Regardless of whether The Plan had Love starting in 2022 or not, Rodgers has forced the issue a year early. I know he’s famous for having a chip on his shoulder, but he’s going to lose serious money if he doesn’t show up. He’s stubborn, maybe, but not stupid. He’ll show up before he starts losing game checks.

When he does show up, I think they’ll trade him. I can’t imagine they think he can lead this team to the Promsed Land after this, unless it ends pronto and Rodgers commits to the team.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Once training camp starts, once we have some exhibitions, if Love looks competent …….I’ve said before that Denver cannot compete in their division with Bilgewater and Lock.. Rodgers for Chubb and Surtain, Adams straight up for Jeudy. That’s Elways best play.

-8 points
9
17
Guam's picture

June 27, 2021 at 10:52 pm

I think you are pretty much spot on Leatherhead. The only quibble I might have is the Chubb and Surtain for Rodgers (and probably some draft choices) trade. I question whether Denver will give up much in the way of existing starters in a trade for Rodgers. Doesn't giving up current players defeat their purpose of competing for a Super Bowl now? I suspect Elway would rather mortgage Denver's future by giving away lots of draft choices rather than surrender players he will need for a Super Bowl push this year.

2 points
6
4
Leatherhead's picture

June 27, 2021 at 06:25 pm

The only player they’d be giving up is Stubbs. Surtain is the #1 pick. So Denver dramatically improves for the overall cost of two high first round picks. Packers add two very good defenders to a defense that already has several.

2 points
4
2
Guam's picture

June 27, 2021 at 10:53 pm

You are splitting hairs LH. Denver would still effectively be giving up two starters as I am certain they plan to start Surtain this year (their corners weren't good last year). I think Denver would prefer giving up future draft choices to losing two starters on defense. I would love for the Packers to get Chubb and Surtain, I just don't think Denver would relinquish both of them. (BTW, its Chubb not Stubbs isn't it?)

4 points
4
0
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:15 pm

Hey Guam & Leatherhead.
Been following the trending in terms of what DEN might be inclined to give up. 3 R1s and a player seems to be the consensus, or where prognosticators tend to lean of late. There are questions as to the price possibly being 2 players, 3 R1s.

DEN signed plenty of FA help in their secondary in Ronald Darby and Kyle Fuller this offseason to whether a loss. Surtain ll seems attainable in trade. Chubb and Surtain ll together would likely save DEN one of those picks.

Tough to say what kind of offer would get the Packers’ attention, but it should be a compelling mix of players/picks.

Just FYI

2 points
2
0
Stroh's picture

June 27, 2021 at 11:26 pm

If the trade were to happen it will be next year. But playing in this fantasy if Surtain is part of the deal, it would mean Stokes goes to Denver. That is the #9 over all pick in exchange for the #29 overall. That is in effect a 1st rd pick. Then throw Chubb in the deal and another 1st rd in 22 which w/ Rodgers would be a mid to late 20's overall and probably a 2nd or 3rd.

The Packers wont trade Rodgers this year, because what they would get are picks in next years draft and if they have Rodgers that pick is worth A LOT less, than if the broncos had to start Drew Lock for a year. A late 20s pick isn't worth nearly as much as a top 10 pick. That is a large part of the reason a trade won't happen w/ Rodgers untill next offseason! Not too mention there would be many more teams in the discussion for Rodgers which would drive the trade cost up and give the Packers a better return.

8 points
9
1
dobber's picture

June 28, 2021 at 05:46 am

With what's starting to size up as a weaker QB draft on the top end in 2022 and with so many young QBs in the league on the tipping point with regard to their production and evaluation, it will drive up #12s value on the trade market in February.

8 points
9
1
Leatherhead's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:37 am

Why would we send Stokes? That makes no sense for us.

Our secondary, for the next several years, could be Alexander, Surtain, Stokes, Adams, Savage, with Stokes and Surtain.

I'd rather get proven players than draft picks, and I'd rather get high first round picks instead of lower ones. If this trade goes through, Denver is drafting after #25....That's what you want for Rodgers?

No. Surtain and Chubb are two proven players who would help our defense for several years. Denver gets to hang onto their future picks.

You don't think the Packers will trad Rodgers this year: I'm wondering if they'd let him come back now after this fit of pique where he criticized the culture of the organization. Why would you want a person who has done and said the things Rodgers has leading your team and being the face of the franchise? To me, that makes little sense. I'd rather go 5-12 , personally.

-1 points
4
5
Stroh's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:54 am

Surtain Stokes and Alexander are all boundary CB! They can't all play at once. Slot CB or the Star CB role is very different from boundary CB. You don't just take an outside guy and stick him inside and say go play. Its just not that easy.

So Sending Stokes for Surtain make all the sense in the world!!

0 points
1
1
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 06:19 pm

I don’t think so, Stroh.

From what I’ve read on him, Patrick Surtain ll can play anywhere. He’s more like a Charles Woodson-type player, who really can play every position in the secondary. He’d be perfect at “Star.”

6-2 208 4.46 40 time. More comparable to another “Star” player in Jalen Ramsey, who is nearly identical in size & speed. His attributes are perfect there. Easy hip flip to transition anywhere, with great hands & timing in coverage.

Plus, there’s no way in hell I’d give up Stokes.

2 points
2
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

June 28, 2021 at 01:15 pm

Chubb is one of the few guys from Denver I would take who is not on a Rookie deal.

1 points
1
0
Bure9620's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:33 pm

Very possible, if he wants to absolutely be a distraction, goes scorched earth and pees in everyone's cheerios when he shows up, they will indeed trade him. Not sure he does that though. I think Rodgers shows up sometime around the 2nd preseason game and pretends there is not issue at all....

8 points
9
1
Qoojo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 06:07 pm

I view it in terms of how long Rodgers has left to play. Does Rodgers think he can play to 45? We know at least 40 for sure. Maybe 42 is closer to reality. I don't think Rodgers will opt-out because it's too costly in terms of the time that he has left. At 37, Rodgers is old enough to know the clock is ticking. Sitting out a year means 20% of his remaining time left went down the drain.

This possibility is more about the turd named Florio churning his bullshit for clicks and to get on TV. Talking heads have to talk. Some are literally only around to say dumb stuff to outrage people (e.g. Skip Bayless).

17 points
18
1
Packers0808's picture

June 27, 2021 at 06:26 pm

At this point let Rodgers come back and carry a clip board for all I care by now! The drama queen man bun show has gotten old with his grand daughter hanging on his arm!

2 points
13
11
nygary's picture

June 27, 2021 at 06:43 pm

Love your comment Packers 0808. I have been saying the same thing since the draft. He is an excellent QB, but i think of him as such an asshole.

3 points
11
8
jhtobias's picture

June 27, 2021 at 06:46 pm

This is an option if his mind has already been made that he will not be playing for the packers in 2021 then i understand the logic ..

Rodgers and his agent and maybe they already have told Murphy and Gutey that I will be using the opt out option and announcing it July 2nd so you can trade me before then, or will do the same song and dance next year.

If Rodgers has truly decided her under no circumstance will be playing in Green Bay this year, regardless of money, signing his buddies letting him control the draft or whatever has been offered to him I hope he uses this option. Also if Green Bay knows he will never show up and they will never trade him this year then it benefits both parties.

The distraction then is over, and let the chips fall where they must this season.

7 points
8
1
stockholder's picture

June 27, 2021 at 06:48 pm

I'd still opt out . Then play; I'm going to retire! Then un retire. (Like Favre. Next year.) JUST- Take the money and run. I'd screw Gute up with every "cap way" possible. He'll trade him. There is No light at the end of the tunnel. The packers made this a 1 year stop now. Somebody will always take a chance on RODGERS, if he wants to play. Next year; 1/2 this team will change anyway. There is No future for Rodgers in Green Bay now. No statue. No Bull shit. This FO will be criticized forever, on how they wasted 2 MVP Hall of Fame QBs.

-2 points
10
12
jannes bjornson's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:10 pm

Bullseye.

1 points
4
3
Stroh's picture

June 27, 2021 at 08:28 pm

You and stockholder are going to eat your words! Rodgers will play and play his best in GB this season.

The opt out is an option but for Rodgers not a very desirable one. Rodgers cares about his legacy A LOT! If he opts out and never plays in GB again, his legacy is that he gave Packers fans the finger! He won't do it IMO.

If Rodgers wants out of GB next year, the Packers will be in better bargaining position to trade him. A trade this year is out of the question!

He will be a Packer in 2021. Beyond that its very much up in the air. That is the reason Rodgers hasn't reported. He wants a guarantee he'll end his career a Packer. But drafting Love means the Packers can't give him that.

If Rodgers plays this year it's in GB, and if he doesn't he's telling Packer fans and his teammates to F Off and his legacy is completely shot to hell.

9 points
11
2
Crankbait's picture

June 28, 2021 at 07:47 am

The realists will criticize the Packers for wasting two Hall of Fame quarterback's. The cheese and wine crowd in Green Bay will think otherwise and the FO knows this.

0 points
2
2
Eric Zenk's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:14 am

In my opinion most of this 'blame the FO crap' falls on Thompson not Gute. Gute has done everything he could ‘to this point in time’ to help HOF QB 2 – Rodgers! From spending money to fix a defense by bringing in the Smith brothers and Amos. By resigning Bak, Jones and Clark. By drafting primarily for defense the past two drafts. By pushing cap charges into 2022 and 2023 simply to keep this team intact for one more run in 2021 while bringing back player favorites like Mercedes Lewis.

What more could Gute possibly done? Please do tell. If Rodgers is stuck in the ‘woe is me and the Pack FO sucks mode', fine move on from him. The Packers have been around for 100+ and will be here long after we’re dead and buried. The team and organization come first. And I don’t care if Favre or Rodgers are big stars. I call BS on that crap where you have to treat your stars differently. Treating them differently is exactly how these guys get big heads and egos.

Would Lombardi have put up with this? I think you know the answer if you look at how Lombardi handled players, their contracts and their egos. Some say Lombardi could never coach in the 21st Century, but they forget one big thing, he adapted to his players and usually got the most out of each player. Those traits work in any era.

0 points
3
3
White92's picture

June 28, 2021 at 06:55 pm

Is "what more could Gutey have possibly done" a serious question? Trading UP for a questionable QB prospect burning draft picks to do so is hardly doing all he could to get to another SB while Rodgers is here. In fact, the move was more like something you'd see out of Ryan Pace.

Putting the organization first would be getting as many weapons as you can while you have a HOF QB, not trading assets for a hope and a prayer 3 years later.

0 points
2
2
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 08:15 pm

"Questionable" QB prospect would be your opinion. They did not trade up in the first to get Jodan Love because they had a ton of unanswered questions about him. They went up to get him because that is Gute's guy. Of course we don't know how he will pan out which you could say about literally any draft pick and every QB selected every year. Half flame out.......

2 points
2
0
White92's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:35 pm

Well that's the point. He gave up a pick for a guy that's a crapshoot a couple of years down the road while his current team was a player or two shy of the SB. How do you make that trade and pick knowing the guy would be inactive every week?

I don't like the way Rodgers is behaving one bit, but I also think the GMs move in 2020 was a boneheaded and perhaps fireable offense.

-1 points
1
2
Bure9620's picture

June 29, 2021 at 05:47 am

Many said the same of Ted Thompson

0 points
1
1
greengold's picture

June 29, 2021 at 07:06 am

White92, isn’t every QB a crap shoot early in their career?

Why did the Packers take him? Aaron Rodgers was 37 years old, coming off an injury, we needed to add another franchise QB to take over for AR anyway at some point, and Jordan Love was perfect for what LaFleur wanted to do.

Who is that one player you would have taken instead? These arguments are empty without offering up an alternative.

Few if any saw Love being the pick. I wanted either WR Michael Pittman Jr. or RB Clyde Edwards-Helaire at #30. Firm.

After getting over my own initial shock that the Packers took Jordan Love, I can’t really argue against it, given the importance of the QB position, and the value of his drop of at least 20 draft positions.

The value of that drop was equal to about 3 R1s to the Packers for the #3 QB in the draft with the strongest arm in the draft.

0 points
1
1
gmeyers1's picture

June 28, 2021 at 07:20 pm

Yes, Lombardi could coach today. No, he didn't treat everybody the same. Hornung was his untouchable.

1 points
1
0
flackcatcher's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:04 pm

Thanks TGR for the nice overview. While this does give one other option to Rodgers, all in all, it's pretty thin gruel for him. His choices remain much the same since the beginning of this petty drama. Report and play, or sit out and waste a year. Rodgers made those choices when he signed his contract. The longer this goes on, the more leverage the Packers have over him toward him. Damn fool...

9 points
10
1
stockholder's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:08 pm

Maybe not. They just might remove Gute as Rodgers requested. Cap Hell will cause panic.

-11 points
2
13
packer132's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:45 pm

Gute is not going anywhere, and is highly respected throughout the league by other GM's. Just because you hate him means zero.Rodgers even told James Jones that Gute is not the problem. Murphy is the one that he has a bone to pick with. Packers were $35 million over the cap in March and found a way to get back to even. That's not the #1 concern today, as there is the QB problem to fix and then worry about roster cuts.

6 points
7
1
Stroh's picture

June 27, 2021 at 11:33 pm

Only you would actually believe the packers would fire Gutey to appease Rodgers!!! In ABSOLUTELY will not happen!!!

6 points
7
1
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 08:17 pm

No, that would set a terrible precedent not just for the franchise but for the league.....Others owners would take issue with a player having the power get a GM fired. NBA super stars don't even have that type of power.

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:11 pm

That's a great phrase: thin gruel for AR. The whole problem I have with trying to understand how this whole situation plays out is that it seems irrational in the first place. [I don't mean to imply that there is no reason for AR to be upset or that GB gave him reason to be upset.] Murphy's statement that the Packers aren't idiots (and have at least collectively some spine) seems likely to be true. AR's options mostly stink. GB's options aren't very good short of Jordan Love being good, if not in 2021, then during his rookie deal.

Neither side has good options. Isn't that why unhappy marriages endure?

8 points
8
0
flackcatcher's picture

June 28, 2021 at 11:28 am

I've been doing some digging on the timeline here, talking to my friends around the league, and it's not a pretty picture at all. To be blunt, Rodgers felt the Packers pulled a bait and switch on him on his contract. Not on the contract numbers, but the length of the deal. Whatever verbal or handshake deal Rodgers and his agent had with Murphy, went out the window with the hiring of Brian Gutekunst as VP of Football Operations. (By the way, the same thing happened to HC Matt Lafleur) While Rodgers (and Lafleur) might have had agreements with Murphy, they didn't have them with Gutekunst. And that's been at the root of Rodgers actions since last year. At least, that's what I have been told. Like everything else we get, it's all second or third hand information. So, take it like with a large grain of salt.

-2 points
2
4
jannes bjornson's picture

June 28, 2021 at 07:43 pm

Whatever you say, Mark.

-1 points
0
1
flackcatcher's picture

June 29, 2021 at 10:23 am

AND as usual, you miss the point Jannie. Both sides are starting to backfill with excuses now. It's the beginning of the end game, otherwise stories like this does not leak.

0 points
0
0
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 07:56 pm

Gutekunst is the GM. His role is purely personnel.

2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

June 29, 2021 at 10:29 am

...and ARod signed his deal 8 months after Gutey became the GM. I think it highly unlikely that he got stiffed in some way unless he had a deal ironed out and Murphy came back and 'adjusted' it...whatever the case, #12 still agreed to it.

2 points
2
0
flackcatcher's picture

June 29, 2021 at 10:47 am

The entire timing of the deal was weird. It was actually done in 2017. The signing was done in 2018 due to waiting for Thompson to clear Cap room, and other Cap stuff. There was a lot of press on it at the time. (That presser with Murphy was down right strange. Claiming he did not negotiate but was in the room. And having Ball next to him saying he did not cut the deal. Just very strange at the time)

0 points
0
0
flackcatcher's picture

June 29, 2021 at 10:34 am

Normally, that would true. But the Rodgers contract has become a problem for both Mark Murphy and the Executive Committee who authorized Murphy to make the deal in the first place. If you look at Gunstkunst's timeline since his hiring, he has gained a great deal of power on the contract side at the expense of Mark Murphy. If anything, it's a return to the Wolf/Thompson style GM the Packers have run since the mid 90s. To put it bluntly, Gute's becomes the Executive Committee clean up man. Questions is, what happens after that.

0 points
0
0
Amy Berk's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:12 pm

The Broncos are waiting for him on July 2nd. I get to listen to Denver sports radio and here how stupid GB is as Rodgers will opt out and play for the Broncos..

If AR plays for the Broncos they will be SB material this year.

I prefer AR to play for the Packers. even with all this media drama.

-4 points
1
5
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:24 pm

If AR opts out, AR cannot play for any team in the NFL in 2021. Period. He cannot change his mind. It is a done deal if he opts out.

6 points
6
0
Leatherhead's picture

June 28, 2021 at 06:43 pm

Exactly. That’s why he won’t do it.

Rodgers has to rejoin the team. The Opt-out or threat of retirement will not get him what he wants. Once he rejoins the team, then the Packers have to make a decision.

1 points
1
0
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 07:57 pm

Read the CBA......

1 points
1
0
TarynsEyes's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:19 pm

"he has a finite number of seasons left."

This type of thought or belief always seems to pop up while ignoring that the same has been said about Brady for going on near 10 years. How many years equals 'finite'?

Manning and Brees suffered issues with their throwing shoulders, neck. Rodgers isn't throwing any ducks on a consistent basis as the two mentioned. Things may change, but to suggest such with the 'finite' years is a tad premature.

-1 points
6
7
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 08:39 pm

Hi Taryn.

The whole idea of Tom Brady is annoying. He is the outlier of the outliers. Maybe Brady can play even when he is eligible for Medicare (which might be a moving target). I thought someone would take issue with that sentence.

I may have to stop working tomorrow due to some misfortune, or perhaps in 3 more years, or 8 more years. I look at the probabilities and try to have a plan for as many scenarios as possible. I assume that AR does as well.

6 points
7
1
TarynsEyes's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:34 pm

I also planned for what might come early as best I could while planning for a longer time. Brady may be the outlier, but outliers can create procreation in sports. What was believed impossible by one always breeds another and another and ...

1 points
5
4
PewAuKeeFan's picture

June 27, 2021 at 10:34 pm

TGR: TarynsEyes enjoys being miserable, and will spout anything to validate that miserable-ness. That is one fact that has been well established.

0 points
5
5
Eric Zenk's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:21 am

He's injury prone though. The older you get, the more difficult it is to avoid injury. And speaking from experience with my service connected disability, my back and legs will never be the same after the spinal fusion surgery I had to have due to the training I endured for 20+ years. It's only going to get worse as I age as will Rodgers shoulder, knees etc.

8 points
8
0
flackcatcher's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:09 am

UGH. Please don't remind me of my future.... :-0

3 points
3
0
BrettGB's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:38 pm

It's interesting for sure, but I do think Rodgers wants to play in 2021. the only way he'd opt out, that I can see, is if he wants to show the Packers what things are like without him in hopes that they'll give him whatever he's currently asking for in 2022. But I don't think he'd want to punt on an entire season with no chance to return until next year.

7 points
7
0
joejetson's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:39 pm

These Rodgers stories are nothing but conjecture. There are, however some actual facts to consider. Rodgers is 37 and will, sooner than later, have to be replaced. Rodgers has been on the losing side of five NFC Championship Games, admittedly not all his fault, but he hasn't made the.Big Play to win some of them. When both Rodgers and Favre took over as starting QB, they did not immediately become winners. At some point, Love will become the starter. There will definitely be growing pains for him, but he is young and talented, and deserves a fair shot to compete for the QB job. You cannot let Rodgers dictate the long term future of the Packers.His job is (or should be) to honor the contract he willfully signed, and to compete for a.job like 90 other players. Frankly, a lot of us are sick of the Pouty Boy routine. S... or get off the pot.

16 points
17
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 08:11 pm

My article is about a new development now that Covid opt-out rules have been ironed out. The purpose is to inform the readers of a new option AR has while laying out the cap ramifications with lots of hard numbers.

To be sure, you're not wrong to suggest that there is some conjecture but I did my best to shy away from suggesting which motivations might be uppermost in AR's mind since I do not know Rodgers from Adam (what's the etymology of that phrase?). I confess, I thought of LH and GG when I wrote the last line (about reaching the conf. championship game with Love or Bortles at QB), but while I have an opinion about how the Packers would fare without AR, it was mostly for comic relief. Mind, my teenager keeps imploring me: 'Dad, don't try to be funny on the website' but I keep ignoring him. Tit for tat, I suppose.

7 points
7
0
Leatherhead's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:46 am

I like how you try to lay out the facts, and then state your personal bias. It's more honest than simply asserting opinions as facts.

It seems choosing the opt out accomplishes nothing for Rodgers.
It seems it would improve the Packers salary cap situation.

If he retires, Packers get even more salary relief.
If he returns......then the organization has to make a decision. My biased opinion is that the 1265 brass might be happier if he's gone. I'd be double damned if I ever let a person who had publicly criticized the culture of the organization blackmail me into doing what they want. Screw them. Retire. I'll go with your replacement and use the money I save to make the team stronger.

5 points
6
1
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 11:11 am

TGR has made his feelings known consistently that he thinks the best case scenario is AR returning to play for the Packers this year. I agree that might have been the case, but a lot has changed with the discourse between AR and the team. None of us knows anything about the status of a possible return. We're all left to guess.

I agree the opt out doesn't help AR, and doubt highly he would employ that, unless he just wants to take the year off.

The only benefit the opt-out gives AR is time to make his next moves. That's it. Plan for retirement, etc. That is a possibility, but, I suspect he would rather play for another team than sit out, and that he would rather sit out than play again for the Packers, as he has already put out into the world through intermediaries, unchecked by him.

This is one of the weirdest scenarios any of us NFL fans have known, in the history of the game.

I also agree the Packers FO might like to put this behind them and not have him play for them this season, given all that has taken place since Draft Day1... we don't know, but that is likely.

While their public statements may be that they want him to return, other team statements can be construed as slights towards AR. Doesn't point to there being a mending of fences.

As you mention here, AR has his own public statements slamming the Packers FO. Personally, I find them to be deflections from the real crux of the biscuit: that they probably don't want to live in Green Bay, and that he doesn't want to play football here anymore.

Put it this way, do you think he would want to stay if his fiancé wanted him to? There would be no pulling him away.

I think it is as simple as that.

0 points
2
2
Leatherhead's picture

June 28, 2021 at 11:33 am

I think the crux of the biscuit is that he isn't winning these games that get us to the Super Bowl, and it's been 10 years and the organization isn't going to commit money to him to keep coming up short. IOW, he's going to be replaced because he's old and expensive, just like a lot of other people. He's still a real good QB but he's getting paid to lead the team to a Super Bowl and that hasn't happened.

If we'd won in 2019, or 2020, or even this year, I think it's entirely possible the organization might have been willing to throw in more money and keep him here. But that didn't happen.

So Rodgers wants to "pull a Favre" and go somewhere else . But he's under contract ....a contract that he signed just a short time ago.

We fired a coach for him. We put a good ground game around him and a good defense on the field. Still no results. Now we're supposed to fire the GM, get Zach Ertz, and trade Love away? Seriously?

3 points
4
1
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 11:54 am

Oh, I think all this talk about trading Love away is ridiculous. Same for the other BS of bending over backwards to appease him talk.

All the other stuff you're saying has merit to it, but, we don't know for sure what the FO is thinking. We can only guess. Same on AR.

I still find that draft day bombshell curious. AR's failure to make any attempt to squash that gives it credence as being truthful. He's had all kinds of opportunities.

Looks to me like he just wants out, never to return, and that he's willing to assign all of the blame on the Packers FO.

Personally, I think his methods are fucking bullshit, and that he's already jumped the shark. I'd prefer we trade him tomorrow, given his actions, stance and his MO. None of it seems forthright to me.

-1 points
1
2
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 08:24 pm

I think Murphy and possibly Russ Ball would be happier he is gone. I think they are actually even willing to sacrifice possibly a year of mediocrity for future success. I actually believe Gute believes Love is indeed the future of the franchise but is very tentative having the future be now.

1 points
1
0
CHEESEHEADDALLAS's picture

June 28, 2021 at 06:56 am

Amen In other words don't let the door hit you where the good lord split you.

1 points
3
2
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 07:59 pm

The loss to Brady at home will put Rodgers legacy in perspective........

2 points
2
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 07:52 pm

This looks like Greengold's dream scenario to me. Love will be good and this pretty much eliminates GB's cap issues. Gute no doubt has a plan to close the remaining gap in 2021 and the $35M+ deficit for 2022. Currently, that might include getting $22M in cap relief from a March trade of AR but an opt-out should provide at least $38M in relief.

If AR's number one priority is not to play for GB to the exclusion of other considerations (not necessarily a given), this makes a lot of sense. He would face no fines, wouldn't have to pay back the $6.8M roster bonus, and wouldn't have to pay back any of his signing bonus money as long as he played for a team in 2022.

Opting out makes more sense than just holding out for the entire year. I see no way for the Packers to trade AR this year. AR could retire and then unretire week 8 or so (the Veldheer scenario), but that is really messy for his reputation as it would be transparently nasty.

If I were a betting person, my money would be placed on AR starting game one and playing every game as long as he is healthy, save for a game that doesn't matter late in the season or a half in a blowout so LaFleur can get a good look at Love in a real game. My second choice for likeliest to happen would be opting out.

To be honest, I did not think the NFL would agree to another opt-out except for high-risk players and/or something limited to players who opted last year or have high risk, so this option was not on my radar.

8 points
8
0
flackcatcher's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:31 am

I have told that the NFL/NFLPA had a verbal agreement for a second opt out in place last year, to be formalized at the beginning of this season. With uncertainly of reopening, and many players and their family medical conditions, it made sense for both the league and the players. It was older players like Rodgers who pushed for this last year. Folks forget how close the league came to not playing last year.

2 points
2
0
Bure9620's picture

June 28, 2021 at 08:27 pm

Well said. However, I think Gute's plan may be much simpler. He intended to trade Rodgers all along and alleviate the imminent 2022 cap hit Rodgers creates.

0 points
0
0
The_Justicar's picture

June 27, 2021 at 08:19 pm

If Rodgers opt out....what would we be able to do with the cap space freed up for this year? Anyone we can trade for? Any one, like D Adams, we can sign to an extension and front load the deal? Carry that cap space into next year?

4 points
4
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 08:49 pm

Well, I didn't want to first posit that AR would opt-out and then further speculate on what GB might do with the cap space. It would also require some knowledge of Gute's plan to close the cap space gap for 2022 and what is up with Davante and the other 2022 free agents, and I don't think intuition suffices.

For 2021, there are some players who are still unsigned, by which I mean name players or players who have an NFL track record. So those names could be tossed about. There is no way to know which players might become cap casualties in September. I have no idea if GB would be interested in a one-year rental if AR opts out. I suppose the team could sign such players long-term if they got $29M in extra cap space this year. It is a lot of conjecture.

D-day - July 2 - is this Friday. Time enough then.

4 points
4
0
The_Justicar's picture

June 27, 2021 at 11:05 pm

Gotcha. But then if he doesn’t opt out I have less to speculate on. Lol. I think I found a list of unsigned dudes and I will use that $30 million to sign the following guys to one year deals. Geno Atkins at DT, K J Wright at LB, maybe golden Tate for more competition at WR. Guess I could also afford say Brian Poole at nickel back to bolster the db group as well.

0 points
2
2
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 28, 2021 at 02:00 am

Arggh! LOL!

Lots of readers are tired of the AR saga. I didn't want to add to it, but felt the new development and options afforded by the Covid agreement obligated me to work the numbers and options.

7 points
7
0
dpwiener's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:02 pm

Look at it from Gute and Murphy's point of view: This opt-out possibility is actually the best thing that could have happened. They've been saying all along that they won't trade Aaron (at least not this year), but no one has been sure if they'd actually stick to that. So this drama could have just kept dragging on and on into training camp.

But it NEVER made any sense for the Packers to trade Aaron until the 2021 season was over. The Packers need to know which teams will be desperate for a quarterback and have high picks to trade in next year's draft. The Packers also need to learn what they have in Jordan Love. Hence the Packers were going to sit back and force Aaron to decide whether to cave and play for the Packers this year, or sit out and suffer the financial consequences, or actually retire from football.

Instead Aaron is going to have to decide to play for the Packers this year, or take the opt-out. He knows the Packers aren't going to trade him this year. If he sits out or retires he loses vast amounts of money. If he opts out he doesn't lose any existing money (but he won't get this year's salary), and he makes crystal clear to the Packers that he's not bluffing about never playing for them again. Meanwhile the Packers save a ton of actual money and cap space if Aaron opts out, and they know absolutely that they'll be trading him next year. They can also put all of the public relations blame on Aaron. Best of all, the drama comes to an end by July 2nd.

I really, really want the drama to be over with one way or another. So I'm happy that it will finally be settled this coming week. Negotiations almost always wait until a deadline for a deal to be made, and suddenly there's a July 2nd deadline to force a conclusion. If Aaron doesn't opt out, then that means he'll be playing for the Packers this year, and he and Gute et al will announce a major agreement by Friday. Both sides will claim the controversy was blown out of proportion, and that everyone is now happy and focussed on winning the Superbowl.

7 points
9
2
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 27, 2021 at 09:20 pm

AR will keep the $6.8M roster bonus.
AR won't earn his $14.7M base and his $850K escalator.
AR probably ends up with guaranteed money due to this situation, if not from GB from the acquiring team.

$15.55M ain't hay. At least there are no fines or paying back signing bonuses with an opt-out.

4 points
4
0
dpwiener's picture

June 27, 2021 at 10:35 pm

By the way, I suspect that the Packers' front office would secretly prefer that Aaron opt out. That way they get the money/cap win, the PR win, the big trade windfall next year, and they definitively move on to Jordan Love as their next franchise quarterback. But they won't greatly mind the alternative if Aaron comes back to lead the Packers, since that means a possible Superbowl victory this year and more time for Love to develop.

6 points
6
0
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:43 am

Like you, dpwiener, I want this drama over with too.

AR not opting-out, however, doesn't mean "he'll be playing for the Packers this year." All it means is that he might want the DEN trade to actually happen - this year. His not opting out would keep that window open as best as he could. That is the only bit of control AR has in this matter, because he'll likely wind up being traded away next season if he does opt-out now.

Let's not forget, AR is loaded. He can hold out and not bat an eyelash. Imagine what his investments have earned over the course of earning a quarter of a billion dollars. He's a bright guy.

Not only has he not squashed the draft day bombshell, he's poured more gas on it in subsequent interviews.

Does that sound like somebody that wants to return? For what? To help the Packers win a Super Bowl? You think this vindictive, highly competitive player wants Murphy & Gutekunst to share in any victory spoils should they win it with AR leading the way?

I don't. It's not what I want, but... seems a real possibility. Maybe more so than the alternative you're presenting here.

We're Packer fans. We want him to return to help us win a Super Bowl. It doesn't mean he wants that. The statement allegedly put forth on his behalf, unchecked, says otherwise.

To me, I find this whole situation to be sad. But, I do think the Packers have enough talent on board to persevere and achieve their ultimate goal, if AR does not return.

-1 points
0
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 29, 2021 at 01:55 am

I noted that AR loses $14.7M plus $850K, about $15.55M. However, under his current deal he was scheduled to earn $73M over the next three years.

If he is traded, the new team probably will give him at least 3 yrs, $90M with a lot of guaranteed money, and that's AR's break-even amount. Lose $15M in lost earnings in 2021 but gain it back (and probably more) with a sweetened deal from another team. Opting out makes some sense.

2 points
2
0
crayzpackfan's picture

June 28, 2021 at 12:02 pm

DP I love your take on all of this. My only concern is that GB gives him a new guaranteed contract for the next 3-4 years. They sometimes do goofy sh!t like that. I’m hoping this plays out much like you scribed above. It will either be an interesting July 2 or much of the same. Cheers.

2 points
2
0
PewAuKeeFan's picture

June 27, 2021 at 10:41 pm

If Rodgers is really pissed with the Packers, he is not going to opt-out, as he would not want to create a chance of a scenario that may actually be beneficial to the Packers (subject to Love playing well).

2 points
3
1
nostradanus's picture

June 27, 2021 at 10:53 pm

This is all way overblown, Rodgers will report to camp the first week of August just to make his little statement to the NFLPA and Packers management.From then on its all football for him man.
Super Bowl!
Go Pack!

10 points
12
2
EricinGB's picture

June 27, 2021 at 11:26 pm

The analysis of Rodgers sitting out and then traided vs playing and then being traded only covers 2021 and 2022...in reality, the cap savings in 2022 would be largely offset by the "remainder" hit in 2023...In terms of total cap $$$, Rodgers sitting out 2021 efectively pushes the 2021 remainder into 2022 and fails to mention the unaccounted 2022 "savings" that would have been 2022 that would then be pushed into 2023....or put another way, Rodgers sitting out and then traded vs being traided sooner has roughly 1/2 the total effect (savings quoted in the article) on the cap when you consider 2021, 2022 and 2023 together. Regardless, the larger player/cap issue not addressed is how the QB situation and quality of QB play effects Adams' and Alexander's willingness to structure a long term contract vs trying the market...Packers will not have cap space in 2022 to frnachise tag Adams and pay 5th year money to Alexander...Packers need to structure long term deals in order to keep both players and stay under the cap...if Rodgers sits out or is traded and QB play regresses significantly, how willing will Adams and Alexander be to play for a non-contender vs picking and choosing their future team? Packersw may loose any cap saving and more by needing to pay a larger long term premium to keep Adams and Alexander without Rodgers as QB1.

-1 points
3
4
dobber's picture

June 28, 2021 at 05:42 am

I think the cap implications are pretty important because, as you point out, 2022 is a huge mess, and ARod opting out does little to make those issues better.

If Arod were to opt out in 2021, I think the Packers use creative ways to use that immediate cap windfall to try to ease some of those issues that you mention ahead of 2022 because it's 2023 where the cap starts to clear. It's less likely that they'll suddenly become significant shoppers on the remainder of the FA market this season.

The best case scenario for the Packers fiscally--and probably on the field and in terms of trade compensation--remains for #12 to report, play well in 2021, and then be dealt in February.

6 points
6
0
EricinGB's picture

June 28, 2021 at 08:30 am

Agree with you...best case for Packers is for Rodgers to play in 2021...the rub for Rodgers (though not declared) is that Rodgers would be playing against non-guaranteed money...so if he gets hurt, tough luckmoving forward. Suspect Rogers is holding out for 2021 and probably at least 2022 salary to be guaranteed; this way if he is ijured and can no loger play moving forward he is covered...and Packers don't want to do that if they don't have to...the benefit to Rodgers getig traded is a ew cotract and playing again on guarantreed money again....Optint out protects Rodgers from injury risk if Packers refuse to guarantee his salary if injurred....it could all be about guaranteed money...suspect Rodgers is only top 15 QB not playing on guaranteed money...

2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:16 am

HIs 2021 is set. There aren't any per game bonuses that I can find, so as long as ARod reports, his earnings for 2021 don't change. The only think he could lose if he got hurt are shots at escalators.

In the end those likely wouldn't matter much since whomever is paying his 2022 deal and going forward will rework it...ARod seems to not approve of his current contract which likely means he won't accept a deal to go anywhere where he won't get his deal redone. We might say he has no choice but to follow his contract, but he can very easily say he won't report and that kills the number of suitors immediately. With that in mind, we'll know almost immediately when there's a "trade in principle" in place because ARod's agent (and likely other agents for veteran players involved) will be allowed to work those details out before the trade is finalized. There's no way that could be kept quiet.

"suspect Rodgers is only top 15 QB not playing on guaranteed money."

I'm very likely wrong, but the only QBs I can think of who are playing on a guaranteed deals are Cousins, Wilson, and Brady. As I look, I find a couple more. There are guarantees involved for 5th year option players, there might be a few players who converted their salaries to guarantees (and got a big bonus as a result) to grant cap relief, but all rookie contract QBs are likely not guaranteed and I think just about everyone else is playing on non-guaranteed deals.

2 points
2
0
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 06:35 pm

Hey TGR, I was hoping you would share your perspectives on this. Nice work, as always.

Personally, I have 1 dream scenario, and that is the Packers winning this season’s Super Bowl and bringing the Lombardi Trophy home, regardless of which QB helps win it. I was all for AR leading the way prior to draft night. After that, I recognized a high likelihood AR would never return again to play for the Packers, and that there might be a possible trade with DEN. The pieces looked to be in discussion, but no word publicly. I really did think something would happen after the June 1st date.

This new opt out possibility completely works in the Packers’ favor, as they benefit either way. GB can afford just about any scenario to play out. The loser may be Denver, a team desperate to add a proven talent like AR.

My stance has been misunderstood. I wanted AR to lead the Packers to a SB win like everyone else. His wanting out made me remove emotion to assess. It’s the way I’m wired. 2 facts:

1. A statement was released that has gone unchallenged by AR saying he won’t play again for the Packers.

2. He “got engaged.”

I take this at face value, and look for and at the positives. I don’t see the FO has any options to force AR to play for the Packers against his will. Without money, nor contract length, nor team controls factoring in, what is left? Nothing. The decision appears to be more personal. I also see the public sniping on both sides points to the relationship most likely being over.

That appearing to be the case, give the rock to the kid and let’s go. Trust your decision making & do your best. I do believe Jordan Love will shock the world, with his talent, with guidance by LaFleur, and with the surrounding high level of talent he counts as teammates in Green Bay. This team is built for the run, and ready for a young QB, if that’s the hand that is dealt.

Everybody saw what happened, including the players in GB. MLF has focused heavily since on getting JL ready to take over. I think the team has had enough time to gain some "buy-in" on the idea Love might start Week 1. Having the team around him ready for that possibility will only help the Packers achieve success.

It has really gone so far that I question how much AR wants to play for the Packers this season. You want that person at the most important position on your team to be all in. Should he return, that would be an uncharacteristic 180° turn from what we've known of him to date. Is the team now past the point of no return? This is all really difficult to figure out with nothing but second hand info. Unprecedented situation, for sure.

Can they mend the bridge? That would be something, allowing for the Packers FO original plan to unfold. Hard to say what is going to happen. I'm just a fan like everyone else here, hoping for the best either way. That said, I believe AR has handled this so poorly that I question his commitment. This team looks ready to rock. That is what has us all still a little shocked as Packer fans.

Never know. This opt out possibility might force an unbelievably good deal from DEN this week. My guess is it is only Aaron Rodgers and the Denver Broncos sweating bullets right now.

2 points
4
2
dobber's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:48 am

"This opt out possibility might force an unbelievably good deal from DEN this week."

Actually, if ARod announces that he's planning to take the opt-out on the 2nd, it likely means he's cut the negotiating stance of the Packers way down and any offer on the table--of which there appears to be none--will be cut, too. Teams will expect that the Packers will be hedging against what they could get in February for a QB who's shown he'd rather sit than play and might be trying to make whatever they can, now.

If ARod waits 'til the last second and takes the opt-out without really talking to the Packers and giving them a chance to react, it's a sign of pettiness and his desire to stick it to the team. That will also cut his suitors way down in February.

4 points
4
0
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:58 am

My point is, this may have lit a fire under DEN to put forth the best offer imaginable before July 2nd, to get AR into a DEN uniform this year.

I bet the Broncos are scrambling right now to save their season, and any hopes of landing AR in Denver this year.

Of course, if he announces an opt-out that would change everything, but I don't see him doing that until he has to. He wants to be traded, it appears. Seems he would allow every avenue there to run its course. He will likely not opt out in the hopes something can be worked out between DEN and GB this year.

His big thing is, if there is no deal on the table prior to July 2nd, does he make that move? He might want a year off to have some fun. Denver is the one feeling the heat.

Do you see what I mean? DEN might make an offer the Packers can't refuse. It's possible, given this unexpected twist. Think about it... Aaron could find himself turning the screws on DEN to get this done now... just by not saying a word on his intentions. I don't believe the Broncos can contact him under NFL tampering rules to find out, one way or the other.

2 points
2
0
dobber's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:41 am

"Seems he would allow every avenue there to run its course. "

This is where we both agree: I don't think ARod will cut off his nose to spite his face. He's going to play somewhere in 2021.

This talk about possibly opting out is his last power play if he's even considering it. I don't think he'll make that move, and I'll bet the Packers don't either. The Packers will likely call his bluff if he threatens...of note is that I don't believe ARod has said anything about this path, and choosing this out will make him look even more petty and less desirable. He knows this. I think he wants to be the Peyton Manning/Tom Brady hero wherever he ultimately lands, and it's hard to do if you come in looking like a passive-aggressive shit.

Whatever the case, as soon as any trade talks really start to happen--whether it's Denver or anyone else--it will be the worst kept secret in the league. Every NFL jock has his ear to the ground on this right now...and any deal will require that the team acquiring ARod will need to talk to him about his deal, so the Packers will have to grant ARod's reps permission to talk. That won't be a secret if/when it happens.

If we've heard no news on the trade front, it's because there's no news.

4 points
4
0
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 12:20 pm

Hahahahaha!

"so the Packers will have to grant ARod's reps permission to talk."

dobber! You might have thought to share than info with me a while ago... LOL. Yeah, you're right. I hadn't considered that. The team has held firm that AR is unavailable in trade. When/if they do open that up, I agree, we'll all know.

The Packers FO might just sit on him throughout the remainder of his contract. I wouldn't put it past them. Not what I want as a fan, but I could see them holding firm on that end. Who knows? They might just wait out the year. Whatever. I'm done with this AR stuff.

1 points
1
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 29, 2021 at 03:01 am

I never doubted that you want GB to win a SB. I thought of you simply because you could run for President of the Jordan Love fan club, and I hope you're right!

And this team is pretty loaded overall, so if Love is a competent or better QB then GB could still have a high octane scoring offense. Even if Love needs a year, with $29.9M in cap savings, Gute should be able to keep the team together for 2022 and/or have room to maneuver. I am not that picky: I'd still be very happy if the Packers win the super bowl in 2022 if they don't in 2021.

I don't think AR has alienated the locker room and his relationship with LaFleur and the coaches seems fine, as far as I can tell, anyway. So a return seems plausible to me. I don't know how deep the grudge is or how stubborn AR is, though. It might be hard to believe just from what you know of me, but at least one member of my family should have his or her (can't be too precise here as I need plausible deniability) picture next to the word stubborn in the dictionary.

3 points
3
0
EricinGB's picture

June 28, 2021 at 08:35 am

Agree with other posters...best case for Packers is for Rodgers to play in 2021...the rub for Rodgers (though not declared) is that Rodgers would be playing on non-guaranteed money...so if he gets hurt, tough luck moving forward. Suspect Rogers is holding out for 2021 and probably at least 2022 salary to be guaranteed; this way if he is injured and can no loger play moving forward he is covered...and Packers don't want to do that if they don't have to...the benefit to Rodgers geting traded is a ew cotract and playing again on guarantreed money....Optint out protects Rodgers from injury risk if Packers refuse to guarantee his salary if injurred....so opring out is a bigger deal that others have suggested...it could all be about guaranteed money...suspect Rodgers is only top 15 QB not playing on guaranteed money in 2021 and forward...if you don't think that is a big deal, and a 100% legitamate sticking point, think again.

-1 points
0
1
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:04 am

Hey Eric,

Did the Packers not already pay him to be our starting QB? If he is inclined to hold up the franchise for more $$$, then I'm not sure that giving into those wishes is the best course for the team. What precedent would that set for the Packers in future player dealings?

I'll add, what if you're wrong, and money doesn't matter to him in this? He's already made $240M.

There is so much more that we are not privy to with regards to how this team feels about AR being QB1 in GB.

2 points
3
1
dobber's picture

June 28, 2021 at 09:46 am

"I'll add, what if you're wrong, and money doesn't matter to him in this? He's already made $240M."

Past history has shown that being among the top-compensated QBs has been important to ARod. We can argue over whether it's ego, or something he's compensating for, or whatever---I don't know. I don't think that changes now, though, coming off an MVP season.

4 points
4
0
greengold's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:11 am

Yeah. None of us knows. I happen to think this is not about money at all. Maybe you and others do think it factors in, and we've all learned that more often than not, you follow the money.

I'm going out on a limb with this one, thinking it is more about his personal relationship. None of what has occurred to date, in my eyes, has anything to do with football, or what is in the Packers best interests. I really don't think AR cares. His mind is elsewhere now, so it seems.

The Packers are set as they have been in years to win it all. They have the money, and likely will throw more at him on a re-worked one year deal. If he's unwilling to take that, then you know this is not about football. Didn't they already offer him more, and he turned them down?

We'll find out eventually.

3 points
4
1
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 29, 2021 at 03:07 am

I've always wondered whether inserting an ironclad No Trade clause good for 2021, 2022 and perhaps 2023 would suffice. I think 2023 is too much.

Maybe rolling No Trade guarantees? Or as an incentive?

3 points
3
0
greengold's picture

June 29, 2021 at 04:38 am

Hey TGR, way to think outside the box!

That’s something that might work for a player who wants to be assured he has the full 3 year window to play in GB.

I really think his personal reasons right now supersede even an offer that good. I get where you are coming from with this.

I think you see where I’m coming from with this too? It really is a place of taking the proffered statement as truth, at face value, without any ties to the Packers at all. No money, no years, no controls, no guarantees matter in this. Apparently. It is entirely possible all of this has zero to do with the Packers.

His sole reason for leaving may be his wishes to start his future family in another place.

2 points
2
0
PatrickGB's picture

June 28, 2021 at 10:48 am

When it comes to making a stand on something, #12 is beyond stubborn. If he says “no” I believe that he means it. We don’t know for sure if he actually said no but all indications seem to support it. To this fan it seems like the die has been cast. He is gone. Time will tell what the team does next. I have been used to superior QB play for a long time. But now the team will have to do the best it can with more cap money and draft picks.

4 points
4
0
PAPackerbacker's picture

June 28, 2021 at 06:06 pm

I have doubts that Rodgers will choose to opt out in 2021. It would mean he can't play for any team in the 2021 season and if he chooses to come back in 2022 he will be another year older. So why would he choose to go this route? And he will still face the same issues he had in 2021 if he would indeed return in 2022. If he does choose to opt out it would surprise this Packer fan. I can't speak for other fans but I certainly would lose a lot of respect for him if he chooses to opt out. If he is that stubborn to throw a season away it would show, to me anyhow, a lack of willingness on his part to work things out and also show just how self centered his intentions really are. No matter what he chooses to do, I am, and always will remain a Green Bay Packer fan!! Go! Pack! Go!

3 points
3
0