PDA

View Full Version : Trade Aaron Rodgers



MastaPeacock
07-13-2008, 03:35 PM
Here's my genius idea. Trade Aaron Rodgers on the condition that Favre agrees to stay for 2 years. Then make Brohm the backup. By the time Favre retires, Brohm will be ready to take over. Rodgers should be able to fetch a high draft back, maybe even a 1st rounder, at worst a second.

Favre>Rodgers for the next couple years.
Brohm has the tools but needs to learn decision making (hopefully Favre can help).

beast
07-13-2008, 03:39 PM
on the condition that Favre agrees to stay for 2 years.

I'm thinking 3 years would be better. But the problem is, I don't think Favre will commit for more than one season at a time.

Brendan
07-13-2008, 03:43 PM
This wouldnt be a HORRIBLE idea since you drafted Brohm and teams could definately be interested in Rodgers, but good luck making Favre "commit" to play for those years...

OC Knights #11
07-13-2008, 03:44 PM
it says a lot about Favre, can't make up his mind, your holding rodgers back. I wanna see this kid start. Don't get me wrong Favre is the best quarterback of all time, but i am sick of his ****.

roy hobbs
07-13-2008, 03:45 PM
Here's my genius idea. Trade Aaron Rodgers on the condition that Favre agrees to stay for 2 years. Then make Brohm the backup. By the time Favre retires, Brohm will be ready to take over. Rodgers should be able to fetch a high draft back, maybe even a 1st rounder, at worst a second.

Favre>Rodgers for the next couple years.
Brohm has the tools but needs to learn decision making (hopefully Favre can help).

i thought favre was retired.

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 03:54 PM
There's no way we would get a first or second rounder for Rodgers.

servais77
07-13-2008, 04:10 PM
There's no way we would get a first or second rounder for Rodgers.

And that should tell you alot about how Rodgers is perceived around the league.

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 04:19 PM
And that should tell you alot about how Rodgers is perceived around the league.

Nobody will give a first rounder for a QB who hasn't started yet in this league.

beast
07-13-2008, 04:22 PM
Nobody will give a first rounder for a QB who hasn't started yet in this league.

It happens almost every single draft.

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 04:57 PM
It happens almost every single draft.

Rodgers was a QB taken late in the 1st round, about 4 years ago, and he still hasn't started a game. I don't think the situations are similar at all.

robdizzle3
07-13-2008, 05:46 PM
Nobody will give a first rounder for a QB who hasn't started yet in this league.

Look at Matt Schaub.He have alot of game experience yet the Texans tried everything to grab him.If Favre were to play two more years then I would do tha because of Brohm being able to lead the team by then like mentioned at the top.Brohm will be ready next year but I guess to be sure we do make it two.I really do want A-Rod to start because I think that he will b a really good QB but we odo know what Favre is going to give us and Chris Mortensen said Favre can still play

servais77
07-13-2008, 05:49 PM
Nobody will give a first rounder for a QB who hasn't started yet in this league.

Yeah I know.

4favre4
07-13-2008, 08:21 PM
Trade him to miami for JT and a 5th rounder

4favre4
07-13-2008, 08:22 PM
or to the Jets for a 2nd or 3rd

beast
07-13-2008, 08:23 PM
Trade him to miami for JT and a 5th rounder

Horrible idea IMO. Maybe JT, but a 5th no way. You must be joking. It should be at least a 3rd, to go with JT.

4favre4
07-13-2008, 08:31 PM
You can't get a 3rd and JT this is not your Madden franchise mode were you can rip teams off. This is a guy who has 1 TD regardless of how good he is he still has not shown he can play at the NFL level.

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 09:08 PM
You can't get a 3rd and JT this is not your Madden franchise mode were you can rip teams off. This is a guy who has 1 TD regardless of how good he is he still has not shown he can play at the NFL level.

Exactly, this isn't a ****ing video game.

hughest4
07-13-2008, 09:39 PM
I don't feel like trading A-Rod is out of the question, especially if they allow Favre to come back. I doubt he would be willing to take a backup role on this team again and would most likely ask for a trade. I would have no problem with Brohm being our future QB because i feel like he is just as capable if not more so then Rodgers

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 09:48 PM
I don't feel like trading A-Rod is out of the question, especially if they allow Favre to come back. I doubt he would be willing to take a backup role on this team again and would most likely ask for a trade. I would have no problem with Brohm being our future QB because i feel like he is just as capable if not more so then Rodgers

I agree, but I would want some sort of commitment from Brett so he just doesn't come back for this year, then retire again, and we have a still pretty raw Brohm starting next year. I think that would get ugly, but I would be all for that idea if Brett makes the commitment. But I like Rodgers and would like to see him get a chance to prove himself somewhere else.

hughest4
07-13-2008, 09:58 PM
I agree, but I would want some sort of commitment from Brett so he just doesn't come back for this year, then retire again, and we have a still pretty raw Brohm starting next year. I think that would get ugly, but I would be all for that idea if Brett makes the commitment. But I like Rodgers and would like to see him get a chance to prove himself somewhere else.

Yeah, but i highly doubt you will get that kind of commitment from Brett Favre. He has been taking things on a year to year basis for what seems like 5-6 years, and i don't see that changing if he is back with us. Sure, Brohm is a young guy but he is coming in as NFL ready as you can get. He is extremely intelligent and one year behind Brett will do him wonders

twelvePack
07-13-2008, 09:58 PM
Why grant Rodgers a trade? He is under contract.

beast
07-13-2008, 10:07 PM
Why grant Rodgers a trade? He is under contract.

Just like Favre :). Now Favre just has to show up like Rodgers :).

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 10:14 PM
Yeah, but i highly doubt you will get that kind of commitment from Brett Favre. He has been taking things on a year to year basis for what seems like 5-6 years, and i don't see that changing if he is back with us. Sure, Brohm is a young guy but he is coming in as NFL ready as you can get. He is extremely intelligent and one year behind Brett will do him wonders
I would just like Brett to agree to return for next season (that would have him playing this season and next year). That would give Brohm 2 years behind Brett, which I feel is perfect. I just don't think 1 year is enough.

Why grant Rodgers a trade? He is under contract.

I think it is fair to Rodgers to give him the chance to go prove himself somewhere. We could also get some value for him. Then we do what I've said above for the next 2 seasons, then Brohm will be ready to step in.

twelvePack
07-13-2008, 10:30 PM
I would just like Brett to agree to return for next season (that would have him playing this season and next year). That would give Brohm 2 years behind Brett, which I feel is perfect. I just don't think 1 year is enough.


I think it is fair to Rodgers to give him the chance to go prove himself somewhere. We could also get some value for him. Then we do what I've said above for the next 2 seasons, then Brohm will be ready to step in.

I say keep him under his contract, it's only one more season. We can always hit him with the franchise tag after that. There isn't anything saying that the Ironman won't get hurt either, slim chance for Rodgers, but still a slight possibility. This might not help Rodgers, but it helps the team. I feel a hell of a lot better with Brohm getting a year of experience under his belt, even if he is in a backup role.

hughest4
07-13-2008, 10:48 PM
Why grant Rodgers a trade? He is under contract.

This is true, but if we bench him again this year then who knows if he will want to play for us in the future. He might feel like its a slap in the face taking Brett back. I would hate to have a 1st round pick sign with someone else and us get nothing out of it. At least if we trade him we can get a decent pick. I'm comfortable with Brohm as our QB

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 10:59 PM
I say keep him under his contract, it's only one more season. We can always hit him with the franchise tag after that. There isn't anything saying that the Ironman won't get hurt either, slim chance for Rodgers, but still a slight possibility. This might not help Rodgers, but it helps the team. I feel a hell of a lot better with Brohm getting a year of experience under his belt, even if he is in a backup role.
That's saying that Rodgers won't pull what Favre is pulling right now and demand a release/trade after we would bench him again, which I think he would. So I think we would then deal him to a team like Niners or Phins and at least get something in return.

This is true, but if we bench him again this year then who knows if he will want to play for us in the future. He might feel like its a slap in the face taking Brett back. I would hate to have a 1st round pick sign with someone else and us get nothing out of it. At least if we trade him we can get a decent pick. I'm comfortable with Brohm as our QB

I agree 100%.

Warpy1981
07-13-2008, 11:28 PM
I've lived in WI for my whole life. I think Favre is the best overall QB of all time. I have loved watching him play over the years. But I do not understand that how ppl let him jerk them around on this stuff. He doesn't know if he wants to play or not all summer then expects that everything gets swept aside so the great and mystical Brett Favre can waltz in make the coaches and management look bad by demanding his release.

Rodgers has every right to be pissed and want a trade if they demote him just because Favre wants back in. It should be like all positions in football and the best player should win their job every day. If Favre is still in tip top condition he should be able beat out Rodgers and he should play. If Rodgers beats him out Favre should do the honorable thing and step aside.

GO BREWERS!!!!!

ryanph30
07-13-2008, 11:42 PM
I've lived in WI for my whole life. I think Favre is the best overall QB of all time. I have loved watching him play over the years. But I do not understand that how ppl let him jerk them around on this stuff. He doesn't know if he wants to play or not all summer then expects that everything gets swept aside so the great and mystical Brett Favre can waltz in make the coaches and management look bad by demanding his release.

Rodgers has every right to be pissed and want a trade if they demote him just because Favre wants back in. It should be like all positions in football and the best player should win their job every day. If Favre is still in tip top condition he should be able beat out Rodgers and he should play. If Rodgers beats him out Favre should do the honorable thing and step aside.

GO BREWERS!!!!!

I agree.

But I'll throw in Go Twins instead. :)

twelvePack
07-13-2008, 11:43 PM
That's saying that Rodgers won't pull what Favre is pulling right now and demand a release/trade after we would bench him again, which I think he would. So I think we would then deal him to a team like Niners or Phins and at least get something in return.


I agree 100%.


He can demand whatever he wants, but the fact is that Rodgers hasn't even established himself yet. If TT wants to lock him up for another two years, he can and there is nothing Rodgers can do about it. It's not like he hasn't been well paid to learn the game, and he will make big money if the franchise tag is slapped on him. The thing is, if TT decides to franchise him, his agent would rather have a long term deal in place, so Rodgers isn't going to end up anywhere else unless TT wants to make that happen.

GoPackGo728
07-14-2008, 12:18 AM
He can demand whatever he wants, but the fact is that Rodgers hasn't even established himself yet. If TT wants to lock him up for another two years, he can and there is nothing Rodgers can do about it. It's not like he hasn't been well paid to learn the game, and he will make big money if the franchise tag is slapped on him. The thing is, if TT decides to franchise him, his agent would rather have a long term deal in place, so Rodgers isn't going to end up anywhere else unless TT wants to make that happen.

TT is selfish. He wants Rodgers to start and is trying to keep Favre retired by saying Favre wouldn't be the starter.

First off, if the goal is to put your team in the best position to win right now, not 10 years from now, so why wouldn't you start Favre?

TT is a selfish prick. I bet they trade Favre before this is all said and done, unless the fans keep rallying at Lambeau and putting pressure on TT.

azbearfan
07-14-2008, 12:22 AM
I can't believe I'm in the Packers Den.
Trade Rodgers to the Bears.

GoPackGo728
07-14-2008, 12:27 AM
Rodgers for Urlacher. Done

azbearfan
07-14-2008, 12:30 AM
Rodgers for Urlacher. Done

LOL. I could see why you think thats a good idea.
I wouldn't want #4 for #54.

MastaPeacock
07-14-2008, 03:01 AM
I think teams would be willing to give up a ton for Rodgers. Granted he hasn't started or played much, but everyone understands the situation. It's not a knock on him that he hasn't. He also has learned from one of the GOATs and is ready to start now. I think the Pack could get at least a 3rd rounder, w/ a conditional put on it depending on how Rodgers plays (up to a 1st rounder).

Bottom line is, Favre is the best bet for now. Rodgers is the best bet for the next 10 years. Brohm is a pretty good bet for the next 10 years. I'd take two out of three if I could.

ryanph30
07-14-2008, 06:43 PM
I think teams would be willing to give up a ton for Rodgers. Granted he hasn't started or played much, but everyone understands the situation. It's not a knock on him that he hasn't. He also has learned from one of the GOATs and is ready to start now. I think the Pack could get at least a 3rd rounder, w/ a conditional put on it depending on how Rodgers plays (up to a 1st rounder).

Bottom line is, Favre is the best bet for now. Rodgers is the best bet for the next 10 years. Brohm is a pretty good bet for the next 10 years. I'd take two out of three if I could.

Keep dreaming, they wouldn't. But he isn't going anywhere so it doesn't matter.

twelvePack
07-14-2008, 07:02 PM
I don't know why we have to trade Rodgers. I really don't see what bargaining power he has. Is he going to threaten to sit out? That isn't going to help his value at all.

hughest4
07-14-2008, 08:01 PM
I don't know why we have to trade Rodgers. I really don't see what bargaining power he has. Is he going to threaten to sit out? That isn't going to help his value at all.

We wouldn't have to trade Rodgers, but it might be the smart and right thing to do if Favre were to somehow be the starter again. It would be a shame for a 1st round QB to sit on the bench for 5 years and just leave through free agency. I'd rather get something for him through a trade.

darwin31
07-14-2008, 09:31 PM
I don't know why we have to trade Rodgers. I really don't see what bargaining power he has. Is he going to threaten to sit out? That isn't going to help his value at all.

You want a reason to trade Rodgers if Favre is brought back to start?

Can you say distraction? He would be the first player to have a legit reason to pull a "Chad Johnson". Maybe we should start calling Rodgers "Uno Dos".

wissportsfan
07-15-2008, 02:32 AM
Here's my genius idea. Trade Aaron Rodgers on the condition that Favre agrees to stay for 2 years. Then make Brohm the backup. By the time Favre retires, Brohm will be ready to take over. Rodgers should be able to fetch a high draft back, maybe even a 1st rounder, at worst a second.

Favre>Rodgers for the next couple years.
Brohm has the tools but needs to learn decision making (hopefully Favre can help).

Wouldn't work. If Favre does commit for 2 years your hoping that he will do better than Rodgers would in those 2 years which doesn't seem likely considering Rodgers has already looked like he has been catching up to him. I'm not a Favre hater now or a Rodgers lover but I'd rather look at the big picture.

Ryan Diesel
07-15-2008, 03:11 AM
Wouldn't work. If Favre does commit for 2 years your hoping that he will do better than Rodgers would in those 2 years which doesn't seem likely considering Rodgers has already looked like he has been catching up to him. I'm not a Favre hater now or a Rodgers lover but I'd rather look at the big picture.

Catching up?? What from the game in Dallas? Moving on from the most durable QB ever, almost the most durable player ever, to a guy who gets hurt in practice is not very good for the big picture if you ask me.

Ryan Diesel
07-15-2008, 03:12 AM
Trade Rodgers to Philly and see how well it goes over when he tells their fans to shut their mouths.

wissportsfan
07-16-2008, 03:00 AM
Catching up?? What from the game in Dallas? Moving on from the most durable QB ever, almost the most durable player ever, to a guy who gets hurt in practice is not very good for the big picture if you ask me.

I know you probably don't remember this but in preseason Rodgers looked fantastic and a lot better than Favre did. I do take in to account that it's preseason that Favre isn't probably going all out. I also take in account that he played mostly against the 1st string defenses and he worked well with our receivers mainly (James Jones and Jennings). It did not surprise me to see Rodgers do better than Favre in the Cowboys game because Rodgers is more poised in the pocket than Favre. Looking at the big picture with our receivers around Rodgers, he should be able to shoot his target pretty cleanly with all the talent surrounding him. I'm not quiet sure Favre could do that for years to come.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 03:55 AM
Yeah I remember preseason. I remember Doug Peterson looked like Joe Montana in the preseason every year. You mention all these things, but I don't think your actually taking them into account. I didn't think Rodgers looked better than Favre last preseason either, your on crack. And it's funny you mention how poised Rodgers looked in the pocket against Dallas. They were just disecting his performance in that game on NFL live today. They were showing on some of his good plays he was getting away with all kinds of mistakes that I hadn't noticed before. He kept running around in and out of the pocket when there was no pressure on him but still completing the pass. They showed him staring receivers down and getting away with it all day. Sure he played good that game, but he was playing against a prevent D for one. My whole point is, he was getting away with a lot of mistakes in that game, and it's going to take some time until he learns a lot of things the hard way. I just don't think it's a good time to start over when you were an overtime FG away from the SB and you return every starter but one. And that one starter is Favre, we can return the entire starting offensive and defensive unit from a really good team. I don't ever remember us being able to do that. Time to win is now, if we wait until Rodgers is ready to take us to that elite level than Driver, Kampman, Harris, Woodson, Clifton, Tauscher will all be gone. That's a lot of championship caliber players to think we can replace when we've been unable to address gaping holes at S and G the last few years. The time is now, you build your team to get to the point we were last year, you don't blow it up and start over once you get there.

gbaypack31
07-16-2008, 08:50 AM
Favre has proven he can't get it done in the big games in recent years. Look at the giants game, Minnesota playoff, Atlanta playoff, Philly playoff and St. Louis playoff.

hughest4
07-16-2008, 10:14 AM
Favre has proven he can't get it done in the big games in recent years. Look at the giants game, Minnesota playoff, Atlanta playoff, Philly playoff and St. Louis playoff.

I'm not really going to blame the NYG game on Favre. The conditions were terrible and he wasn't really getting any help from his receivers or the running game. Sure he has had some terrible games in the playoffs but i am still more comfortable with him leading us

pokesn8
07-16-2008, 11:13 AM
my problem with Rodgers is that he's a Tedford QB:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/04/10/SPGUGC5U8L1.DTL

i also think it's funny how everyone says that we can't get a high draft pick for him, but how did we obtain Favre in '92? we used a 1st round pick to get a player drafted in the 2nd round. just something to think about. i've never liked Rodgers game. i think we should groom Brohm to be Favre's successor should we trade Rodgers.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 11:30 AM
Yes I have also always feared that we're driving the greatest player in our teams history out for the next Kyle Boller.

wissportsfan
07-16-2008, 02:07 PM
Favre looked the same in all the preseason games as he did in the Eagles game.

Ryan Diesel
07-16-2008, 02:48 PM
Yeah so let's definitely judge who is better by preseason and the first game of the year. Great logic there.

servais77
07-16-2008, 06:44 PM
Yes I have also always feared that we're driving the greatest player in our teams history out for the next Kyle Boller.

or the next Trent Dilfer, JP Losman, Akili Smith, David Carr....

servais77
07-16-2008, 06:53 PM
I know you probably don't remember this but in preseason Rodgers looked fantastic and a lot better than Favre did. I do take in to account that it's preseason that Favre isn't probably going all out. I also take in account that he played mostly against the 1st string defenses and he worked well with our receivers mainly (James Jones and Jennings). It did not surprise me to see Rodgers do better than Favre in the Cowboys game because Rodgers is more poised in the pocket than Favre. Looking at the big picture with our receivers around Rodgers, he should be able to shoot his target pretty cleanly with all the talent surrounding him. I'm not quiet sure Favre could do that for years to come.


Not true...The stats for the two of them are virtually identical with Favre playing against the real players. To say Rodgers looked a lot better is just completely false. Also Rodgers was sacked 6 times so we better get used to a quarterback that will hold onto the ball to long. One of the many things we take for granted with Favre is his ability to make quick reads and avoid the rush.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/statistics?season=2007&team=GB&seasonType=PRE

Ryan Diesel
07-17-2008, 02:48 AM
ha ha great post, I'm so sick of people talking out of their arse and make someone else post the actual stats. To say Rodgers looked way better than Favre? I seriously have to question your perspective on everything you say, that's just nonsense.

twelvePack
07-17-2008, 04:52 PM
ha ha great post, I'm so sick of people talking out of their arse and make someone else post the actual stats. To say Rodgers looked way better than Favre? I seriously have to question your perspective on everything you say, that's just nonsense.

But hey Diesel, he is basing his argument on one half of football and preseason, hahahaaaaaaaa. I don't mind hearing somebody's argument like Wiss's, but come on this is ridiculous. It holds absolutely no valid content at all.