Jets/Packers Negotiations

[Couchpotato]

He may be traded to a team other than the Jets. I just heard that the Titans are also interested in trading for him.

Do you have any idea where thats coming from?

 

[odanny]

He may be traded to a team other than the Jets. I just heard that the Titans are also interested in trading for him.

Rodgers can veto that.

 

[odanny]

He’s still dead money against their cap. If they wait until after June 1 they get to spread that hit over 2 years.
If they trade him before June 1 he’s 40 million against their cap. Post June 1 he’s 15 million.

That's cool, that means he isn't going anywhere until June 1st for sure.

 

[Couchpotato]

Rodgers can veto that.

No he cant

 

[Blaster]

Rodgers can veto that.

No he can't. Rodgers does not have a no trade clause in his contract.

 

[Blaster]

That's cool, that means he isn't going anywhere until June 1st for sure.

The Packers are in no hurry to trade him.

 

[Couchpotato]

That's cool, that means he isn't going anywhere until June 1st for sure.

Which means the Packers aren’t getting the Jets 1rd rd pick this year

 

[Couchpotato]

The Packers are in no hurry to trade him.

If they want the a 1st rounder this year they are.

 

[Blaster]

If they want the a 1st rounder this year they are.

Maybe they have other options.

 

[Couchpotato]

Maybe they have other options.

Other options where they get a 1st round pick this year and trade Aaron Rodgers after June 1st? That would be a neat trick seeing as how the draft is in a few weeks.

 

[Blaster]

Other options where they get a 1st round pick this year and trade Aaron Rodgers after June 1st? That would be a neat trick seeing as how the draft is in a few weeks.

The Jets have already indicated they won't send Green Bay their first round pick.

 

[Couchpotato]

The Jets have already indicated they won't send Green Bay their first round pick.

Im aware. What options could the Packers have where they get a 1st round pick this year and also trade Rodgers after June 1st? How does that work exactly?

 

[Blaster]

Im aware. What options could the Packers have where they get a 1st round pick this year and also trade Rodgers after June 1st? How does that work exactly?

Maybe the Packers are looking at the salary cap and future draft picks.

 

[Nate99]

Likely scenario:

Jets: We'll give you our first round pick for the next three years.

Gutekunst: I want more.

 

[Couchpotato]

Likely scenario:

Jets: We'll give you our first round pick for the next three years.

Gutekunst: I want more.

The most likely scenario is the Jets telling the Packers all they are getting is a 2nd this year and a provisional next year based on how far they go in the playoffs. And that provisional going away if Rodgers retires after next season.

The Packers might not like that but it's also likely the best they are going to get. Certainly the best while also not trading Rodgers to a contender in their own conference. We've gone over this earlier but the number of teams who would possibly be interested in Rodgers and the Packers are willing to trade him to is exceedingly small.

Packers have said no one in the NFC -16

Chiefs, Chargers, Denver, LV, Cincy, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Balt?, Buffalo, Miami, Jacksonville, Colts (drafting), Texans (drafting) all have their guy. -13

That only leaves 3 teams.

Jets, NE, the Titans.

There's no way Belichick is giving up a first round pick for Rodgers, and I dont think Rodgers fits in with the "Patriot Way" so I think you can safely eliminate them as well. -1

So Jets and Titans.

Tannehill is going to cost the Titans 18 million in dead cap if they cut him and they dont have the pieces in place that if they bring in Rodgers they have any type of shot at a playoff run anyway. So that seems an unlikely move by Tennessee. Their coach is also a Belichick product.

That leaves the Jets as really the only team who's interested in Rodgers and the Packers would be willing to trade him to. Add in that Rodgers doesnt want to be in GB and GB doesnt want him there either and that means the Packers have little to no leverage. Now the Jets have been morons in this by publicly courting Rodgers, and setting up expectations with their fan base that they are going to get him, which takes some of their leverage away, but the scale is definitely still tilted in their favor.

 

[Blaster]

The most likely scenario is the Jets telling the Packers all they are getting is a 2nd this year and a provisional next year based on how far they go in the playoffs. And that provisional going away if Rodgers retires after next season.

The Packers might not like that but it's also likely the best they are going to get. Certainly the best while also not trading Rodgers to a contender in their own conference. We've gone over this earlier but the number of teams who would possibly be interested in Rodgers and the Packers are willing to trade him to is exceedingly small.

Packers have said no one in the NFC -16

Chiefs, Chargers, Denver, LV, Cincy, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Balt?, Buffalo, Miami, Jacksonville, Colts (drafting), Texans (drafting) all have their guy. -13

That only leaves 3 teams.

Jets, NE, the Titans.

There's no way Belichick is giving up a first round pick for Rodgers, and I dont think Rodgers fits in with the "Patriot Way" so I think you can safely eliminate them as well. -1

So Jets and Titans.

Tannehill is going to cost the Titans 18 million in dead cap if they cut him and they dont have the pieces in place that if they bring in Rodgers they have any type of shot at a playoff run anyway. So that seems an unlikely move by Tennessee. Their coach is also a Belichick product.

That leaves the Jets as really the only team who's interested in Rodgers and the Packers would be willing to trade him to. Add in that Rodgers doesnt want to be in GB and GB doesnt want him there either and that means the Packers have little to no leverage. Now the Jets have been morons in this by publicly courting Rodgers, and setting up expectations with their fan base that they are going to get him, which takes some of their leverage away, but the scale is definitely still tilted in their favor.

The Packers have Rodgers under contract and the Jets don't. End of discussion.

 

[Couchpotato]

The Packers have Rodgers under contract and the Jets don't. End of discussion.

Ok. How does that give the Packers leverage? GB doesn't want to have him under contract. They don't want him there. He's going to cost them a shit ton of money to sit at home next year unless he gets traded. Tell me, how many draft picks do they get for not trading him and just paying him 60 million dollars to hang out? Is that a 1st rounder?

 

[Blaster]

Ok. How does that give the Packers leverage? GB doesn't want to have him under contract. They don't want him there. He's going to cost them a shit ton of money to sit at home next year unless he gets traded. Tell me, how many draft picks do they get for not trading him and just paying him 60 million dollars to hang out? Is that a 1st rounder?

They would be willing to keep him under contract if the Jets continue to lowball them. That is just a fact.

 

[Couchpotato]

They would be willing to keep him under contract if the Jets continue to lowball them. That is just a fact.

Maybe, though I doubt it. But do they get anything for doing that other than fucked? That's what you don't seem to be grasping here. The Packers get nothing by not trading Rodgers. They are only worse off. Less cap room and less draft capitol whether it's this year or in the future. Not to mention the issue of having a HOF QB who's on your roster, who you're paying 60 million dollars to, and is not playing over a guy who's likely going to struggle next year. That's something the Packers front office doesn't want to deal with. Im sure the HC doesn't either. The Jets might have to play another year with Wilson as their QB though Im quite sure they can find someone better than that on the market or in the draft, but in doing so they save a ton of cap, and a 1st round pick if that's what the Packers are demanding. The Jets arent any worse off if the trade doesnt happen than they currently are. The same can not be said of the Packers.

 

[Blaster]

Maybe, though I doubt it. But do they get anything for doing that other than fucked? That's what you don't seem to be grasping here. The Packers get nothing by not trading Rodgers. They are only worse off. Less cap room and less draft capitol whether it's this year or in the future. Not to mention the issue of having a HOF QB who's on your roster, who you're paying 60 million dollars to, and is not playing over a guy who's likely going to struggle next year. That's something the Packers front office doesn't want to deal with. Im sure the HC doesn't either. The Jets might have to play another year with Wilson as their QB though Im quite sure they can find someone better than that on the market or in the draft, but in doing so they save a ton of cap, and a 1st round pick if that's what the Packers are demanding. The Jets arent any worse off if the trade doesnt happen than they currently are. The same can not be said of the Packers.

Once again the Packers don't need to trade Rodgers.