WFT's Off-Season Thread

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by MissouriSkin

It’s also insane to listen to people say for months not to trade the farm for a QB and build the right way and then in one second change your mind and want the new shiny toy available. No one’s wrong, we just see it differently.

I don’t mind trading the farm for a for sure thing like Rodgers or Wilson. But trading farm in draft no thanks. For the record I don’t mind trading up to get your guy just not an RG3 style trade.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by MissouriSkin

It’s also insane to listen to people say for months not to trade the farm for a QB and build the right way and then in one second change your mind and want the new shiny toy available. No one’s wrong, we just see it differently.

I assume you talk about trading the farm to go up and get a rookie QB (which has a lot of risk). Which to me is a very different situation than trading the farm to get a QB of Rodgers or R. Wilson's caliber. I don't understand what's so terrible about being opposed to trading for a rookie and be for trading for Pro Bowl QB.

Also, what's the right way to acquire a QB in the next two seasons, that doesn't result in the team having a terrible record and having a top 5 pick? And what is more likely to happen:

a.) Winning with Fitz, develop a project QB
b.) Winning with Rodgers, develop a project QB

I know it is probably not likely that Rodgers gets here, but I don't get this "no way in hell" attitude that a lot of people have.

[MissouriSkin]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I assume you talk about trading the farm to go up and get a rookie QB (which has a lot of risk). Which to me is a very different situation than trading the farm to get a QB of Rodgers or R. Wilson's caliber. I don't understand what's so terrible about being opposed to trading for a rookie and be for trading for Pro Bowl QB.

Also, what's the right way to acquire a QB in the next two seasons, that doesn't result in the team having a terrible record and having a top 5 pick? And what is more likely to happen:

a.) Winning with Fitz, develop a project QB
b.) Winning with Rodgers, develop a project QB

I know it is probably not likely that Rodgers gets here, but I don't get this "no way in hell" attitude that a lot of people have.

When was the last time the “all in shoot for the stars trade” has worked out for us?

[punch it in]

Originally Posted by MissouriSkin

When was the last time the “all in shoot for the stars trade” has worked out for us?

In all fairness it was never for a guy like Rodgers.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by MissouriSkin

When was the last time the “all in shoot for the stars trade” has worked out for us?

I can understand being trigger shy no doubt. The three most recent trades that come to mind were McNabb, RG3, and Alex Smith. They all ended pretty poorly for us. McNabb was flat out bad. 2012 was magical until RG3 tried to be a pocket passer in the Seattle playoff game and basically ended his career. I still think I had reservations about his longevity but it is hard to think back a decade. The Alex Smith trade looked ok. We were winning the division and while we weren't wowing statistically. Alex Smith's leadership is undeniable but that was a fluke accident.

IDK I think I would pull the trigger on Rodgers far more of a for sure thing than any of those three QBs. I look at Tampa they went 7-9 basically same team just add Brady and a bit of Gronk and suddenly Super Bowl Champs and favorites this year.

If we had Rodgers we would be in the NFC title game next year no doubt in my mind.

[FrenchSkin]

Might be weird, but I completely understand the thinking behind trading for Rodgers, and I'm not calling it crazy, because being an instant SB contender does have some appeal... But I'm still strongly against it.
And it's not about some sort of moral compass telling me what's "right" and "wrong" in building a team.
It's actually about winning. Long term.

I don't want to be a 2-3 years wonder. I want to make the playoffs 85% of the time, and have a chance at the big thing several times a decade.

I saw an other offer being 2 firsts, 2 seconds, Fitz and Ioannidis.
My issue is, as many said before, with how the cap works, we KNOW we won't be able to resign all of Allen, Payne, Young, Sweat, Terry etc... (Especially if we have a nearly 40M/yr QB) So we're gonna NEED some high draft picks to replace them. Because if we don't, regardless of how this 2-3 years ride goes... We're kinda back to the basement... and I don't want that...

Oh and btw we don't have 37M of available cap space, so who you cutting ?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by FrenchSkin

Might be weird, but I completely understand the thinking behind trading for Rodgers, and I'm not calling it crazy, because being an instant SB contender does have some appeal... But I'm still strongly against it.
And it's not about some sort of moral compass telling me what's "right" and "wrong" in building a team.
It's actually about winning. Long term.

I don't want to be a 2-3 years wonder. I want to make the playoffs 85% of the time, and have a chance at the big thing several times a decade.

I saw an other offer being 2 firsts, 2 seconds, Fitz and Ioannidis.
My issue is, as many said before, with how the cap works, we KNOW we won't be able to resign all of Allen, Payne, Young, Sweat, Terry etc... (Especially if we have a nearly 40M/yr QB) So we're gonna NEED some high draft picks to replace them. Because if we don't, regardless of how this 2-3 years ride goes... We're kinda back to the basement... and I don't want that...

Oh and btw we don't have 37M of available cap space, so who you cutting ?

Who wouldn't want to be a serious contender for the next decade? But the truth is a long term dynasty is rare. Teams that rise up for a couple of years and have a 2-3 year window to win the SB is what happens most of the time. Rodgers would give us that. I'm not going to waste much breath on this because I think the chances of him coming here are slim at best, but it sure would be a fun ride to go on and I'd be fine with whatever it took to get him here.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by MTK

Who wouldn't want to be a serious contender for the next decade? But the truth is a long term dynasty is rare. Teams that rise up for a couple of years and have a 2-3 year window to win the SB is what happens most of the time. Rodgers would give us that. I'm not going to waste much breath on this because I think the chances of him coming here are slim at best, but it sure would be a fun ride to go on and I'd be fine with whatever it took to get him here.

My thoughts exactly.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Just like D Watson (before the curtain was pulled back), if Rodgers wants out - ultimately he'll get what he wants.

[OnceWeWereKings]

The only reason i wouldnt be all in for a rodgers trade is that we could well trade away picks that exist longer than his tenure would be. Rodgers, while great, is no spring chicken. at 38, who knows how many years he has left. He is one of my favorite current players to watch, and i root for him...but i dont know that i would want to mortgage any type of future for a 38 year old qb. couple in a camp and a new system and all new teammates for him to get acclimated to...i just dont think it would be worth it. how crazy would it be to have a 2023 2nd or third round pick going to gb, when rodgers retired the year before. that would eat me up inside...unless he won a sb with us. but thats a huge leap of faith as we were still only 7-9 last year.

[GridIron26]

Originally Posted by OnceWeWereKings

The only reason i wouldnt be all in for a rodgers trade is that we could well trade away picks that exist longer than his tenure would be. Rodgers, while great, is no spring chicken. at 38, who knows how many years he has left. He is one of my favorite current players to watch, and i root for him...but i dont know that i would want to mortgage any type of future for a 38 year old qb. couple in a camp and a new system and all new teammates for him to get acclimated to...i just dont think it would be worth it. how crazy would it be to have a 2023 2nd or third round pick going to gb, when rodgers retired the year before. that would eat me up inside...unless he won a sb with us. but thats a huge leap of faith as we were still only 7-9 last year.

We share the same concerns about trading for Rodgers.. Granted, Rodgers is one of the best QBs in NFL history and he looks like he can play for next few years but the fact that he is already considering retirement is a concern. Rodgers would need to convince me that he will play longer than than next 1-2 years, in order for me to make a trade offer.

[EdmundDorf]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

We share the same concerns about trading for Rodgers.. Granted, Rodgers is one of the best QBs in NFL history and he looks like he can play for next few years but the fact that he is already considering retirement is a concern. Rodgers would need to convince me that he will play longer than than next 1-2 years, in order for me to make a trade offer.

This

[FrenchSkin]

Originally Posted by GridIron26

We share the same concerns about trading for Rodgers.. Granted, Rodgers is one of the best QBs in NFL history and he looks like he can play for next few years but the fact that he is already considering retirement is a concern. Rodgers would need to convince me that he will play longer than than next 1-2 years, in order for me to make a trade offer.

Agreed, and that's no guarantee.
I know he's coming off an MVP season. But not everybody is Brady, people act like it's a lock Aaron's gonna play until 42... He's also had a fair share of injuries.

[sdskinsfan2001]

And that!

[AnonEmouse]

I have to ask the question why Rodgers would come here, given other choices? He's obviously going to be looking for a high profile team that gives him the chance at another SB, so that doesn't rule us out but it doesn't give us any edge over other teams the at would be in the running. I agree he would be a good target, but I don't think we're a target for him.