How likely is it Ron and the front office will pursue Aaron Rogers?

[irish]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

So that's ultimately where you and I fundamentally disagree. If you think Aaron Rodgers could get this team to a Super Bowl in 2022 then I can see why you'd think going for this makes sense.

I just don't see how you can conclude that. You'd have Rodgers sitting on the books for, call it $30M, which means you'd need to cut Landon Collins to make room for a decent MLB in free agency. And you wouldn't have your 1st rounder this year or next year to fill other holes, which include WR, guard, safety and corner.

We don't have as much cap space as everyone seems to think, and I chuckle at the people like Chico who say the cap basically isn't a real issue. We have $34M of available cap space after signing Leno. And the following players would eat into that available space if we resign them:

- Bobby McCain
- Cornelius Lucas
- JD McKissic
- Adam Humphries
- Ricky Seals Jones
- Joey Slye
- Cam Sims
- Brandon Scherff (bye, we'll get a cheaper version)

So put Rodgers on at $30M and suddenly you need to drop Landon and probably extend Ereck Flowers to get his $10M cap number down, just so you can try to resign some of the guys above and fit in a MLB. Because remember, if you don't resign the guys above or find an alternative for them, then you've got significant roster holes.

Everyone's drunk over a QB. But we're not that close. Don't get it twisted, I want us to acquire a QB. I just don't want a 38 year old one.

I don't think AR guarantees WFT a SB appearance but I think he gives WFT a fighting chance. Every team has flaws and weaknesses some more than others. Teams go from worst to first all the time. Focusing on being a contender in 2024 in the modern NFL is like focusing on what you are going to be doing on your job 30 years from now. Its not useless, but so much will happen between now and then its more a theoretical exercise than practical.

The most important position in the NFL is QB (just look at the playoff teams to verify that) and WFT doesn't have one. Until they get one they can focus on role players and defensive studs all they until want until 2024 but they wont be any closer to winning then than they are now.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by irish

I don't think AR guarantees WFT a SB appearance but I think he gives WFT a fighting chance. Every team has flaws and weaknesses some more than others. Teams go from worst to first all the time. Focusing on being a contender in 2024 in the modern NFL is like focusing on what you are going to be doing on your job 30 years from now. Its not useless, but so much will happen between now and then its more a theoretical exercise than practical.

The most important position in the NFL is QB (just look at the playoff teams to verify that) and WFT doesn't have one. Until they get one they can focus on role players and defensive studs all they until want until 2024 but they wont be any closer to winning then than they are now.

This reads like you think we have the Rams roster before they traded for Stafford. We most certainly don't.

QB is everything, I will agree with you. But pushing all in for a guy who will be 39 at the end of next year is something you do when you have Jalen Ramsey, Aaron Donald, Cooper Kupp, etc.

Ashburn Syndrome all over this thread.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This reads like you think we have the Rams roster before they traded for Stafford. We most certainly don't.

QB is everything, I will agree with you. But pushing all in for a guy who will be 39 at the end of next year is something you do when you have Jalen Ramsey, Aaron Donald, Cooper Kupp, etc.

Ashburn Syndrome all over this thread.

So what happens when they get the pieces in place sometime by 2024-27 and they don't have a QB? The answer is they still wont win because they don't have the most important position on the field. The idea of getting the pieces in place and then filling in with a good/great QB is ridiculous. You gotta grab a great QB when you can get him.

My argument isn't for going all in on only AR. If they have a shot at one of the top free agent QBs in the off season they should go all in. I don't care how great the pieces are a team isn't winning with a Heinicke or someone like him at QB.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by irish

So what happens when they get the pieces in place sometime by 2024-27 and they don't have a QB? The answer is they still wont win because they don't have the most important position on the field. The idea of getting the pieces in place and then filling in with a good/great QB is ridiculous. You gotta grab a great QB when you can get him.

My argument isn't for going all in on only AR. If they have a shot at one of the top free agent QBs in the off season they should go all in. I don't care how great the pieces are a team isn't winning with a Heinicke or someone like him at QB.

OK now on that point, I completely and fully agree. I want them to push the chips in for a quarterback, big time. I just don't see why we'd want that to be Rodgers.

Wilson makes the most sense to me. Watson I'm interested in too assuming you can do the due diligence it takes to get comfortable with the legal entanglements. I'd rather get a guy I know we could keep here for five years.

All of this of course is governed less by our preferences and more by external factors. I'm sitting here saying oh I'd rather have Wilson over Watson and Watson over Rodgers, but in reality none of them might actually be available or desirable.

Wilson might move on but only to a list of three teams that doesn't include Washington. Rodgers might decide I'm going elsewhere but only to Denver. Watson's legal trouble might be real.

But in a world where I'm needing to trade lots of assets for a QB I'm really hoping it ends up to be somebody younger than 39 at the end of next season.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

OK now on that point, I completely and fully agree. I want them to push the chips in for a quarterback, big time. I just don't see why we'd want that to be Rodgers.

Wilson makes the most sense to me. Watson I'm interested in too assuming you can do the due diligence it takes to get comfortable with the legal entanglements. I'd rather get a guy I know we could keep here for five years.

All of this of course is governed less by our preferences and more by external factors. I'm sitting here saying oh I'd rather have Wilson over Watson and Watson over Rodgers, but in reality none of them might actually be available or desirable.

Wilson might move on but only to a list of three teams that doesn't include Washington. Rodgers might decide I'm going elsewhere but only to Denver. Watson's legal trouble might be real.

But in a world where I'm needing to trade lots of assets for a QB I'm really hoping it ends up to be somebody younger than 39 at the end of next season.

Younger is better but IMO AR is the best of your options and gives this team the best chance to win now. Its a win now league.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This reads like you think we have the Rams roster before they traded for Stafford. We most certainly don't.

QB is everything, I will agree with you. But pushing all in for a guy who will be 39 at the end of next year is something you do when you have Jalen Ramsey, Aaron Donald, Cooper Kupp, etc.

Ashburn Syndrome all over this thread.

I agree, i rather a Watson or younger guy out of the draft. AR gets us in the playoffs maybe a nfc champ trip but it be in a short window of time and in 2 years we are back right where we are now.

We need the next mahomies herbert allen etc...but so does everyone else.

[irish]

Originally Posted by mredskins

I agree, i rather a Watson or younger guy out of the draft. AR gets us in the playoffs maybe a nfc champ trip but it be in a short window of time and in 2 years we are back right where we are now.

We need the next mahomies herbert allen etc...but so does everyone else.

So after 30 years of being a laughing stock you'd say getting AR wasn't worth it for two or three years of playoffs and maybe NFC Championship? Wow. I guess beggars really can be choosers.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by irish

So after 30 years of being a laughing stock you'd say getting AR wasn't worth it for two or three years of playoffs and maybe NFC Championship? Wow. I guess beggars really can be choosers.

Look at TB if tom hangs it up; they got a Super Bowl so that is big but now they got a lot cleaning up to do.

do you want 2/3 years of fun and a decade of clean up

Or a allen herbert etc...situation where we are competive for a good solid decade

[irish]

Originally Posted by mredskins

Look at TB if tom hangs it up; they got a Super Bowl so that is big but now they got a lot cleaning up to do.

do you want 2/3 years of fun and a decade of clean up

Or a allen herbert etc...situation where we are competive for a good solid decade

Yes. This organization has had 30 years of clean up so I don't think 2 or 3 years of fun and winning would be a hard sell to whatever fans are left.

While Allen and Herbert look good you cant say for certain that they have a decade of good play in them.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by mredskins

Look at TB if tom hangs it up; they got a Super Bowl so that is big but now they got a lot cleaning up to do.

do you want 2/3 years of fun and a decade of clean up

Or a allen herbert etc...situation where we are competive for a good solid decade

Brady took over a talented but older team in his 40s. Rodgers is 38, so he's closed to that.

Again, this is why I think Russ Wilson makes sense for SO many reasons, including getting more years out of him.

[Chief X_Phackter]

Originally Posted by mredskins

do you want 2/3 years of fun and a decade of clean up

Or a allen herbert etc...situation where we are competive for a good solid decade

I want neither.

I want 2-3 years of fun (Rodgers/Wilson...), and also draft a Mahomes to be competitive for the foreseeable future once Rodgers/Wilson... is done.