Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
MintBaconDrivel  
#1 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 12:51:56 PM(UTC)
ProFootballTalk said:
At a time when it appeared that the next quarterback contract extension would be given to Aaron Rodgers by the Packers, the Cowboys finally got their long-coveted deal in place with Tony Romo. And with Romo, who has won precisely one career playoff game, now under contract at a seven-year average of $17 million, Rodgers'
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#2 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 2:20:34 PM(UTC)
I don't know whether this belongs in this thread or your other about the need for a franchise QB. I say this from the perspective of someone who sees Romo (on TV) virtually every week, and whose second favorite team (albeit distant second) is the Cowboys. Romo is good, maybe even great at times, but he is not so special that he couldn't be adequately replaced by ...... most of the QBs warming benches around the NFL. And no, that is not just a slam of Romo. I would say the same for Cutler, Stafford, Ryan, Flacco, Griffin, Luck, basically everybody not named Rodgers, Brady, Brees, or P. Manning - and really, I'm not sure the list of difference makers even extends to the other three - it may begin and end with Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers IMO is in a class by himself in terms of quality.

All of that being said, I don't see how the signing of Romo underscores the importance of a new deal for Rodgers in the immediate future. Yeah, I would love to have it happen this off-season. It's unthinkable to lose him, and for peace of mind, I hope the big deal comes through soon and is a "rest of the career" contract. Yeah, I want to see the sky being the limit for Rodgers in terms of money. However, I don't see the signing of Romo or Flacco as significantly impacting the Rodgers contract. Why? Because I expect Rodgers to get so much more money than either of those that the slight expansion of market value has little effect.

I fully expect Rodgers to get a ten or more year contract for well over $200 million, with $100 + million guaranteed, and for that to happen WITHOUT significant harm done to the Packers salary cap situation - I mean like $10 million or less cap hit the first year.
sschind  
#3 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 3:27:04 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't know whether this belongs in this thread or your other about the need for a franchise QB. I say this from the perspective of someone who sees Romo (on TV) virtually every week, and whose second favorite team (albeit distant second) is the Cowboys. Romo is good, maybe even great at times, but he is not so special that he couldn't be adequately replaced by ...... most of the QBs warming benches around the NFL. And no, that is not just a slam of Romo. I would say the same for Cutler, Stafford, Ryan, Flacco, Griffin, Luck, basically everybody not named Rodgers, Brady, Brees, or P. Manning - and really, I'm not sure the list of difference makers even extends to the other three - it may begin and end with Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers IMO is in a class by himself in terms of quality.

All of that being said, I don't see how the signing of Romo underscores the importance of a new deal for Rodgers in the immediate future. Yeah, I would love to have it happen this off-season. It's unthinkable to lose him, and for peace of mind, I hope the big deal comes through soon and is a "rest of the career" contract. Yeah, I want to see the sky being the limit for Rodgers in terms of money. However, I don't see the signing of Romo or Flacco as significantly impacting the Rodgers contract. Why? Because I expect Rodgers to get so much more money than either of those that the slight expansion of market value has little effect.

I fully expect Rodgers to get a ten or more year contract for well over $200 million, with $100 + million guaranteed, and for that to happen WITHOUT significant harm done to the Packers salary cap situation - I mean like $10 million or less cap hit the first year.


I guess we see it differently. Aside from maybe a few really young guys who haven't really had their chance yet I don't see more than 3 maybe 4 of the QBs warming the bench on any team as viable starters in the NFL. I think that is why so many teams have been reaching to draft young QBs the last couple of years. There is no one in the league now that you realistically have a chance to get (read that as backups on other teams) that are any better than any rookie you might draft. Teams are locking up their starters and letting the backups go but that is mainly because the backups suck. Players like Flynn and Kolb and Palmer are getting looks now but I could see any of the teams that get those players drafting a QB #1 anyway.

I hate the cowboys with a passion but Romo is not a bad QB. He is certainly in the top half of QBs in the league and could be a top 10. I don't see any current benchwarmers who could step in and give the cowboys anything like they get from Romo.

User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#4 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 3:34:39 PM(UTC)
The Packers have been very fortunate to have been blessed with Starr, Dickey, Favre, and Rodgers. With the exception of Dickey, a lot of winning has occurred because of these guys. And I would say that Favre and Rodgers did more with less talent than Starr had - and Starr himself has said he is nowhere near the quarterback Favre and Rodgers are. Whatever we end up paying Rodgers, it will seem like a bargain in a couple years. There isn't a player in the league that I would trade him for.

As for Romo, well, I'll just grin a little bit about it. I will say though, that the Cowboys have squandered a lot of talent since the middle of the 00's and their problems are a lot deeper seeded than Tony Romo.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#5 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 7:19:52 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
The Packers have been very fortunate to have been blessed with Starr, Dickey, Favre, and Rodgers. With the exception of Dickey, a lot of winning has occurred because of these guys. And I would say that Favre and Rodgers did more with less talent than Starr had - and Starr himself has said he is nowhere near the quarterback Favre and Rodgers are. Whatever we end up paying Rodgers, it will seem like a bargain in a couple years. There isn't a player in the league that I would trade him for.

As for Romo, well, I'll just grin a little bit about it. I will say though, that the Cowboys have squandered a lot of talent since the middle of the 00's and their problems are a lot deeper seeded than Tony Romo.


We actually agree on something. What's the world coming to hahahaha.

User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#6 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 7:22:55 PM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
I guess we see it differently. Aside from maybe a few really young guys who haven't really had their chance yet I don't see more than 3 maybe 4 of the QBs warming the bench on any team as viable starters in the NFL. I think that is why so many teams have been reaching to draft young QBs the last couple of years. There is no one in the league now that you realistically have a chance to get (read that as backups on other teams) that are any better than any rookie you might draft. Teams are locking up their starters and letting the backups go but that is mainly because the backups suck. Players like Flynn and Kolb and Palmer are getting looks now but I could see any of the teams that get those players drafting a QB #1 anyway.

I hate the cowboys with a passion but Romo is not a bad QB. He is certainly in the top half of QBs in the league and could be a top 10. I don't see any current benchwarmers who could step in and give the cowboys anything like they get from Romo.



My point wasn't that Romo is bad, but that Rodgers is good - more like super. As for the bench warmer thing, I've seen more than a few nobodies pressed into service as QBs for good teams over the years and do a .... let's say barely adequate job. Arguably, the net body of work for Romo is barely adequate.

nerdmann  
#7 Posted : Sunday, March 31, 2013 9:30:00 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
The Packers have been very fortunate to have been blessed with Starr, Dickey, Favre, and Rodgers. With the exception of Dickey, a lot of winning has occurred because of these guys. And I would say that Favre and Rodgers did more with less talent than Starr had - and Starr himself has said he is nowhere near the quarterback Favre and Rodgers are. Whatever we end up paying Rodgers, it will seem like a bargain in a couple years. There isn't a player in the league that I would trade him for.

As for Romo, well, I'll just grin a little bit about it. I will say though, that the Cowboys have squandered a lot of talent since the middle of the 00's and their problems are a lot deeper seeded than Tony Romo.


I don't know about Dickey, but the Packers were not "blessed" with Starr, Favre OR Rodgers. All of these quarterbacks were CREATED by the organization. Starr sucked his first year or two. He was what, a 17 round draft pick? Favre was traded out of Atlanta for being a drunkass country boy. And Rodgers himself wasn't exactly lighting it up under the Sherman/Rosseley regime. Imo, without Mike, Aaron probably wouldn't even be as good as Alex Smith has become. Hard to say I guess, maybe they would have gotten a different QB guru to coach him up.

Point being, none of these QBs happened by accident.

And as for Favre and Rodgers, they're not half the man Starr was, and I'd take Starr over either one of them, any day of the week.

Not knocking them as players, but Starr was in a league of his own.
Zero2Cool  
#8 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 4:05:53 AM(UTC)
No source, but on Facebook they had some trending article of some kind that said Packers and Aaron Rodgers are about $2 million apart.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#9 Posted : Monday, April 1, 2013 6:11:57 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
No source, but on Facebook they had some trending article of some kind that said Packers and Aaron Rodgers are about $2 million apart.


hahahaha is that $2 million total for the length of the contract? or per season? or per game? Assuming it is per season, that's an insignificant figure - considering that he will undoubtedly average well over $20 million per season, and I HOPE they make it a ten or more year contract - to lessen the cap hit and give us the peace of mind of having him for the rest of his career. I say split the difference and give him $23 million a season instead of $22 or 24 million hahaha.

Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Fan Shout
beast (13h) : Who are the longshots? Jags? Saints? Redskins? and who?
SINCITYCHEEZE (13h) : Buckeye closing in on 4 Longshots in Pickem today....Son you need to hook me up we could make a killing on some parlays next weekend. Lol
beast (15h) : Bears ran it 60% of the time...
beast (19h) : Bears tried hard to give it away, but Steelers couldn't take it
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Lot of injuries :(
Zero2Cool (20h) : OUT for the Packers: WR Randall Cobb S Kentrell Brice CB Davon House LB Jake Ryan LB Nick Perry T David Bakhtiari DT Mike Daniels
beast (20h) : Ravens/Jags must be a FF nightmare, as ol' TEs who never score, had 4 of the 6 TDs
beast (21h) : Bears beating Steelers at halftime.
beast (21h) : https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/yp89dj/stephen-a-smith-points-out-nfls-paid-patriotism-problem
beast (21h) : I just read that it wasn't until the NFL started getting paid by the DoD (in 2009), that players were on the sidelines for the Anthem. (I ca
Zero2Cool (21h) : apparently it was comon to stay in lockeroom years ago
Zero2Cool (21h) : i couldn't find anything confirming its against the rules
beast (21h) : Is it against the rules to be in the lockerroom for the Anthem?
yooperfan (22h) : Prolly some fines coming down.
Zero2Cool (22h) : it is? this could be interesting
yooperfan (22h) : It's against league rules for a team not to be on the field during the National Anthem.
Nonstopdrivel (22h) : Chat room posting to the top instead of bottom again.
Zero2Cool (22h) : Jordy Nelson IN. Randall Cobb OUT.
Nonstopdrivel (22h) : Where is everybody? There's plenty of football to talk about!
yinzer (23h) : what??
Zero2Cool (23h) : Today's Birthdays: mi_keys (29)
Zero2Cool (23h) : Steelers Will Remain In Locker Room During National Anthem
Zero2Cool (23h) : thanks
buckeyepackfan (24-Sep) : Good Morning Packer Fans! Gameday! GO! PACK! GO!
buckeyepackfan (24-Sep) : Happy Belated Birthday Z2C!
beast (24-Sep) : Happy Birthday
wpr (23-Sep) : Hope you had a great day Z.
uffda udfa (23-Sep) : Happy Birthday, Z.
macbob (23-Sep) : Z2C-Hope you had a wonderful birthday! Thanks for providing us a great place to hang out.
Smokey (23-Sep) : Anyone watching the Utah vs Arizona tonight .
Cheesey (22-Sep) : No..."Fired FROM the forge!"LOL!
Smokey (21-Sep) : A "Forged in Fire" wash out ? LOL
Cheesey (21-Sep) : Zero got cut??? I TOLD him not to play with knives!
uffda udfa (21-Sep) : Spriggs to IR.
uffda udfa (21-Sep) : Nick Perry having surgery on finger likely out this week.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
59m / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

22-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

22-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

21-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

21-Sep / Around The NFL / Cheesey

21-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

20-Sep / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

Headlines