Cory's Corner: Don't Even Think About Tagging Adams

The NFL's best receiver needs a deal in hand before the March 8 deadline. 

The Packers have a week to get a deal done with Davante Adams.

Tuesday, March 8 at 3:00 p.m. central time is the deadline for the Packers to make a decision whether they will use the franchise tag on the game’s best receiver.

If the Packers are even considering doing this, it is something that could potentially blow up in their face. Remember, players hate being tagged because they usually get less than they would get on the open market.

But it also hurts the team as well. Washington tagged Kirk Cousins in 2016 and 2017 — becoming the first quarterback to repeat as a franchise tagged player. He was paid $19.9 million in 2016 and $23.9 million 2017.

That offseason, Cousins, spurred by mounting frustration over a long-term deal, signed with Minnesota. 

According to OverTheCap.com, Adams would get $19.1 million if he was tagged. But in order for the Packers to do that, they must have the salary cap space — and the Packers are currently $30.4 million in the red after recently restructuring Kenny Clark, Aaron Jones and David Bakhtiari. 

Tagging Adams, who turns 30 on Christmas Eve, should be the very last resort. Granted, I don’t want to pay him over $23 million a season, but if you give him a long-term deal, that money can be spread out and you could give him more guaranteed money up front. 

This is a passing league. You need a great receiving threat if you want to compete. Adams was sixth in the league with 14 catches of 25 yards or more and he was second in the NFL in targets with 169 — behind Cooper Kupp’s 191. 

You could make the argument that Rodgers makes the receivers and that’s true to some extent. However, without Adams, this offense would stumble. Adams can win any one-on-one matchup that is presented to him thanks to some of the  best route running in the game. 

And his hands have gotten better since his first two seasons in 2014 and 2015. 

What Adams needs to understand is what he can accomplish without Rodgers. For the sake of argument, let’s say that Jordan Love is the quarterback for the Packers in 2022 — which I don’t think will happen. Adams will likely put up his fourth single digit receiving touchdown season of his career and will have a hard time cracking 1,000 yards.

Rodgers knows where Adams is going to be and Adams knows where Rodgers wants to throw it. In the last three years, Adams has received 28 percent of Green Bay’s targets and 30 percent of the team’s receiving touchdowns. 

Rodgers has often been criticized for locking on to one guy — and he did that in the NFC Divisional Playoff loss to San Francisco. But if Rodgers is going to throw to just one guy, wouldn’t you rather have it be Adams?

Which is why the Packers need to get a deal done before they can even think about placing a franchise tag on the Packers’ No. 2 receiver in franchise history behind Don Hutson. 

 

-------------------

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

NFL Categories: 
1 points

Comments (133)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Bure9620's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:20 am

That is almost certainly not happening.....Adams is tagged

0 points
2
2
marpag1's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:34 am

There is a small chance that the Packers could reach an long term agreement before then, but yes, you're right... it's very highly likely that the Packers will - and obviously should - tag Adams.

It's painfully silly to argue otherwise. If nothing else, it buys you time to negotiate. Your option is to let him walk. Who in their right mind does that?

-2 points
2
4
NickPerry's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:28 am

"Tuesday, March 8 at 3:00 p.m. central time is the deadline for the Packers to make a decision whether they will use the franchise tag on the game’s best receiver."

Yup...AND the Packers would basically cut Za'Darius Smith and Billy Turner. Extend Jarie Alexander, Adrian Amos, & Preston Smith with a BUNCH more void years tacked on, and they STILL don't know what the hell Rodgers is doing or how much it will take.

I am OFFICIALLY sick and tired of these Salary Cap gymnastics and EVERYTHING else involved, to HOPEFULLY (In managements eyes) to keep an aging QB who is 0-4 in his last 4 NFCCG who still hasn't committed.

Oh, and yes, I'm dying to give the ONLY WR on the roster who's turning 30, $30 million a year or close to it.

Ted is OFFICIALLY rolling over in his grave!!!!!!!

15 points
20
5
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:46 am

I heard Gutekunst on the news a couple of days ago basically revelling in his and Ball's use of void years to keep the team together. He said that he's counting on the cap to continue rising, so he has no problem with extending players into the future. Into infinity, I guess. I've been a big supporter of his, but he's doing the franchise a huge disservice and, IMO, needs to go NOW.

0 points
2
2
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:10 am

I come back to the fact (and CW and I debated this the other day) that BG is likely working from an organizational blueprint or imperative. He's been given parameters to work within, and this is how it's going to get done.

Up until Bakhtiari's extension/rework, I was 50-50 on whether I thought 12 would be back and what the Packers would do with Adams. Now I'm about 75-25 in thinking that ARod will be back, and if he's back, they'll be tagging Adams in the next few days. The structure of the Bakhtiari deal doesn't signal to me a team that is pivoting and planning to move on from ARod. Don't get me wrong, the Packers were going to need to get some $$ from the Bakhtiari bank in some way. I don't think this is the right path for this team and roster, but I'm a layman fan.

4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:10 am

I don't think Gutekunst is going anywhere. As dobber stated, this is an organizational plan and not a wild hair decision by Gutekunst. That's not how this is done.

Apparently, The Plan is to push as much as we can to the future, anticipating an expanded cap. Meanwhile, we'll use the draft to get replacements for Rodgers, Adams, Bakhtiari, Turner, Jones, ZSmith, P.Smith, Cobb, Lewis.

I've never been a fan of being in debt, and that's what this feels like to me. But I'm sure Russ Ball knows a helluva more about this than I do. We get to continue to compete with this very good team for another two years.

0 points
3
3
Since'61's picture

March 01, 2022 at 01:16 pm

LH - I think that you are absolutely correct that the Packers will try to use the draft to eventually replace AR, Adams, Bak, the Smiths and others. However, for me, the flaw in this plan is that we will probably continue to reach the playoffs as you correctly state. Which probably means that we will continue to draft later in most rounds which will likely make it difficult to replace players at level of Adams. Bak, the Smiths etc.

We saw this happen with the last few TT drafts form 2014 to 2017 in particular. Yes, we get to continue to compete for another 2 years only this time, when those 2 seasons are over we will be in that situation without a player like AR to build a team around.

for me, This is all pointing to Murphy, Gute and Ball leaving the team in a long term declining spiral. I hope that I'm wrong. Stay safe. Thanks, Since '61

7 points
7
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 01:34 pm

Since 61....

Bakhtiari, a Day 3 guy.
Adams, a 2nd round guy.
Smiths, free agent acquisitions.

There's plenty of ways to get good players while drafting later in the round. Ask Aaron Rodgers.

Football is a game of replacement. We have one of the best teams in the league.....why should we blow things up just because we've come up a foot short? Why don't we hold on to what we've got ? Add to it? Before the 2024 season starts, we could add three good drafts to the core that will still remain.

I think Murphy, Gute, and Ball know what they're doing.

-2 points
2
4
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 04:57 pm

You've said that you're happy if the team wins the division, so I see your point of view. For those of us who are happy only with a Championship, then your POV is extremely short-sighted, because we KNOW what happens when we win the division - one-and-done.

Doing the same things with the same tools and expecting different results is not a good way to go through life, especially when your primary tool is a major part of your problem.

2 points
3
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:55 pm

Jurp, Let’s think this through.

😎. I am happy with winning the division and going to the playoffs
😀. You are happy ONLY with Championships

So, over the last three decades, you’ve been happy twice and I’ve been happy a bunch of times.

And MY view is extremely short sighted? 😎. I always choose happiness, but if your way works better for you, good.

What if you’re getting the results you want? 39-10? This is a very good team and you’re saying it should be blown up because that will somehow give us a better chance than trying to just improve a little bit in the offseason.

0 points
2
2
Stickfish's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:11 pm

The Packers and Ron Wolf pinned their turnaround hopes on a guy who threw five passes — two of which were intercepted — as a rookie and overslept for the team picture after a night of carousing. And it worked out brilliantly.

But the team president at the time, Bob Harlan, wasn’t so sure. He accompanied Wolf to a Packers-Falcons game in Atlanta late in the 1991 season, four days after he’d hired Wolf as GM.

"So I'm up in the press box in Atlanta, about an hour and a half before the ballgame, just sitting there," Harlan recalled in 2019. "Ron comes up, puts his briefcase in the chair next to me and says, ‘I'm going down to the field to look at Atlanta's backup quarterback. If his arm is still as strong as it was in college,' he said, ‘we're going to go after him.' Just like that. So Ron goes downstairs, and 45 minutes later he comes back and says, ‘I'm going to trade for Brett Favre. Are you OK with that?' I said, Sure.'”

Harlan paused, and smiled. "I didn't know who Brett Favre was."

The FO has had some success in the past, I’m going to give them a pass on their future plans.

2 points
2
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:52 pm

While I gave you a "Thumbs Up" lets not confuse Gutey with Ron Wolf. Oh, and Favre wasn't the backup, he was at least 3rd string. ; )

The timing of Gutey drafting Love was questionable to say the least, and if he's going to extend the 4 time MVP for two more seasons, I hope Gutey can jettison Love to recoup some draft capital. Just saying.

Doesn't surprise me that Bob Harlan didn't know who Favre was either. ; )

4 points
4
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:51 pm

Why do we have to jettison Love? Do we not need a capable backup QB? Is he going to get worse?

He’s under contract. He’s still cheap. He’ll be here for two or three more years. I think he’s an asset to us.

1 points
1
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:05 pm

Oh, I wouldn't jettison him unless a GM were willing to part with some decent Draft capital. We can find any number of guys to hold a clip board. And we can draft a QB next year, or the year after depending on ARs extension.

Don't get me wrong, I love Love. I think it's a shame he probably won't get on the field in his rookie contract. I think in all fairness, I hope Gutey gets a wicked offer for Love so he can trade him and he gets his shot. That would get Gutey off the hook, and Love a much deserved chance.

Obviously, if AR asks for a trade, we have our starting QB, at least for the next season or two. It should be at least entertaining the next few weeks.

2 points
2
0
gmeyers1's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:18 am

You seem to be saying that the solution to losing conference championship games is to not play in them.

1 points
2
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:32 am

No, I'm saying you have to win the division and make the playoffs to get to the conference championship.

I swear, this board is full of guys who are obsessed with scoring before they even get to first base.

-1 points
2
3
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:37 am

No first bases in football. That’s possibly the source of confusion?

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:56 am

It's all the same game. First you stand, then you walk, then you run. You have to win in the semifinals to make the finals. You can't do it the other way around. You can't just jump to the end, and you can't guarantee outcomes (unless, of course, you cheat).

1 points
1
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 04:57 pm

BUT WE DON'T WIN IN THE SEMI-FINALS! Sheesh.

3 points
3
0
MainePackFan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:07 am

LH. I'm not sure, but by the lay of the thread I think gmeyers was replying to jurp.

1 points
1
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:49 pm

Totally agree NP. Totally.

0 points
0
0
stockholder's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:34 am

Catch and Release! So whats the Bait. MONEY! Rodgers is hooked on Adams. If he wants him that bad. Let him pay the 30 mil. After all, the rumors of his 50 mil. Contract. Is astronomical. How is this much money Life changing to them? This about greed. Not Team. And ADAMS never won the NFL MVP. I say let him go. No matter what the price. He’s grown up. It’s Time he leaves the House.

3 points
9
6
croatpackfan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:36 am

Well I believe that Aaron Rodgers did not ask $50 mil per season. He asked for $49.5 mil per season, 5 season deal... He gave discount to the Packers because they eat his sh**s!

-2 points
4
6
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:52 am

Tag and trade! Let's get draft capital.

I'm convinced if Gutey shuttles both Rodgers and Adam's he can put together a very strong and competitive team for many years to come assuming he does a reasonably good job drafting.

6 points
7
1
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:12 am

According to Pete Dougherty on JSOnline, he has had conversations with scouts who say Adams would bring as much as a late 1st and as low as a late 2nd round pick in trade--keeping in mind that the acquiring team still needs to pony up a deal for Adams that he'll sign. If that's true, it's better than letting him walk...assuming that letting him walk means no 12 and a pivot to a new QB.

5 points
5
0
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:31 am

There is only one valid reason for tagging Adams and that is that we have a pre agreed and mutually acceptable trade partner. Teams that pay that much to a 30 year old WR need to ask if he is the difference maker to cap the team off.

Good teams have shown that Adams alone can be stopped, whether the dependency is due to Rodgers caused predilection or a lack of ability elsewhere is immaterial. A team centered on Rodgers and Adams has been proven to be Ill equipped to succeed when it matters. Retaining Adams almost ensured a rerun of that lesson given or cap and the same result is the odds on outcome.

6 points
7
1
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:03 am

Not to pick nits, but anybody alone can be stopped. OJ, Csonka, Earl, Rice, even Brady.

This team is not centered on Rodgers to Adams on the field. On the field, the RBs are getting the ball on over 54% of the plays. Adams gets it about 15% of the tim Together, the #1 WR and the RB are over 70% of our offense.

And it's not like we won't start 2022 with a better group than the one which finished 2021. We'll have Bakhtiari and Jenkins. We might use a premium pick on a skill position player. So I'm not quite ready to say "We have no hope with Rodgers and Adams". I think it's entirely possble to have a better offense in 2022 than we did last year.

-1 points
2
3
croatpackfan's picture

March 02, 2022 at 03:52 am

It is doubtful if Packers will be able to field Jenkins. How it pans out with David?

2 points
2
0
Packers0808's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:56 am

It seems simple, Rodgers and Adams wanting highest paid, stroking their egos is all it is! Hell with rest of team, ME is important!

11 points
14
3
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:30 am

Rodgers has stated the rumors of his desire for a 50M contract is false. It’s also common for QB’s of his stature to get the next highest contract. Brady with TB contract is one of the only I can remember who didn’t get the highest and he was 42 with a year of declining talent before leaving NE. I don’t believe its as much of stroking an ego as it is getting paid for your value. You can’t fault a guy for asking for your value, whether its a football player or any of us at our job. Would I love to see those two sign a contract for 1/2 of their value, YES I would, but that’s not realistic to expect. We are in this situation for many reasons, Rodgers contract is just one of them.

Signing 4 big FA contract all in one year, 3 years ago is a big one as well. But, nobody wants to talk about that.
It’s like a kid in a candy store, if you let the kid run wild he will eat all the candy. Unfortunately, the kid gets fat, just like the Packers did with their salary cap. This is what “all in” looks like.

3 points
5
2
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:51 am

The main reason we're in this situation is because the FO has allowed the team to BE in this situation. Had they followed logic and common sense, Rodgers would've been gone last spring and we'd be looking at a lot more draft picks over this and next year's drafts. No, the cowards at 1265 covered their asses and have basically sold out the team to AR, very probably wrecking the franchise's future in the process.

-2 points
3
5
Guam's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:17 am

I liked the "all-in" for last year, however I will mind it for this year. One last hurrah with Rodgers that would result in only one year of cap pain was not a bad idea, but damaging the team's future for several years for another "last dance" is managerial negligence.

However I am starting to think Rodgers may bail management out of their idiocy. Management has repeatedly professed their desire to have Rodgers return, yet no decision has been reached and no contract signed. Why not? There has to be a problem and I suspect that problem is Davante Adams. Rodgers wants Adams back and may be hinging his return on Adams return. TGR has thoroughly demonstrated that resigning Adams is going to require lots of cuts elsewhere and Packer management appears to be unwilling to be that crazy (Packers FO and Adams are not talking). Might Rodgers just decide he can't play without Adams in Green Bay and move on to other pastures? Hopefully we will know soon.

6 points
6
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:41 am

Hasn't Rodgers said that he wants to play with Adams in the future? I thought so, but could be wrong. But yeah, AR's decision must be tied to the team's decision on Adams or he would've been extended by now. We'll possibly know more after McAfee's show, and definitely know more after Adams is eligible for tagging.

2 points
2
0
Guam's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:21 am

Rodgers has made statements supporting Adams, but I can't remember (which isn't saying much....) Rodgers ever officially tying his tenure in Green Bay to Adams tenure with the Packers. However it is looking more and more like that may be the case.

2 points
2
0
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:24 am

Jurp….that’s true, but we also wouldn’t have found out whether Rodgers would’ve helped us win a SB or not in 2021 season. We had already started the process of “all in” and last year most on this site wanted Rodgers back to try and win the big one. Now that it didn’t happen most want him gone.

Since we are already in SC hell, I’m one of the minority that wants him back to try to make another run at it over the next two years. Many Fans want it both ways, what I mean by that is if Rodgers would’ve led GB to a SB victory, almost all would want him back again. Since he didn’t many want him gone. The reality a lot has to go right for a team to win a SB and it certainly all isn’t on the QB. What also is true is that normally it takes a great QB to win a SB. It could be years or decades before we get another great QB.

0 points
2
2
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:41 am

murf....a week or two ago, I posted that it was fear that was making people reluctant to move on from Rodgers, and you pointed out that it was entirely possible to believe that the Packers would be better for the next year or two with Rodgers than without him.

I gave that a lot of thought, and I have to agree with you. And I think the organization agrees with you too. And that means that all this "we want Rodgers back" stuff that we hear from the organization probably isn't just theater, as I had presumed.

Which means we'll sign Adams, and we'll probably sign him for a lot less than people think. Adams will have to decide whether he wants to play elsewhere, for more money, or stay here in Green Bay with a guy who will feed him the ball, even to the exclusion of other receivers. This is Adams ticket to the HOF; two more prolific seasons will put him near the top in yards, receptions, TDs, etc.

I'm not sure if you need a great QB to win, or if winning makes the QB great. Nobody thought Stafford was a great QB. Flacco. Eli Manning. In fact, if you take Brady out of the equation, it's a bunch of one and dones: Wilson, Mahomes, Stafford, Flacco......

The overwhelming majority of Super Bowl winners are guys under 30. That means they're on their rookie deal, or second deal. IMO, if your QB is over 30 and hasn't been back to the Super Bowl in the last few years, you're ahead to change horses to a younger guy.

But I don't think we're going to do that. We'll run with Rodgers....and Adams....for a few more years. We'll win a Super Bowl IF these two guys can lead us to it. So far, that's been a no.

1 points
2
1
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:43 am

Yeah, let's just keep doing the same thing with the same players as we have been for the past three years and expect different results. Sounds like a GREAT plan.

4 points
5
1
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:46 am

I favored the shot last year, though I was one who initially premised that on Rodgers agreeing to free up space to add guys LAST Year. Even when he refused, it still seemed plausible. Essentially no cap hangover and a roster that should have been good enough.

This year the situation is, to me, wholly different for threr main reasons. Firstly we saw the same failings from Rodgers and, I think Regression from LaFleur. It seems neither can or has learned.

Secondly, the cap position this year is infinitely worse and we don’t have the ability to retain strength and depth without miraculous drafts and miraculous SFAs for the second year running.

Thirdly, the simple reality is that now we are talking about burdening the future significantly, to a point that eats up projected cap growth, I think as far as 2026. Not only that, but much if that will be being spent on players that won’t be on the roster at that time, meaning we get zero for a significant chunk of our cap. That’s a great way to consign a team to the wilderness.

It is supremely ironic that these moves will essentially force us to rely on the draft and develop only approach that led to the implosion of the late TT era until Rodgers is gone. That reality gives the lie to all the BS that the last dance was a rationally repeatable tour.

4 points
4
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:46 am

Well, Coldworld, you know that we are beating similar drum.

But, LAR showed that it can be done. They are now w/o 1st and 2nd picks for several years and traded and paid some players quite large amount of money. But, what is interesting that they have 5-6 players that eat 60% of their salary cap, while others are on very low contracts or on rookie deals from 3rd to 7th round values.

Last season (2021) they were lucky that their low round picks played well. And that they did not suffer lot of injuries.

Packers can not count on that. That is game of ifs and game of hope. And old Croatian proverb says: "Fear rarely cheats, while hope cheats steadily!"

1 points
1
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:22 am

jurp......Come on man.

"Same thing with the same players"........

Yeah, I do think there's merit to that. It's a real good group, if it's all together and healthy. Do we think we might have had a different result if Bakhtiari and Jenkins had been in the game? Entirely possible.

Look, you plan to win the division, and then you hope for the best in the playoffs. You can't just keep tearing down and replacing, you have to build.

To that very good group that ended the season, we can add Bakhtiari, and Jenkins. We might add some talent in the draft. We are so close.....why blow it up IF YOU DON"T HAVE TO?

As I've repeatedly said, I'd favor moving on without Rodgers or Adams. But I don't think the Packer Brass agrees and if that's the decision then I'm onboard. I'm just trying to explain the reasoning behind the "Keep Rodgers and Adams" plan.

1 points
2
1
croatpackfan's picture

March 02, 2022 at 03:53 am

"Look, you plan to win the division, and then you hope for the best in the playoffs. You can't just keep tearing down and replacing, you have to build."

Hey, you can plan to do that through more than one season. If you do on that premise, you have better chances to achieve the goal. Packers did it 3 years in the row (started with high deal with Aaron Rodgers before 2019 season), signing impact FA for a lot of money, and constantly improving the team. But, when plan did not succeed, you need to start from beginning. You can not bring back the same team, because you do not have enough SC space. 2 players, no matter how good they are, even on the top of their abilities are not, and never be enough to win SB.

Also, it is sad when people start to fool themselves. We all knows that players by age of 30 start to decline, some younger, some older, but the question is only 1 or 2 years of difference (of course, there is outliers, like Tom Brady). QB position is special, because experience is important part of playing the position, so experience QB can hide or overcome his diminished capabilities by using his experience and adapting how he plays. Unfortunately, Aaron Rodgers insists that his capabilities are the same as he had at age 30 or less, why he is making mistakes.

2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

March 02, 2022 at 08:40 am

Winning a division with an ascending roster/QB for a team in rebuild is a big thing indeed, but then it’s a validation of a step in the right direction. It’s a big thing as a design for progress and because it signals a move into future contention.

Winning a division with an elite QB is the threshold expectation. If it doesn’t happen, there’s going to be an inquest as to why. Do you think a Mahommes team would celebrate a division a TD out?

The distinction isn’t a hard one to grasp or a new one. In our position, if we keep Rodgers, no, winning the division and going out isn’t a success it’s a disaster. The more so at the cost to the future that it will entail this year. It wouldn’t signal hope but futility now and worse for the future.

0 points
0
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:04 pm

LH - Oh,I understand their reasoning, but as someone who's been fiduciarily responsible for a business entity, their strategy is borderline criminal - pushing a huge amount of the costs out FIVE YEARS is not something that most businesses will do unless another entity (banks, usually) will be responsible if the walls cave in.

If we were to get nothing for AR and nothing for DA, then I could see their insistence on this "strategy", but this is not the case. When you depreciate an asset past its usefulness (which is in essence what the FO is doing by shifting costs to years when the players who've incurred those costs will no longer be on the team), then you are irresponsible and should be nowhere near making fiscal decisions of any kind.

1 points
1
0
TarynsEyes's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:09 am

"Adams will have to decide whether he wants to play elsewhere, for more money, or stay here in Green Bay with a guy who will feed him the ball,"

I would be shocked if Adams takes less money simply to catch balls from Rodgers and to see Rodgers get the recognition and money. Adams wants something more and it's money since he won't get what could make it worthy, a SB ring, an MVP, and a Pro Bowl selection isn't worth losing out on $millions a year in salary. The numbers Rodgers puts up are because of Adams, and Adams knows it. He wants his money and won't care whose throwing him the ball and where his receiving numbers land after he gets his money. Naturally, if a far lesser QB is his future, he'll proclaim his disgust with his lack of production with a sad face, but he'll have his money to make him smile and not care to levels unbelieved by fans. He hit the wrong side of 30 and wants what he and others work for, the MONEY.

3 points
4
1
Guam's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:36 am

LH: Agree with much of what you say, but don't agree that the Packers will sign Adams for "a lot less than people think". Adams has been consistent and at times emphatic that he wants to be the highest paid receiver in the game. Adams came from a disadvantaged background in Oakland, CA and has publicly stated this is his a chance to provide generational wealth and security for his family. He won't be signing a team friendly deal with the Packers or anyone else (and I don't blame him one bit).

If Packers choose to keep Adams, it will be with a full market contract.

3 points
3
0
Coldworld's picture

March 02, 2022 at 08:28 am

The idea that the roster will be better this year is based upon fantasy. Sure we might get some growth from Stokes, Newman and we get Bakh and Alexander back, but Bakh may yet not be as good or as durable and other injuries will happen.

We’ve already lost Campbell, and that provoked a lot of it’s not him but the system chatter, which I find thoroughly dubious. Now we are back in the miracle draft fiction. Great drafts, when they happen—which is generationally rare—still more rarely materialize in years one or two.

I get the desire to not face reality, but when a justification starts relying on multiple barely plausible assertions and extremely improbable hopes then the fact is that justification isn’t one at all.

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:21 am

"Since we are already in SC hell..."

To my mind, it makes a lot of sense to move on and try to engage the next window for the Packers because cap hell is one and done. The space that Adams and ARod inhabit in 2023 is vital to creating room for Jenkins, Alexander, and others who are nearing the ends of their rookie deals. Any of those guys--some of whom will need extensions starting this season (see: Alexander) can be manipulated to keep the 2022 number low (and actually generate a savings), but you've got to put the money somewhere, and that likely starts in 2023. Estimates on cap expansion don't seem generous enough to cover all that cash with Adams and ARod ARound.

"We had already started the process of “all in” and last year "

The Packers could've capitulated last year, given up in the face of an unprecedented cap shrinkage, and started anew. They chose to take a shot and manipulated the pieces starting last year--and it will mostly finish this year--to generate the cap to stay solvent and have a few pennies to rub together to bring in the Whitney Merciluses and the Rasul Douglases. I don't know that the room will be there this year. I think the team they emerge from camp with will mostly have to carry them through 17 tough games. The formula for all-in will likely be even more restrictive than a year ago.

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:55 am

I think your last two sentences are very much on target.

"I think the team they emerge from camp with will mostly be there this year".

Well, yeah. Always. I mean, you start with 90 and then pare it down . Eventually, you emerge from camp in August with your team. Yeah, you might make a key pickup, but you're also likely to lose some of the guys you started with. 45 dressed, 53 on the roster, another 10 or so on the practice squad. (I'm probably off by a little because I can't keep up with the changes.

What I think you might have meant is that most of our team for 2022 is in place already if we can resign/extend/push money down the road the guys we have meant "Don't look for dramatic additions via the draft or free agency."

Truthfully, if we could start the season with the guys we ended with, plus Bakhtiari and Jenkins and Tonyan, plus maybe ONE talented guy in the draft........I'd be happy with that. I'd take that team and I'd dominate the division and cruise into the playoffs.

We're all disappointed we fell short...again...last year, but there's a lot to be said for not throwing the baby out with the bath water. We keep Rodgers, and Adams, and Douglas, and our RFAs. We cut ties with Cobb and Z and push as much as we can to the future. We add some guys in the draft who'll be on rookie deals for 4 years.

And we can win this division for the next two years.

"The Formula for all-in will likely be even more restrictive".

Oh yeah. I mean, as my friend Scotty would say "I don't think the engines can take it".
The Packer Brass doesn't take this "Go for broke Last Dance" stuff as a one year shot. They could ride this very good horse for two more years while pushing money into the future. But we're going to be in really bad cap shape, no doubt.

Again, not the path I would have chosen but I'm a fan of simplicity.

-2 points
2
4
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:00 am

Most of a roster that failed and with less depth/experience? Hardly a recipe for a successful sales pitch to anyone not emotionally invested.

5 points
5
0
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:08 am

"I mean, as my friend Scotty would say "I don't think the engines can take it"."

Any post with a Scotty quote is an automatic upvote!

2 points
2
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:14 am

While I agree with you, doing it the way they're doing it gives them a final shot at a Super Bowl. (Maybe not a good shot, but a shot.)

Blowing it up this year, is giving up on AR/DA getting a ring together...

I understand why Gutey would try to extend the window a year. If we were to have all the stars align and did win it all, Gutey would look like a genius, AR could retire a Packer, and our 2nd leading WR in Packer history would have a ring too. Win/Win/Win.

If we trade AR and tag-n-trade DA it might be 3 or 5 years before we could sniff a Super Bowl. IDK, maybe not that long, but with AR/DA we have a chance, at least this year.

MM/Gutey/Ball really have no accountability to anyone. I think that's part of the problem.

-1 points
2
3
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:08 pm

I don't give a rat's fart if AR and DA do or don't get a ring together - what I care about is that ALL 53 players + practice squad get rings. Whether AR or DA are on the team is irrelevant.

AR retiring a Packer is NOT a win/win - it's a win for him and a loss for a team that could've gotten at least SOME compensation by trading him. It also, IIRC, negatively affects the cap, but I could be wrong about that.

2 points
2
0
PeteK's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:41 am

Were you saying that before the playoffs this season?

3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 12:28 pm

"The main reason we're in this situation is because the FO has allowed the team to BE in this situation."

The main reason they're in this situation was the $20-someM backward leap the cap took in 2021. Nobody was looking for that in 2019 or when free agency first opened in 2020. That was a major course correction for many teams...maybe more so for the Packers than most. Granted, nobody made the Packers take the path they did, but the situation is likely wholly different right now if the cap continued its regular expansion over the last couple years.

2 points
2
0
PeteK's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:48 am

Those signings catapulted us from losers to SB contenders.

3 points
4
1
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:56 am

Seems like collusion between AR and Adam's both wanting highest salaries at their positions. The philosophy is maybe we force them to actually pay us this crazy amount, or our demands force them to trade us to a team they have identified that will be competitive and which has the cap space to accommodate our salary demands.

2 points
2
0
MainePackFan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:29 am

Did Rodgers say he wanted to be the highest paid QB? I know there are lots of rumors, but I don't recall him saying that.

2 points
3
1
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:50 am

Whether he’s the highest paid or nearly so doesn’t make a whole lot of difference. I think he’s currently 6th and we are in the position we are.

0 points
1
1
MainePackFan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:33 am

CW. The narrative being pushed is that he is demanding to be the highest paid QB. If true, that would make a difference to me in how I view him and his motivation.

My point is that I have not heard him say anything about the money aspect of his contract, yet the indication of some of the posts is that it's about the money. Maybe I missed it. Correct me if I am wrong.

0 points
1
1
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:42 am

Fair, though that narrative makes no difference to my assessment.

0 points
1
1
MainePackFan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 12:06 pm

Point taken

0 points
0
0
Packer_Fan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:04 am

All of this has to be done by March 16. Tagging Adams only makes sense to avoid the tamper period. Because they need a contract with extended years to lower this years numbers to go all in again. So a decision by Rodgers will come just before the 16th. Since they can't trade Rodgers until the 16th, the team, if Rodgers wants to be traded, would have to gut the team to get under his $46 mil salary. It is in the best interest of all to work out a new contract before the 16th.

3 points
7
4
jeremyjjbrown's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:19 am

The tag is 20 million which is not an unfair salary. The tag is a negotiation tool the Packers need to use it. If Adams wants to be upset he can be upset at the NFLPA for negotiating those rules.

9 points
11
2
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:45 am

JJ…I agree with you, but the other thought to that is you don’t want a disgruntled player. There’s no easy answer to this dilemma. If the Packers had the SC space this wouldn’t be as much of an issue.

IF I was in mgmt making this decision I wouldn’t sign a third contract with a WR for a very high contract. A perfect example is D. Hopkins, I suspect Arizona wished they didn’t trade for him and sign to a big extension. I would let Adams walk. I would put my money into the O and D Line.

8 points
9
1
HawkPacker's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:36 am

Well of course we are waiting Rodgers to determine where he wants to play.

He originally said he would decide quickly. Where is he and how is he deciding? Eenie meenie, minie moe....?

1 points
1
0
PeteK's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:51 am

Weenie wins. hahaha

2 points
2
0
pacman's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:45 am

How many times did we see and complain about AR focusing exclusively on Adams. And Packers record with Adams out was perfect. That is not an accident. Tag and trade and keep MVS and Lazard and get some other speedster. I'm for keeping AR if we can reasonably do it. But Adams is too much of a crutch for AR. Though he did lose me a bit on the panchakarma thing.

Clarity within a week.

10 points
10
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 07:53 am

I want Adams gone so that AR goes with him.

5 points
5
0
pacman's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:01 am

What if he agrees to come back for $20M for 1 year? I'd rather fire MLF for not fixing ST.

0 points
1
1
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:09 pm

No problem, because he won't.

1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:29 am

@pacman…..Ditto, I’m with you. I’m not sure how you can manage to tag and trade Adams, but if possible, by all means do it!. Otherwise, get a 3rd round compensatory pick for next year. The rumor I just heard on TV minutes ago is the Packers are negotiating a short term extension with Rodgers…..Of course, as my father told me long ago, believe 1/2 of what you read and hear.

1 points
1
0
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:26 am

Tag-and-trade is a gamble. You have to know you have at least one serious buyer, you need to clear the space under the cap, and you need to deal him immediately at the start of the league year. Then his $19.1M tag allotment becomes open cap...which they can use to help conduct business (sign draft picks, etc.) in 2022--they're going to need to clear that cap anyway. If they don't know they have a buyer and they choose to risk him hanging on their cap for any length of time, this is an awful play.

6 points
6
0
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:57 am

You not only need a serious buyer, but one that the player is happy with and has agreed the structure of a long term deal such that the buyer knows it can pull the trigger.

5 points
5
0
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 03:39 pm

Dobber and CW you are both correct. I also think these discussions happen behind the scenes to make such a deal come to fruition.

2 points
2
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 12:29 pm

It is negotiations which should produce extension if packers will be able to comply what Aaron Rodgers wants. That is the "news". They have nothing firmly, just want to be in position to close the deal quckly before the end of the fiscall year.

0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:59 am

Completely with you on all points with the exception of AR.

1 points
1
0
mrtundra's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:08 am

We can win without Adams on the roster. We've proved it in games where he was injured and did not play. No one is indispensable. Even Rodgers and Adams should be able to see that.

10 points
10
0
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:12 am

If the Packers get to the end of the tagging period and haven't tagged Adams, I think they're both gone.

8 points
8
0
Guam's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:25 am

Yup. Agree completely Dobber. I think Rodgers has tied his return to the Packers to Adams return to the Packers and I don't think the Packers want to pay for both. They would (apparently) happily resign Rodgers, but they aren't talking to Adams at all. And I think they wind up losing both. And I am perfectly okay with that outcome.

6 points
6
0
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:44 am

They don’t need to talk to Adams. It’s tag or gone and he’s already said he’s not backing down from his position and he already knows that they may tag him.

I will say this. If indeed Rodgers has tied himself to Adams and Adams is tagged, if Rodgers is then Brought back on a contract that is even close to market value, then he isn’t serious about winning it all or is sufficiently deluded that we should not be listening to him. Personally, I think there is a strong chance if the latter and that explains why the deference to him results in playoff losses with eerily similar causal traits.

5 points
5
0
Guam's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:52 am

There is a middle ground in the tagging scenario that I am unsure about. Adams will be unhappy with being tagged. Tagging will cost Adams at least $5 million this year and likely impact his negotiating power next year simply due to advancing age in a young man's game. I believe Adams would play under the tag, but he could be a very unhappy participant.

Would tagging Adams make Rodgers sufficiently unhappy to force a trade from the Packers and blow up the FO plan to have another "last dance". Rodgers supports his friends and Rodgers forcing a trade might also cause the Packers to trade Adams to a team that would give him a new contract. Not at all sure what the outcome of tagging Adams might be, but I suspect there is room for serious problems.

1 points
1
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 12:33 pm

Following Packers through Aaron Rodgers career, I will say this (despite I'll receive a lot of down votes):
If any friend of Aaron Rodgers will mess with Aaron Rodgers plans, he will not be his friend any more...

2 points
2
0
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:37 am

Dobber, I tend to disagree, although, Rodgers would love to have Adams I believe he will sign with the Packers either way. I’m not a SC expert, but if GB went to Rodgers and told him its just not possible without losing too many other very good players he might acquiesce. He should be smart enough to realize there is a reason he was 6-0 without Adams playing. Something Vic and NE have known for years, WR’s are a “dime a dozen”.

3 points
4
1
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:31 am

I think he's shown that he's loyal to his guys: Crosby, Cobb, Bakhtiari. Adams is clearly one of them. I don't think he'll hang around if Adams won't be there. He'll see that as a slight, not just to Adams but to his own wishes. This is why everyone is waiting. If ARod is playing in 2022, he could say so at any time...he knows if he is or not at this juncture. He's waiting to let the Packers make the first concrete move so his move can be responsive and paint him in the best light.

4 points
5
1
Guam's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:16 am

I would generally agree with your logic Murf, but then why isn't the deal for Rodgers done yet? If Rodgers is willing to forego Adams and with the FO's professed interest in signing Rodgers, this deal should have been done a couple of weeks ago. The longer this goes on, the more I believe Rodgers has tied himself to Adams. We should know soon.......

1 points
2
1
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:44 am

Don't get my hopes up!

1 points
1
0
murf7777's picture

March 01, 2022 at 03:43 pm

I have to disagree Dobber....I don't think they are mutually together. I feel strongly they would like that, but they also know it's a business and there is only so much $'s to go around.

I think Rodgers sees that going to the AFC is a bad decision for his opportunity to make it to the SB and probably sees GB, even without Adams, as his best path for the next two years. It sure seems GB feels they want Rodgers as well. My prediction is Adams doesn't get tagged, unless it is a tag and trade, and Rodgers signs a short term extension.

1 points
1
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:15 pm

If AR is serious about going to the SB, I can see this point in regards to the AFC West, a meat-grinder of a division, but not so much with Cleveland or Pittsburgh. Whether he plays in the AFC or NFC, he would more than likely have to beat an AFC West team in the SB (assuming he even makes it that far).

0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:03 am

But they are in the driver's seat! They lay out their collective salary demands and either the Packers pay them, or because of these lavish demands they force management to trade them to a team that will. Reluctantly it actually pretty genius on their negotiation front. Makes what Rodgers did last year to force renegotiating his contract brilliant.

3 points
3
0
Swisch's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:19 am

It seems like lunacy to pay these two aging veterans in Rodgers and Adams a combined $70-$80 million per season, especially after the past two season ended in heartbreaking losses in which this duo failed to connect in crunch time.
Again, I evoke the futility of Rodgers throwing to Adams in double coverage against the 49ers in the playoffs while Lazard crossed the middle of the field wide open for a missed opportunity to put the Packers in prime position to win the game. This came after the previous season of losing to the Bucs in the playoffs when first-and-goal from the 8 came up empty.
Here's the thing: I seem to remember Rodgers saying he held out last summer in large part because his grand accomplishments on the field had earned him the right to have a significant role in personnel decisions -- yet he comes up short the past two seasons in the biggest of moments.
I mean owning the Bears is a good thing, and winning the NFC North in nice and all, but not for close to $50 million for this arrogant but ultimately disappointing QB. It's actually pathetic to see Rodgers so full of himself after producing so little in the clutch.
Then there's Adams now seemingly in league with Rodgers in padding each other's stats and wallets, as seen in their pathetic collusion in the meaningless Lions game at the end of the regular season. Apparently, they are dancing almost exclusively with each other to grab an outlandish proportion of the salary cap and the attention.
Please give me Jordan Love and MVS instead, and use the enormous savings to sign top players across the roster for the Packers.
By next week, I'm hoping to have this bromance traded away so that sanity and dignity returns to the Packers.

19 points
21
2
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:04 am

Amen Swisch!

5 points
5
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:57 pm

Amen is right!

0 points
0
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:13 am

Very good Swisch -- except for the "give me Jordan Love and MVS" part. The thought of those two in the lineup is depressing. Never been a fan of MVS, Mr. Go Long, and Love has shown nothing, not even a glimpse of future greatness.

All the rest of your post, right on!

-1 points
2
3
LambeauPlain's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:45 am

Rodgers didn't show a "glimpse of greatness" in his first 6 quarters of NFL regular season football either. His first year as a starter following the 13-3 NFCCG year was a 6-10 mark. I didn't see the glimpses that season either. Rodgers finally showed potential for greatness in his 5th year in the NFL.

5 points
6
1
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:32 am

We won’t get there with Murphy still in office. He is the anti-Wolf. He is the man who oversaw the wasting of the prime of Rogers under the surreptitious leadership of his protege GM in waiting Russ Ball and now is clinging to the bar after closing time.

5 points
8
3
flackcatcher's picture

March 01, 2022 at 02:28 pm

(HA!) I keep waiting for the Executive Committee to close his tab.... :-)

2 points
2
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:16 pm

Don't hold your breath. I predict that he'll retire "with honors" after 2022 and then go directly into the Packers Hall of Fame.

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:22 am

A long-term deal with Adams will still average north of 25M a year. I figure he will want at least four years. I don't know how you can make that cheaper than the tag without over-reliance on void years. This, for a team that wasn't willing to pony up an extra million or so to get OBJ and (probably) win a Super Bowl? The logic escapes me. The path to the Super Bowl is not going to be found by spending more money on the guys who have proved that they can't do it without more help. If Rodgers (maybe) and Adams (definitely) want big cash then it is time to move on.

15 points
15
0
Lphill's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:35 am

Can all the Rodgers haters please find another team when Rodgers returns please.

-11 points
4
15
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:47 am

I won't find another team, but I'll certainly be much less invested in this one. So - you'll see me much less on this site. I'll be mainly here to bother you and Stockholder (a guy HAS to have hobbies, doesn't he?).

BUT - I promise that, if pigs fly and unicorns come waltzing down my street and the Packers win the Super Bowl, I WILL return to say "I was wrong". If that doesn't happen, then maybe I'll be back to say "I told you so!", Only time will tell...

5 points
9
4
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:06 am

Well done Jurp! You and me both!

1 points
4
3
Swisch's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:02 am

We don't hate Rodgers. It's Rodgers who is jerking us around as fans, and we're understandably and justifiably angry with him.
Here's a guy who holds out last offseason and threatens to ruin a run at the Super Bowl. When he finally comes back just before training camp, he haughtily trashes the front office with flimsy evidence and tells us how all of his greatness has earned him a say in personnel matters. Then, he falls short in the playoffs for the second year in a row in heartbreaking fashion.
He talks big and comes up small.
All along the way, I've been holding out hope for some growth from Rodgers as far as personal humility and appreciation for the fans. I'm not seeing it.
This offseason, even as we continue to reel from the devastation of COVID and the accompanying restrictions, Rodgers seems so full of himself in his greed for cash and grasping for power. He apparently has no sense of accountability for his epic fail in overlooking a wide-open receiver and missing a play that would likely have won the playoff game against the 49ers.
Nary a thought for the fans, it seems; or his teammates, for that matter.

7 points
8
1
Oppy's picture

March 01, 2022 at 06:06 pm

Hang on one second.
...I hate Rodgers.

Thanks for your time,

-Oppy

0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 02, 2022 at 12:03 am

You couldn't have said it any better. The lack of accountability and any sense of blame since the 49r game has driven me crazy.

1 points
1
0
Tundraboy's picture

March 02, 2022 at 12:10 am

Couldn't possibly have said it any better. The lack of any ownership for his failures, as if we are all idiots is astounding. We have eyes and are not suckers.

1 points
1
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:16 am

Get your priorities straight -- there may be Rodgers haters here, but no Packer haters.

11 points
11
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:18 pm

Amen!

0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:35 am

Apparently being a Packers fan means you need to check your brain at the door.

5 points
6
1
LambeauPlain's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:38 am

I don't hate Rodgers. Never have. For you to assume so just because I disagree with your narrative that "Rodgers is the only way to a SB" is as arrogant as your hero.

Rodgers is a great QB during the regular season and a huge disappointment in clutch games. Where he is clutch is holding the franchise and its fans hostage to his self centered demands up to the 11th hour, then clutches the cash.

I am in FL for an extended stay, and Rodgers image is pretty bad among NFL fans. Wearing my Packer hat or shirt, and someone says "Go Pack!", it is usually followed by "what is Rodgers going to do this time?" or "what a self centered diva" or "he sure like his drama" or "he chokes in big games".

My neighbor, who is a Pats fan said "I love your team, but not your QB."

6 points
7
1
Coldworld's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:30 am

I don’t hate Rodgers. I just don’t think Rodgers and the Packers are a rational match at this point given the circumstances. I don’t even think that’s all due to Rodgers. LaFleur’s handling of him has essentially created an overly entitled beast snd LaFleurs inexperience or potentially by now inability have magnified Rodgers tendencies/weaknesses when we play teams where it takes mire than just Rodgers ability to win.

I may be wrong, but I’m wrong because my goal is a successful franchise in the field long term and because I think about what’s likely to bring that or not. Right now, I believe that retaining Rodgers and/or Adams is plain stupid because nothing points to a different outcome and the result will prevent us competing for a long time. If they do it, I will have little faith in the leadership.

Does thinking Murphy has been a disaster also make me not a fan of the Packers?

8 points
8
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 12:45 pm

I will give you another proposition, Lphill. If Aaron Rodgers will be trade, please go and chear for the team he should play. Come here after next post season to cry how he pick up wrong team, when he fails again to win SB.

Is that OK with you?

I will not justify myself to you, as you are not interested in Packers, just, like stockholder, in Aaron Rodgers...

5 points
6
1
ricky's picture

March 01, 2022 at 08:58 am

Cory wrote: But if Rodgers is going to throw to just one guy, wouldn’t you rather have it be Adams?

What if you don't want Rodgers focusing on one receiver? Remember, when Adams was hurt, the Packers were undefeated, and the ball was spread around to multiple receivers. And it wasn't just the SF game, this year. It was the NFC championship game against the Bucs when Rodgers did the same thing, with the same result: a loss. Adams is going to be too expensive, and a very large portion of the salary cap will be tied up in two players- Rodgers and Adams. And although it's easy to sit at home and say let Adams walk, Rodgers would be extremely unhappy if that happened. And right now, the Packers seem more interested in keeping Aaron happy than in building a team that can compete now and in the future. Two years in a row, the Packers make the playoffs, then fizzle because Rodgers locks in on Adams, and ignores guys who are open, so he can force it into double coverage. Time to try something new, or keep doing the same thing, and hope for different results.

10 points
10
0
Swisch's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:18 am

Hear! hear!

1 points
2
1
jhtobias's picture

March 01, 2022 at 09:43 am

Sorry Corey but of course you tag him. Davante will never sign his tender but you will get a much better compensation for a tag and trade vs some useless comp pic. Come on man business is business just like davante said and the packers need to capitalize on return for him.

1 points
3
2
stockholder's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:01 am

You do realize Bahk was equal to a Comp pick. NFL Draft: 2013 / Round: 4 / Pick: 109. It's never useless.

2 points
4
2
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:20 pm

OMG, I just upvoted Stockholder!

0 points
0
0
jhtobias's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:05 am

You do realize davante would bring a first round pick via trade. But I guess your right take the comp pick instead on the 1sr round pick makes sense .

2 points
2
0
stockholder's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:17 am

If they can get it. Do it. I think the NFL is headed for a Lock out. If they keep renegotiating contracts. And Cory doesn't want him franchised now. So I'm saying you didn't trade him. Stay within the Rules. Comp pick please. Because they can't afford him.

0 points
2
2
jannes bjornson's picture

March 01, 2022 at 02:06 pm

Move on from the Adams posturing. If they wanted him re-signed it would have been last year. Take the three pick and pay the guys that will be onboard. Rodgers may pout, but he is still signed for '22. Bigger realities to deal with at this time than hashing over this bull....

3 points
3
0
Leatherhead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 10:26 am

I'm not sure he does bring a 1st round pick. Maybe to some team at the end of the round, like the Bengals. Other than that, we'd get a second round pick. We get a late 3rd comp pick if he just walks.

I think The Plan is to play with Rodgers and Adams in 2022.

-1 points
0
1
PeteK's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:01 am

Raiders, Chargers, Browns have plenty of cap space and could give us a first rounder this year or I would take their 2023 first.

2 points
2
0
jhtobias's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:07 am

I agree the plan is to play with rodgers and adams. If that changes because of aaron all I'm suggesting is to maximize the return and tag and trade does that .

2 points
2
0
Irish_Cheesehead's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:26 am

"But if Rodgers is going to throw to just one guy, wouldn’t you rather have it be Adams?"

No! That's my fear with Rodgers and Adams both coming back. Rodgers locking onto just one receiver is not a recipe for a championship. I'd rather have one or the other. Adams is a great receiver, but the Packers were a much more balanced team when he missed games.

3 points
3
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 01, 2022 at 04:19 pm

"That's my fear with Rodgers and Adams both coming back. Rodgers locking onto just one receiver is not a recipe for a championship."

Didn't Patton say, "Never take counsel of your fears..." : )

I'm hoping the hiring of Tom Clements makes that less likely...

Idk what is going to happen, but as long as we have football next year, I'll be happy.

0 points
0
0
Ferrari-Driver's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:51 am

Cory: "...without Adams, this offense would stumble"

I thought the Packers won all seven games when Adams wasn't playing.

If we don't tag Adams and he leaves via free agency, the Packers get a comp pick at the end of the 3rd round after all the teams have made their 3rd round picks. Not really enticing, is it?

If necessary, I would like to see the Packers use the tag and if they have to trade Adams, at least they should do better in draft compensation than what amounts to the 1st selection in the 4th round for a Pro Bowl wide receiver who may very well wind up in the NFL Hall of Fame.

7 points
7
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:22 pm

The offense sure stumbled in the second half against SF, with Adams on the field. Just saying, Cory.

1 points
1
0
PeteK's picture

March 01, 2022 at 02:00 pm

If we tag Adams it means that he will be traded because the 19 mill will increase our cap to 50. A long term contract has the ability to stretch out the compensation. This can also be done with a Rodgers extension. This scenario means we cut Turner 4 mill, Amos 4 mill, Cobb 6mill ( 8 mill after 6/1),Lowry 4 mill, Zadarious 15 mill, Crosby 2mill, Lewis 2 mill after 6/1. This brings us about 10 under the cap which could be enough to sign Rodgers and Adams. Preston has a possible 12 mill cap saving if released, so do we extend him Turner and Amos in order to get enough money to sign draft picks and maybe Lazard, Campbell, Douglas. Hitting on a couple of our draft picks could improve us. That's going all in for 2022 and then be surely stuck with old players with high caps that cannot be cut for at least two seasons. Or cut ties with Rodgers and Adams receive cap relief and picks now and in the future, and ride with Love. Former scenario would present a better SB contender with future pain, latter presents less chance of SB but a better more even future.

3 points
3
0
Dragon5's picture

March 01, 2022 at 11:57 am

Can isn't being kicked...it's being PUNTED...makes a GM look like a genius when he has no choice but to tank via cap hell.

With the 1st pick in the 2026 NFL draft, the Green Bay Packers select...Arch Manning.

4 points
4
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:24 pm

"With the 1st pick in the 2026 NFL draft, the Green Bay Packers select...Arch Manning."

That's assuming that we're not still in cap hell after the restructurings in '23 to go "Last Dance" one more time...

0 points
0
0
crayzpackfan's picture

March 01, 2022 at 02:12 pm

A player is only worth what a team is willing to pay that player. Seriously. Just for the sake of argument (though extremely hypothetical), let’s say we let Adams go. Imagine if his very best FA offer was 5 million a year. Then what? Does the league intervene? Does the players union get involved, or has the market just decided the hell with this nonsense? Sorry, I kinda spun out of my point here. My point is, just because AR and DA are going to be at the very top of their market value, that doesn’t mean GB has to be front and center at the auction. Is a near 39 year old QB and a near 30 year old receiver worth 65-80 million dollars a year? Will the 2-3 years they play for us be worth the backend cost when they are no longer here? What if they both get hurt next year? It seems like management is applying for a credit card with an unlimited balance at 38% interest. I’m exhausted. You folks have a great week. Love reading everyone’s posts.

3 points
3
0
BirdDogUni's picture

March 01, 2022 at 04:26 pm

To quote a near genius... "R E L A X..." ; )

No sense worrying, what will be - will be. We won't have to wait much longer to find out what is going to happen.

Enjoy the journey.

1 points
1
0
jurp's picture

March 01, 2022 at 05:26 pm

You forgot "self-described" in front of "near genius".

Rodgers is anything BUT a genius. What he does have is a great PR team.

0 points
0
0
Philarod's picture

March 03, 2022 at 06:04 pm

I'd be a poor GM. I'm good at math but don't enjoy various salary manipulation scenarios.

Adams is terrific (obviously) but top WR in the game, I just don't see.
To me, he'd be in line behind Kupp, Jefferson and Chase, Hill (not as polished but that speed kills) and in the next group of 3-5 guys. Yes, I want to see 12 and 17 return, but am just not feeling the imperative of the last several years right now.

1 points
1
0