Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Pack-A-Day Podcast - Episode 224 - Should the Packers Trade for Josh Rosen?

By Category

Pack-A-Day Podcast - Episode 224 - Should the Packers Trade for Josh Rosen?

Paul Bretl, Maggie Lawler, and Nick Schmitz take a look at whether Green Bay should consider trading a third round pick for Arizona Cardinals' quarterback Josh Rosen. Plus a discussion on which of the Packers free agents they should retain and a look at who each member of the team has on their wish-list of NFL free agents.

Download & Subscribe on iTunes


Andy is a graduate of UW-Oshkosh and owns & operates the Pack-A-Day Podcast. Andy has taken multiple courses in NFL scouting and appears weekly on 107.5 The Fan in Green Bay to breakdown film. This past season he was an analyst on Green Bay Nation on WFRV TV in Green Bay. Andy grew up in Green Bay and is a lifelong season ticket holder; follow him on Twitter at @sconniesports.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (28) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

jww061356's picture

Oh, hell no. Too much else to address. This doesn't even make my list at this point.

Since '61's picture

No. why would we waste draft capital on a player who is going to sit on the bench? Stupidity reigns!!!
Thanks, Since '61

Old School's picture

Well....QB is the game's most important position and we all know that. Our starter will be 36 by season's end and has missed games and played injured for most of the last two seasons.

Behind him, Kizer doesn't exactly fill me with hope. In my lifetime, we've had three outstanding QBs and we should be on the constant lookout for the next one. Rodgers will not get younger.

I think the Packers should trade down in the draft, anyway, and get more picks. So if we trade down and then use one of those 3rd...or 4th, maybe...round picks on a guy who would dramatically improve our backup QB spot? Oh, heck yeah.

Do we have a backup QB that can come in and still run an offense? I don't think so. I don't know if Rosen is that guy, but I do know he'd be a big improvement over Kizer, or probably anybody we could get in the draft with that pick.

jannes bjornson's picture

If Arizona will take a three pick for him or a #2 in 2020 pull the trigger.
He is a pure passer and just needs to get stronger. Thrown into the fire
w/out a strong supporting cast. If Kingsbury wanst Murray, he will be one and done.

Doug Niemczynski's picture

Well, that's what Hall of famers Aaron Rodgers did and Brett Favre.

GB Jacker's picture

If he's available for a 3 I'd be shocked and I'd dive into that trade, but I can't see it happening. AZ would surely want more, or they will keep him there as they've already paid most of his salary for next couple of years. If they do move him I would imagine he'd want to go somewhere with a better shot at starting - those teams would also be willing to give up more than a 3.

Hope we keep G-Mo and Mo Wikerson. Would be happy to see Clay back at a low price too, think he'd be a valuable asset not being an every down player. Certainly need to do something at Edge and hopefully that's via the draft as FAs are demanding silly money.

Be good to get a Safety in FA, at this point anybody will do.

Swisch's picture

The more I think about it, the more it seems Clay could be an excellent part of our defense as an edge rusher on select passing downs. If we pick the right spots for him, then he could be more effective than most at hunting down quarterbacks from the outside.
We could still get a guy or two in the draft and free agency, yet keep Clay as an important part of our defense. With strategic use, he could thrive.
If Clay embraces such a role, for a salary that's fair to both sides, then he could elevate his standing in Packers lore with a surge at the end of his career that will hopefully result in at least one more victory in the Super Bowl.

jannes bjornson's picture

He will not go inside. Those are his terms, but as you say let him go as a dedicated rusher. The counterpoint is if he rushes and they go wheel route on him can he cover the Back? Too many third and longs converted on that group the past few years. He has a history with the hamstring injuries; maybe he drops weight and picks up a 1/2 step?

Swisch's picture

With less snaps, perhaps Clay stays healthier and livelier.
If we encourage him in his new role, and he dedicates himself to it, then perhaps he regains some of his past glory.
With the right usage, Clay may be better than 80% of the edge rushers in the NFL on any given play.
So much of this depends on how we present this new role to him, and whether he really embraces it.
If that's worked out, I'd really like to see Clay end his career as a Packer.

jannes bjornson's picture

I believe they will present him with a fair offer and add incentive clauses as per roster bonus, sack total, ProBowl selection, etc. He is a legacy guy, but they rarely give out a third contract.

Swisch's picture

It may be improbable to make a good arrangement with Clay, but it could really help if the Packers make the right kind of presentation.
If Clay feels truly appreciated, and that he has an important role to play in the future, then he may give the Packers a discount, There are things more important than money, and Clay would still be getting plenty of that compared to most of us.
After witnessing the success of the Julius Peppers experience with the Packers, Clay may be willing to go all in for a similar role.
Here's hoping something along these lines gets worked out.

The TKstinator's picture

"So much of this depends on how we present this new role to him"

Who's this "we" you speak of? You, me, TGR, dobber, and Doug?
That would be a heckuva panel!

bodei1newbie1's picture

i agree with Since '61 says they team the pack would trade for would want too much and we (the pack) need to fill both sides of the ball

bodei1newbie1's picture

they(the team) the pack would want too much for the qb

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Rosen's value is a third rounder, according to Gil Brandt. He could be wrong, I suppose.

bodei1newbie1's picture

if they want to trade him the pack should give up a lower round (like 6 or 7) round don't you think

Old School's picture

Wilkerson has been really available and a pretty good player for most of his career until last season. If he's willing to sign a "make-good" deal then we should go for it.

I'm having a hard time seeing a future for Geronimo Allison in Green Bay. Even if we keep six WRs (and I don't think we will because we're running more double TE sets and less 3-1-1.) he's still behind Adams, MSV, Brown.....and has to beat out Kumerow or Moore.....just for a chance to be our #5 guy?

I totally believe Matthews is going to be offered a lot more money than he's worth to Green Bay. He's been paid very well for his time here and I can't see him taking the kind of pay cut he'd have to take here.

You know, Matthews' daddy was a pretty good player well into his 30s, and I'm wondering if maybe he's that kind of athlete.....he's been injured early in his career but he's been really durable the last couple of seasons.

jannes bjornson's picture

If he signs Allison is the # two guy. Before he went down he was making plays. Scantling vs Brown for the three spot. It depends if Gutekunst wants a quicker slot guy to replace Cobb. See how the action plays out on Monday.

Old School's picture

Allison lasted 6 games as an every down player. MSV and Eq. Brown both did better. And they're under contract, which Allison is not.

We have Adams, MSV, Brown, and Moore under contract. Kumerow will probably be resigned. We're going to be running fewer 3 WR sets.....I just don't see Allison as part of the future. Love the guy and hope he finds success elsewhere but the numbers don't really add up for him in Green Bay, IMO.

jannes bjornson's picture

That could be if they are targeting a quick slot guy. I am not holding my breath for Moore to show up.

Old School's picture

I'm thinking quick slot guy is not high on the list of priorities.

First, we draft three tall, fast, outside guys.
Then we hire a coach who appears to favor double TE sets more and the 3 WR formation less.

Then, there is the fact that we need to run the ball 7 more times a game just to be average. So given all these factors, I'm inclined to think that we're not really in the market for a quick slot guy.

stockholder's picture

2 years of Losing. Rodgers won't return to his MVP Form. No trade regardless. Wilkerson ? really? Broken Fib and ankle now. His days as a starter are over. Allison will make this team. Believe it or not. Mathews will go where they tell him. And that may mean the door. We don't need to sign anybody but Smiths. Top paid, doesn't mean their worth the money. Top Rookie OLB, doesn't mean starter. The heart ache is wanting/keeping a player that won't make your club better.

Swisch's picture

In the first year of the LaFleur era, I don't think we should bring in such a high-profile sub and successor. It would be an unnecessary distraction.
I like to think that at least one of Kizer and Boyle will be at least a solid backup for this season; or that we could pick up a savvy veteran now or later.
In the next year or two, after Rodgers gets back to MVP form and the Packers surge back into contention for the Super Bowl, then bring in a successor to groom for the replacement to Rodgers (if neither Boyle nor Kizer seem to be that guy).
At that point, I'm hopeful Rodgers would mentor his eventual successor with great care, having been in that position himself once upon a time.

cheesehead1's picture

No to Rosen. Would like to keep Clay, but at a much reduced price, if not, goodbye. Release the oft injured Perry and draft some talented and reliable players.

Irish_Cheesehead's picture

Umm... no

Lphill's picture

Rodgers is far from done, that's a conversation for another time, I think Clay stays I think he played way too many downs last year because of no depth, use him on long passing downs and I think he will be more effective. Plus with the bad calls last year who knows if he became gun shy.

crayzpackfan's picture

I thought about this while driving in my truck today. The only thing I kept coming back to after thinking hell no, bad idea, was Rodgers sat behind Favre for 4 years and that worked out great for us. Would cashing in a 3rd round pick for a potential solid QB once again in GB be worth the wait? Hmmmm???

Skip greenBayless's picture

Why the hell would the Packers give up a valuable 3rd round pick for a qb when they have Tim Boyle? I am in shock we are even discussing this. Boyle is clearly the heir apparent to Aaron Rodgers. He will be our starter in two years.


Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"