Aaron Rodgers Signs Extension With Packers

[jvan1973]

Aaron Rodgers could never get the record breaking guaranteed money that Brady got. That Brady guy, most guaranteed money in the history of the nfl.. impressive

[amfootball]

How could you not care what the cap numbers are? What other financial limitations will the Packers have?

 

The only way they falter is if their drafting begins to betray them, or if they suffer significant injuries at key positions. Other than that, they aren't going to have trouble maintaining a team that can compete every year. Rodgers is the biggest piece of the puzzle, and now he's locked up long term. The first domino has fallen; everything else just has to go as planned.

 

Of course teams that aren't paying their quarterbacks elite money will have an easier go of building the roster around them, but none of those teams you just mentioned have a truly elite quarterback that guarantees them a playoff berth virtually every season. All things considered, when you have an elite quarterback and his contract is coming due, you pay him, and do the best you can everywhere else. You don't even complain about it; it just is what it is.

I don't think GB is a very good team in general. They have a porous defense, a horrible offense line, no running game, and Rodgers lost one of his best receivers in Jennings and has a TE that generally drops as many balls as he catches.

 

While I agree, you have to pay Rodgers and to a lesser extent Matthews (I think they over paid for him), I question whether Rodgers can do what Brady and Manning are asked to do routinely - win while the team is transitioning/rebuilding. He inherited a champ caliber team in 2008. Now that talent needs to be replenished and his salary has doubled leaving less money to sign the same caliber of players he was used to. You couple that with the fact that NFC has the power house Niners, the Giants that have his number for some reason, and several quality teams with QBs on their rookie deals (redskins, seahawks, panthers) and I think it will be an uphill battle for Rodgers and the Pack. 

 

In a way, it is a shame that Flacco won the SB as he is Rodgers peer and once the Ravens went all in, it forced GB to do something now versus two years from now.

 

I agree that they did the best deal they could but it is still a mega deal and very difficult to build the type of team Rodgers was winning with when he first became the starter. I guess time will tell to see if he can be that guy to not only lead them to the playoffs but to championships. He is 1-2 in his last two playoff runs getting blown out by the Giants at home and the niners last year. He still has something to prove IMO.

[The Old Crow]

Rodgers did not have the kind of team around him that Flacco had.  Flacco had a statistically good playoff, but I can't remember how many circus catches Anquan Bolden pulled off with the DB all over him.  Those where not balls that any old receiver could just go up and get.  

 

Flacco's offensive line was way better then the Packers.  Flacco's running game was way better then the Packers.

 

Rodgers and Flacco have been starting for the same number of years.  Aaron Rodgers has 3 pro bowl selections.  Flacco has zero.

 

 

I think the bottom line is Rodgers is a better quarterback than Flacco. That being said, Joe won a Super Bowl, got them to three AFCCG's, and has won two division titles in five years. The Ravens had to pay, as will eventually the Colts with Luck. Anyone with a franchise quarterback will pay. It is commendable that Brady is working for a reasonable contract, but he is at a different stage of his career, and has already been paid twice. Manning was overpaid by Denver, considering the four neck surgeries and uncertainty, but the alternative could have been Tebow. Every team will eventually have to pay if they have a top quarterback.

[Superman]

I don't think GB is a very good team in general. They have a porous defense, a horrible offense line, no running game, and Rodgers lost one of his best receivers in Jennings and has a TE that generally drops as many balls as he catches.

 

While I agree, you have to pay Rodgers and to a lesser extent Matthews (I think they over paid for him), I question whether Rodgers can do what Brady and Manning are asked to do routinely - win while the team is transitioning/rebuilding. He inherited a champ caliber team in 2008. Now that talent needs to be replenished and his salary has doubled leaving less money to sign the same caliber of players he was used to. You couple that with the fact that NFC has the power house Niners, the Giants that have his number for some reason, and several quality teams with QBs on their rookie deals (redskins, seahawks, panthers) and I think it will be an uphill battle for Rodgers and the Pack. 

 

In a way, it is a shame that Flacco won the SB as he is Rodgers peer and once the Ravens went all in, it forced GB to do something now versus two years from now.

 

I agree that they did the best deal they could but it is still a mega deal and very difficult to build the type of team Rodgers was winning with when he first became the starter. I guess time will tell to see if he can be that guy to not only lead them to the playoffs but to championships. He is 1-2 in his last two playoff runs getting blown out by the Giants at home and the niners last year. He still has something to prove IMO.

 

It's all about how they draft. Paying your quarterback elite money definitely reduces your margin for error in other areas; you can't go fix all your mistakes in free agency, and if you give guaranteed money to someone you pay double if they have to be released, plus you still have a hole in your roster. But in the salary cap era, every team is going to have some short term patches over some holes.

 

In a way, I think maybe their drafting has already started to falter. They just drafted two running backs, since third round pick Alex Green hasn't done anything in two years. They drafted two tackles, since Derek Sherrod hasn't done anything in two years. They've hit on some guys, but they still have the same deficiencies they had in 2008 when Rodgers took over -- inconsistent offensive line and inconsistent secondary. As Rodgers has gotten better over time, some of those deficiencies have been masked, but their drafting is going to have to be more impactful moving forward.

 

I don't see how anyone call Flacco Rodgers' peer. And whether Flacco got paid or not, Rodgers was going to get paid. He just had the best two year stretch of any quarterback in NFL history, statistically speaking. And with a roster that has some deficiencies, like you say. The Ravens are far more complete than the Packers. There's really no comparing the two. Flacco has plenty to prove, and he is far less likely to live up to his NFL best $20.1m/year than Rodgers is to live up to his new contract (which is technically $18.7m/year, despite the way it was initially reported).

[amfootball]

It's all about how they draft. Paying your quarterback elite money definitely reduces your margin for error in other areas; you can't go fix all your mistakes in free agency, and if you give guaranteed money to someone you pay double if they have to be released, plus you still have a hole in your roster. But in the salary cap era, every team is going to have some short term patches over some holes.

 

In a way, I think maybe their drafting has already started to falter. They just drafted two running backs, since third round pick Alex Green hasn't done anything in two years. They drafted two tackles, since Derek Sherrod hasn't done anything in two years. They've hit on some guys, but they still have the same deficiencies they had in 2008 when Rodgers took over -- inconsistent offensive line and inconsistent secondary. As Rodgers has gotten better over time, some of those deficiencies have been masked, but their drafting is going to have to be more impactful moving forward.

 

I don't see how anyone call Flacco Rodgers' peer. And whether Flacco got paid or not, Rodgers was going to get paid. He just had the best two year stretch of any quarterback in NFL history, statistically speaking. And with a roster that has some deficiencies, like you say. The Ravens are far more complete than the Packers. There's really no comparing the two. Flacco has plenty to prove, and he is far less likely to live up to his NFL best $20.1m/year than Rodgers is to live up to his new contract (which is technically $18.7m/year, despite the way it was initially reported).

I agree about the drafting and margin for error. GB has not done well in this area and I don't trust their new OC either. Rodgers looked lost at times last season and held the ball too long which caused him to get sacked a league leading 51 times. They better fix that or else he won't be around to finish this mega contract.

 

One other thing to consider as well. Rodgers seems to be a bit thin skinned. When things started to go south last year, he partly blamed his rookies on his practice squad and then during the season Jermichael Finley's agent said Rodgers does not take any blame when things go awry and then Jenning's sister echoed the same thing. Shannon Sharpe also questioned Rodgers leadership abilities, http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/thrown-into-question-n58fedi-187970011.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

 

Much of this may just be smoke and hearsay, but when you hear the same things from different people, it makes you wonder. He has a bit of a chip on his shoulder and I think he rubs his teammates the wrong way at times.

 

I was not saying Flacco was his peer in terms of their careers but in terms of their relative age and seasons played in the league. I believe both have been the starter since 2008. My overall point was the fact that Flacco won the SB AND got paid as the highest paid QB in the NFL, forcing GB to do Rodgers deal now as he worth at least as much if not more than Flacco.