Aaron Rodgers could become available/Rodgers in Indy (Merge)

[chad72 7,160]

7 minutes ago, Arodgers12 said:

I just don’t get why he didn’t try to run it in for a Touchdown on that last drive.

 

Mahomes would have, even Brees in his prime would have, 100%

[Arodgers12 320]

Just now, chad72 said:

 

Mahomes would have, even Brees in his prime would have, 100%

Rodgers just isn’t good in big playoff games. He chokes.

[danlhart87 7,465]

15 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

If they did make a move for Stafford...I think Kenny G is a very strong possibility...or some other FA WR. And then they would draft a TE.

 

They definitely need to add weapons this offseason...regardless of what they do at QB.

they can't afford both

 

Stafford will be around 20m

Golladay will want 15 to 20m

 

 

[chad72 7,160]

Just now, Arodgers12 said:

Rodgers just isn’t good in big playoff games. He chokes.

 

We felt that about Peyton too. He wouldn't take check downs for the longest time till 2006 to Addai and Rhodes when we won it all. He would go for the deeper completion more often and get the Colts in trouble. 

 

Mahomes is the closest to Brady in terms of someone who GETS IT, to distribute the ball and take check downs if necessary. His ability to adapt and improvize while reading Ds has improved remarkably but the Chiefs' speed on offense that they have made a conscious effort to invest in with draft picks is what makes it tick for Andy Reid and Mahomes. Lots of folks need to be in unison to win at the highest level. The Chiefs have that right now. 

[Indeee 371]

9 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Playing behind our OL and overall better D is reason enough to come here.

Ok but why would that be a reason for the fans to be excited and/or satisfied? I'm a fan, not a pro QB. As an example, using the Bills, I have witnessed the Bills in the past three years go get John Brown, Cole Beasley, and Stephon Diggs, and even though Brown might be moving on from the Bills this offseason(if they release him) based on Davis stepping up, those three guys are light years ahead of what the Colts have and here's the kicker... The Colts could have had them ALL. One each year just like the Bills. A solid set of the entire WR tree on full display yet the Colts have chose to just grab a guy here and there with no plan.... This is the issue concerning the wideouts and it has to be changed immediately before any QB talk should ensue

[rockywoj 993]

1 hour ago, The Fish said:

Rodgers wouldn't play in Indiana for one.

I don't think Ballard would give Green Bay what it's going to take to get him out of there.

 

He retires or he plays in Green Bay.

I said it first!

 

lol

 

Frankly I'm concerned because "consensus" is forming and that's a red flag.

Consensus formed last year too, about Rivers coming here ... and he did!

 

I am hoping lightning strikes twice about growing consensus and Stafford becomes reality, maybe getting here at a bit less of a price, with Rodgers apparently now being in play.

[rockywoj 993]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

If Reich had gone for it yesterday in the same situation and we didn't get it, some in here would've been bashing him and say he should've took the points. The FG made it a 5 point game and they had all 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning still = 4 timeouts. I blame GB's defense for this loss, not only did their D stink in the 1st half, they failed to get a stop at the end to give Aaron the ball back. I just find it funny, almost everyone says GB should've went for it but if Reich does it instead of taking the points, he is a bad coach 

I have been one of the voices being very critical of Reich’s not taking 3pts, but yesterday was an entirely different situation.  Yesterday, I said that he had to go for it, for you cannot depend on forcing a 3 and out.  Ergo, that you might not get the ball back.  If the circumstance was different, like if it was early in the 4th quarter, then the FG makes sense.  Did not make sense with barely over 2 minutes to go, though.  Hence, I dispute the broad brush stroke you make regarding some of us that have been critical of Reich’s hyper aggressive approach in making questionable choices of surrendering points, EARLY in games.  Perilously late in a game is simply not apples vs apples.

[The Fish 1,148]

13 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

Consensus formed last year too, about Rivers coming here

 

 

Not really.. Not in the way I'm mentioning it anyway. Maybe you've got some examples, but the amount of division over Rivers coming on board last year was noticeable. Lot's of folks thought JB should have the job again for example, some thought bringing in Brady was the better move (crap..) some wanted to draft a guy to start ect.

 

I was an early adopter of the idea of Rivers coming in because it got the team to move on from JB (had to happen) and it had "SAFE" written all over it- which meant that the team couldn't come up with good reasons to not do it- which seems to be the way these things shake out sometimes.

 

I want Stafford far more than I wanted Rivers, but I have my doubts that Ballard will be the high bidder, going to the Lions with multiple picks. But he probably should, tbh. This QB situation could go full Bears or Browns on us...

 

 

[coltsblue1844 146]

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

If Reich had gone for it yesterday in the same situation and we didn't get it, some in here would've been bashing him and say he should've took the points. The FG made it a 5 point game and they had all 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning still = 4 timeouts. I blame GB's defense for this loss, not only did their D stink in the 1st half, they failed to get a stop at the end to give Aaron the ball back. I just find it funny, almost everyone says GB should've went for it but if Reich does it instead of taking the points, he is a bad coach 

Well, my take... if you are going to rely on your D, why not make it clear that you're going for it/in 4 down territory (Rodgers probably would have ran it on that 3rd down, had he known that they were gonna kick a FG on 4th, to at least make it close enough to consider going for it...he said he thought they were going to go for it on 4th, and so he took a shot at the endzone instead).... all that aside, go for it on 4th... if you dont get it, you still have the 2 min warning and 3 timeouts and the Bucs would have been pinned DEEP instead of having a good return and shorter field and you're still relying on your D (if you didnt get the TD)

[The Fish 1,148]

43 minutes ago, Arodgers12 said:

Rodgers just isn’t good in big playoff games. He chokes.

And here I thought I was watching a guy carry a team who wouldn't be .500 without him.

 

What's an Equanimous St. Brown without Rodgers for example?

 

I hate to say this (sort of) but Rodgers is pure nails compared to a guy who's popular around here in the playoffs.

[rockywoj 993]

10 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

 

Not really.. Not in the way I'm mentioning it anyway. Maybe you've got some examples, but the amount of division over Rivers coming on board last year was noticeable. Lot's of folks thought JB should have the job again for example, some thought bringing in Brady was the better move (crap..) some wanted to draft a guy to start ect.

 

I was an early adopter of the idea of Rivers coming in because it got the team to move on from JB (had to happen) and it had "SAFE" written all over it- which meant that the team couldn't come up with good reasons to not do it- which seems to be the way these things shake out sometimes.

 

I want Stafford far more than I wanted Rivers, but I have my doubts that Ballard will be the high bidder, going to the Lions with multiple picks. But he probably should, tbh. This QB situation could go full Bears or Browns on us...

 

 

The consensus I am speaking of is by professional prognosticators, like in the press (NFL.com, ESPN, etc.).  Almost everybody last year were pegging the Colts as being the best fit destination for Rivers. 

[2006Coltsbestever 21,925]

14 minutes ago, coltsblue1844 said:

Well, my take... if you are going to rely on your D, why not make it clear that you're going for it/in 4 down territory (Rodgers probably would have ran it on that 3rd down, had he known that they were gonna kick a FG on 4th, to at least make it close enough to consider going for it...he said he thought they were going to go for it on 4th, and so he took a shot at the endzone instead).... all that aside, go for it on 4th... if you dont get it, you still have the 2 min warning and 3 timeouts and the Bucs would have been pinned DEEP instead of having a good return and shorter field and you're still relying on your D (if you didnt get the TD)

I personally would've went for it because that is how I am but I am just saying most in here hates it when Reich does it. I love it when Reich does it. Now some are bashing the Packers coach for taking the points. It is just hypocrite stuff. If Reich goes for it yesterday and we don't get it, there would be at least 2 or 3 threads about his dumb decision. Think about this, even if GB goes for it and gets a TD, they still need the 2 pt conversion to tie it. That is far from a guarantee. One last thing, Rodgers probably could have ran that 3rd down play in for a TD instead he threw into double coverage.

[2006Coltsbestever 21,925]

58 minutes ago, Arodgers12 said:

Rodgers just isn’t good in big playoff games. He chokes.

Rodgers is a top 10 QB of all-time and by the way he is 11-8 in the playoffs with a SB win. Only QB's off the top of my head that have been better are Brady, Montana, Unitas, Elway, and of course Peyton. Peyton was 14-13 in the playoffs, just above average but the difference is he has won 2 SB's which is huge.

[2006Coltsbestever 21,925]

36 minutes ago, rockywoj said:

I have been one of the voices being very critical of Reich’s not taking 3pts, but yesterday was an entirely different situation.  Yesterday, I said that he had to go for it, for you cannot depend on forcing a 3 and out.  Ergo, that you might not get the ball back.  If the circumstance was different, like if it was early in the 4th quarter, then the FG makes sense.  Did not make sense with barely over 2 minutes to go, though.  Hence, I dispute the broad brush stroke you make regarding some of us that have been critical of Reich’s hyper aggressive approach in making questionable choices of surrendering points, EARLY in games.  Perilously late in a game is simply not apples vs apples.

If GB didn't have 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning I would agree with you. They basically had 4 timeouts though so I can see why their coach took the 3. I would've went for it by the way but I am just saying had Reich done it and failed this place would've went bonkers.

[The Fish 1,148]

1 minute ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

If GB didn't have 3 timeouts and the 2 minute warning I would agree with you. They basically had 4 timeouts though so I can see why there coach took the 3. I would've went for it by the way but I am just saying had Reich done it and failed this place would've went bonkers.

Rodgers doesn't get a shot, get's called a choker...

 

Brutal

[OffensivelyPC 1,111]

We don't seriously think this is possible...right?! I mean, yeah obviously would welcome him with open arms but I just don't see it.  

[Smoke317 1,300]

1 hour ago, coltsblue1844 said:

Well, my take... if you are going to rely on your D, why not make it clear that you're going for it/in 4 down territory (Rodgers probably would have ran it on that 3rd down, had he known that they were gonna kick a FG on 4th, to at least make it close enough to consider going for it...he said he thought they were going to go for it on 4th, and so he took a shot at the endzone instead).... all that aside, go for it on 4th... if you dont get it, you still have the 2 min warning and 3 timeouts and the Bucs would have been pinned DEEP instead of having a good return and shorter field and you're still relying on your D (if you didnt get the TD)

To me the truth is the opposite.  If Rodgers thought they were going for it on 4th anyway then you tuck that ball and run on 3rd down. Getting as close as you can.  You don’t throw a risky throw late into double coverage.  Was very close to not even getting a 4th down play because of that throw.  That was just a poor choice on Rodgers part.  Now I’m not saying the coach was right kicking the field goal.  But maybe seeing Rodgers struggle to get in on the 3 previous downs had him hesitant to try again?  
 

It’s a tough call.  I probably would have gone for it because their offense was having a hard time putting together drives in the 4th.  But there defense had done a better job against Brady that half.  Just excellent play calling by the Bucs to throw for a 9 yard gain on first down instead of running.  That first down play essentially ended the game. 

[Clem-Dog 135]

10 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

You’re not the first person to make the claim about Tom Brady and the Colts. 

 

But, to the best of my knowledge,  no one has offered up any proof.   A link that clearly says that.   Any chance you have one?  

I guess it was this forum and Twitter where I heard the chatter.  From a financial standpoint TB’s options were limited to only a few teams, so it’s not a stretch to consider the Colts were very high on his list of choices.

[Colts1324 398]

Not that this means anything, but Rodgers is good friends with Pat McAfee & AJ Hawk of whom both are in Indy for pat's show. 
 

Never say never. 
 

I still think we get Stafford tho.

[danlhart87 7,465]

Am I the only one who doesn't want Rodgers?

[shasta519 2,830]

3 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Rodgers takes sacks and is a selfish guy when it comes to pass distribution. How many years have you seen him keying in on Adams or try to play hero and take sacks? I think Stafford is a better fit for what we do because he will not come with the HUGE ego that Rodgers has. 

 

Brady and Peyton distribute/distributed the ball far better, IMO. 

 

Hey...Adams is one of my three keepers in my big money FF league. I like it when Rodgers targets him all the time. But he's also a top 2 WR in the NFL. 

[shasta519 2,830]

38 minutes ago, danlhart87 said:

Am I the only one who doesn't want Rodgers?

 

In a vacuum...probably. But it's more complicated than that. There would be a massive cost associated with it...both in terms of draft capital AND contract. It would be the quintessential "win now" move. The only problem is that to maximize a "win now" window you need to be able to put other resources into the team...either via FA or draft picks. But trading for Rodgers would kneecap both of those. If Rodgers was just a FA...like Peyton was...I would be all for it.

[stitches 8,056]

I personally doubt it. I don't think Green Bay will let him go. Jordan Love didn't get very favorable reviews from camp so he might need more time and I don't think they will let go an MVP level QB while their team is ready to win. 

[danlhart87 7,465]

7 minutes ago, stitches said:

I personally doubt it. I don't think Green Bay will let him go. Jordan Love didn't get very favorable reviews from camp so he might need more time and I don't think they will let go an MVP level QB while their team is ready to win. 

There is no way I would give up multiple 1s for Rodgers. Hes fantastic but way too old at this point.

 

 

[stitches 8,056]

1 minute ago, danlhart87 said:

There is no way I would give up multiple 1s for Rodgers at this point. Hes fantastic but way too old at this point.

 

 

Same. I'm willing to go up for Fields or Wilson or Lance more than I am willing to give multiple 1sts for Rodgers. 

[danlhart87 7,465]

Just now, stitches said:

Same. I'm willing to go up for Fields or Wilson or Lance more than I am willing to give multiple 1sts for Rodgers. 

Wilson and Fields will go to high but I would trade up for Lance 

[Arodgers12 320]

3 hours ago, The Fish said:

Rodgers doesn't get a shot, get's called a choker...

 

Brutal

Now he’s 1-4 in NFC Championship games but at least he is 1-0 in the SB.

[NewColtsFan 8,389]

3 hours ago, Clem-Dog said:

I guess it was this forum and Twitter where I heard the chatter.  From a financial standpoint TB’s options were limited to only a few teams, so it’s not a stretch to consider the Colts were very high on his list of choices.

I’m not disputing at all that we were high on his wish list.   I agree.

 

Im only saying I’ve seen no confirmation, nothing that clearly shows we were first on his list.   That’s my only position. 

[Clem-Dog 135]

54 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

I’m not disputing at all that we were high on his wish list.   I agree.

 

Im only saying I’ve seen no confirmation, nothing that clearly shows we were first on his list.   That’s my only position. 

Fair enough.  I'm just speculating under the assumption that where there's smoke there's fire.  

[NewColtsFan 8,389]

2 minutes ago, Clem-Dog said:

Fair enough.  I'm just speculating under the assumption that where there's smoke there's fire.  

Was there smoke?    If there was, was it really all that much? 

[Clem-Dog 135]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

Was there smoke?    If there was, was it really all that much? 

Enough to where the narrative going around in sports media was that Chris Ballard and Tom Brady could not agree on the duration of a contract.  

[New Zealands #1 Colts Fan 614]

No surprise Rogers wants out.

Out of their whole 2020 draft class only 1 player played in the post season and that was their 3rd string rb.

[ColtJax 349]

Rogers is also the guy that likes to blame coaches and players when they lose. If he wants out he can force it, he has an out in his contract. Maybe the Packers package him with some picks and gets Dak, or gets Jimmy G and a good player. But if he wants out he's gone.

On another note, doesn't it make sense for Detroit to try to get Watson from the Texans and package Stafford with a pick or two?

[NewColtsFan 8,389]

3 hours ago, Clem-Dog said:

Enough to where the narrative going around in sports media was that Chris Ballard and Tom Brady could not agree on the duration of a contract.  

That’s fine.   1 year vs 2.

 

But that doesn’t mean the Colts were Bradys first choice.   It only means he was interested enough to discuss parameters.  

[danlhart87 7,465]

 

 

[IanColts22 11]

I haven’t read what has been said so far in this thread at all.  But I said it before forgot which thread.  I said we go yard after Jordan Love if the Packers decide to stick with Rodgers for a lot longer then anticipated depending on how he performed this season etc..  Then I suggested if Packers front office and coaches don’t like what they’ve seen or if Rodgers doesn’t like what’s going on in Greenbay and wants to get out.  I didn’t exactly say it that way but that’s what I meant lol.  I’ve even said I know this is a pipe dream and other users have replied to me saying I play too much Madden video game.  Well it seems like Rodgers want out after what happened in that NFC title game.  I know again it’s a pipe dream and maybe Rodgers is just mad and like any normal human being is just venting out.  After all is said and done Rodgers and the Packers may just work it out and move on.  But I’m praying I’m wishing if I had the extra cash I would probably even go buy a lamp just to run on it and make  wish to my genie that really doesn’t exist.  But please please somehow Ballard please get us AARON RODGERS please Ballard PLEASE!!!!    I know he is 38 years old but by the way I see him playing I can see him easily giving us the Colts a great prime peak performance for 5 years.  Within that 5 years it’ll cost us a lot of capital like draft picks and salary cap etc..  But I think we will still be able to say after 2 to 3 years we can then draft a QB to learn from Rodgers.  By then I don’t think Rodgers would be mad if we drafted a replacement.  We would instantly become a SB contender for the next 5 years!  I just think this trade/move would be great for the Colts I don’t think we would be in salary cap hell or draft picks wise we would also be okay.  We wouldn’t have to go full rebuild mode after Rodgers is retired or too old to play etc...  The Colts would be in a great transition to a new QB/era after Aaron Rodgers.  I just think it makes sense and but also not salary cap but the main issue is what would it cost the Colts to get Aaron here is what it boils down too.  Let me take that back it can destroy the Colts for years and years if we given up way way too much draft pick wise.  So yeah let me calm down and relax and think bigger picture before the pipe dream!!

[IanColts22 11]

I forgot to mention also.  So everybody is talking about how Rodgers wants out of GB due to the 4th down decision on kicking a FG and not putting in the hands of your MVP/Beast QB to make it happen.  What if this is only a what if as this thread is all just speculation of say us the Colts will try to trade for AROD#12.  But yeah so since that head scratcher decision made granted it hindsight now but hindsight or not it to me was still a stupid Fing move/coach info decision ever made.  So what if at the end of the day Rodgers is like god in GB similar to how Peyton was to us.  What if the owner of the Quackers I meant Packers say hey we don’t want to make Aaron anymore mad since we drafted Love at 26 pick.  We are gonna Fire Leflour and so it’ll keep Aaron happy.  The Packers will have a scapegoat then saying the firing was pretty much putting all blame on Leflour.  Then the media will eat this up and leave Rodgers alone all off season.  

[pgt_rob 709]

Packers CEO says, No way does Aaron Rodgers leaves Green Bay, we're not *s.

 

https://www.nfl.com/news/packers-ceo-no-way-aaron-rodgers-leaves-we-re-not-*s

 

[Indycrazy1287 35]

On 1/25/2021 at 8:58 AM, chad72 said:

 

Mahomes would have, even Brees in his prime would have, 100%

I thought he didnt cuz he assumed it was 4 down territory, but i think everyone watching kinda wondered why he didnt as well. Usually he doesnt hesitate to run it in

[chad72 7,160]

4 minutes ago, Indycrazy1287 said:

I thought he didnt cuz he assumed it was 4 down territory, but i think everyone watching kinda wondered why he didnt as well. Usually he doesnt hesitate to run it in

 

Why need a 4th down when you can run it in for a TD on 3rd down? At worst, he might be stopped at the 1 or 2 yard line and can do a QB sneak, quick pass or FB handoff. Might have made the decision easier for everyone to go for it on 4th down.