C'mon Rp you knew what i was meaning on that geesh, i know it's hard to see me not say bad things about Rodgers but seriously you get paid to play football and i would love to see how much he got paid per a play in the 1st 3 years. I'm happy with him as our qb but thats all he did on game days was carry a clipboard.

But he really couldn't have gone anywhere with his contract and with the CBA this year he was stuck. Now i ask would people have been bitching if he was calling for a trade like they do everytime a Packer says it? Look how people were bashing Collins about missing camp because he wanted more money.

---

The difference here is that no one knew that there was going to be a lock-out in 2010. For all we knew, it would've been a normal year and he would've been gone.

I certainly couldn't have blaimed him if we did indeed let Favre come back and let Rodgers sit on the bench yet again, while being told that he would be the starter all along.

Nick Collins is playing out a very generous rookie contract. He's hitting quite some incentives and is getting paid quite a bit. I asume that he expects Ed Reed/Troy Polamalu numbers, but he's just not that good. LIke you said, he's not going anywhere, anyway.

Maybe we could've done the same with Rodgers had we known this, but looking at the contract he got, it was a bargain for the franchise and a good deal for a QB who started for just 0.5 years. If we postponed this signing to next year, we would've been paying a whole lot more. Just look at the contracts that Rivers and E. Manning got just after Rodgers got signed. Again, a bargain.

It's almost impossible to know the answer.

As a fan, I saw his potential very early on. I know I was in the minority for some time until he actually started a game, and would say that the whole fiasco skewed many perceptions beyond that timeframe.

The question is really did other team's personnel-men see what I saw, and how willing would they be to make the inductive leap that this guy is a starting caliber QB, contrasted to our own personnel-men and their evaluation of his skills. We obviously now know what we thought about him as a franchise, but I reckon that it is almost impossible to know to what extent he would be valued at by others without seeing what he would have done in a continued back-up role, contrasted with starting.

In other words, the market would have answered the question, and I don't see how we could know what the market would be. He obviously would not like it, and I'm sure (as a fan can be) that if he had what he perceived as an opportunity to start vs. continuing to sit...I'd bet he would want to start elsewhere rather than waiting around for Brett to leave, money considerations becoming (again, relatively) secondary.

I know one thing. Dhazer could not possibly have been more wrong about Ted Thompson signing him when he did, and when/how he did it. That little bit of schadenfruede is so well-deserved by him, and while I almost always disagree with him, I do listen to what he has to say, and he has actually changed my mind on some things, so I value the crazy sob's opinion. :thumbleft:

Ooh, I love schadenfreude!

---

Hazer is a good guy.

As Tony Soprano would say:

"I was just bustin his balls."

---

You know, Brett was offered a $25 million contract to basically sit at home; how on earth could he complain about the Packers not wanting him?

See the flaw in your logic yet?

For Brett, it was more about simply money. He is a competitor, and as a competitor he wants to compete against the best at the highest level of pro football.

Aaron could have been justified in complaining on the fact that he is a competitor; he came to the NFL to play and prove himself. After 4 years, not having had the chance to do so and it looking unclear at best if he'd get a shot anytime soon, Aaron could have asked for a trade because he wanted to compete against the best week in week out.


Which ties in to this point: Aaron's initial contract was incentive-laden - based on playing time. Given that he barely played, he was earning the bare minimum of his contract. Granted he was earning good money, but in the NFL you make the vast majority of your money in your second and third contracts. Not playing = hurting yourself in the future in terms of getting a good 2nd contract. So, Aaron could've wanted out on the basis that by being unable to showcase himself, he was hurting his abililty to make max money in the future.


PS - As far as Nick Collins goes, I'm not sure I've ever heard him say he wants money; I have heard him say he wants to be a Packer long-term.

Your implication that Collins is holding out for a big payday is no doubt somewhat true, but from what Collins has said about his contract it would appear long-term (job) security is his highest priority.

---

It still ticks me off to see Aaron Rodgers and "Conan" in the same thread.
Conan SUCKED. Aaron Rodgers doesn't.

---

Humor is so subjective. I have always found Conan WAY funnier than Leno.

Really?
I just never thought anything Conan said as funny. I think he's about as funny as Letterman.
But like you said.....what one person finds funny, another looks at and says, "HUH?"

---

I like Conan way more than Jay too.

Coco appeals to the younger generation; hence his lower ratings compared to Leno. Leno appeals to a much more wider audience... but I still think Conan is hilarious.

---