stevegb
7 years ago
I'm surprised this hasn't been discussed yet but, according to ESPN, some unnamed teams believe the packers violated the IR policies for AR about bringing him back then placing him back onto IR for the same injury. These teams believe AR should have to be released. Here is a link to the article.


Teams Complain Packers violated IR rule and think Aaron Rodgers should be released 

I don't believe anything will happen, maybe a fine or such. Would be pretty devastating if worst case scenario Rodgers were to be released with no compensation. What do you guys think? Also would love to find out the teams complaining demanding his release!
blank
gbguy20
7 years ago
Doesn't this happen all the time? A player or team thinks they are recovered until they actually see them play?
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
nerdmann
7 years ago
VIkings are punking this team, on and off the field.

Mike repeatedly embarrasses us when it comes to this shit.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
beast
7 years ago

Doesn't this happen all the time? A player or team thinks they are recovered until they actually see them play?

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 



I think the difference is the new IR to return rules... where in the past the players was just inactive.

That or they claim a new injury or a relapse of the injury has accrued.

Though they're saying based on return from IR rules, that if Rodgers went back to the IR, it had to be from a new injury. If that's true and correct, then Packers most likely did violate the rules. If that is mistake, and Rodgers old injury can still count, OR if the Packers claim he got a new major injury, then they didn't break the rules. But the punishment is basically anything the commissioner wants to make it.

And while the NFL dislike the Packers for the purpose of throwing any sort of larger event here, the commissioner does seem to want to kiss a little Packers butt around time of Packers Stockholder Meeting, since Packers are the only team that publicly release their numbers.

If anything comes of this, it will probably just be a warning or a fine. With a small chance of a draft pick, but I'm thinking that's unlikely.
UserPostedImage
sschind
7 years ago

Doesn't this happen all the time? A player or team thinks they are recovered until they actually see them play?

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 



I'm guessing when it involves IR its a little different than simply missing a game or two and coming back too soon. I actually like the rule. IR is supposed to be for players who are to hurt to play for the whole season or at least a significant amount of time. I do like the ability to be able to return a couple of players from IR but I don't think it was intended to be used like the Packers used it. If a player is healthy enough to come back from IR and play in one game I don't think it is right to be able to say oops, I guess we were wrong and put him back on IR with the same injury.

Part of the problem in this case I think comes from McCarthy's comments that he was a little sore which can be taken to mean there were no new injuries. The other problem comes from the timing. If they had placed him on IR before they were eliminated by the falcons win I don't think it would be as big an issue.

According to the few article I read the Packers did indeed violate the rule. They really screwed up by releasing Callahan when they brought Rodgers back. Had they released someone else they wouldn't have had to bring in another QB when it was decided to shelve AR for good. I think they knew they were only going to start AR as long as they still had a chance to make the playoffs and they should have figured that it may be only for one week. The way it was they needed to bring in another QB and they needed to create a roster spot so they had to either release someone else or put someone on IR. they should have known that they couldn't put AR back on IR and with only two games remaining they could have just as easily made it Adams or any one of the other guys they probably knew they were going to have inactive the following week anyway.

Unless new information comes out the bottom line is the Packers cheated. They will probably be fined and they may have to give up a draft pick. I just hope they don't make us release him to waivers. The Browns would be sure not to mess up on this one.
sschind
7 years ago

I think the difference is the new IR to return rules... where in the past the players was just inactive.

That or they claim a new injury or a relapse of the injury has accrued.

Though they're saying based on return from IR rules, that if Rodgers went back to the IR, it had to be from a new injury. If that's true and correct, then Packers most likely did violate the rules. If that is mistake, and Rodgers old injury can still count, OR if the Packers claim he got a new major injury, then they didn't break the rules. But the punishment is basically anything the commissioner wants to make it.

And while the NFL dislike the Packers for the purpose of throwing any sort of larger event here, the commissioner does seem to want to kiss a little Packers butt around time of Packers Stockholder Meeting, since Packers are the only team that publicly release their numbers.

If anything comes of this, it will probably just be a warning or a fine. With a small chance of a draft pick, but I'm thinking that's unlikely.

Originally Posted by: beast 



You beat me to it beast.


beast
7 years ago

I actually like the rule. IR is supposed to be for players who are to hurt to play for the whole season or at least a significant amount of time. I do like the ability to be able to return a couple of players from IR but I don't think it was intended to be used like the Packers used it. If a player is healthy enough to come back from IR and play in one game I don't think it is right to be able to say oops, I guess we were wrong and put him back on IR with the same injury.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



I agree that the rule was not intended to be used like the Packers used it... but I honestly don't mind teams using it in that way... say due to an injury, we're shutting a guy down for the rest of the year. Of course maybe their should be a new IR for that... one that just says we can't replace his spot with a PS player from another team or something.

As for the IR to return... I dislike that it's limited to 2... I feel it should be an all or nothing rule... that all players on the IR are allowed to return after missing _ number of weeks or none of them. I think it should be an DL rule sorta like I think baseball has.

Had they released someone else they wouldn't have had to bring in another QB when it was decided to shelve Aaron Rodgers for good.

Originally Posted by: sschind 

They did release FB Kerridge to claim C Dillon Day from the Broncos' PS.

bottom line is the Packers cheated

Originally Posted by: sschind 


I think "cheated" is the wrong phrase... I think "screwed up", or "made an error" would be more correct, as I don't feel as the Packers got any advantage, other than not having to address the media about Rodgers being on the inactive list and getting to sign C Dillon Day from the Broncos' PS.

UserPostedImage
beast
7 years ago
Well Andrew Brandt seems to think this is all about nothing...

Brandt's reaction to teams want Rodgers released due to this violation



IF the NFL has approved the move, then this is basically on the NFL and off the Packers (at least in my mind)
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
7 years ago
I don't know the rules but I wondered why GB would be able to put him into a game then place him back on IR. Without some teeth to the rules teams could play havoc with it.
Maybe GB will have to give up a draft pick.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
7 years ago
Update 

Rule will be tweaked.


The NFL classifies injuries as "major" or "minor" based on whether it will take more or less than six weeks for the player to recover. In essence, a player placed on IR with a minor injury is subject to waivers after he recovers. In Rodgers' case, the question is what happened during his Dec. 17 start against the Carolina Panthers to put him in the "major" category.


UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.
dfosterf (5h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo
Zero2Cool (6h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha
wpr (7h) : Tomorrow is almost here.
packerfanoutwest (7h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?
packerfanoutwest (7h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him
Zero2Cool (9h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.
packerfanoutwest (19h) : don't care
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?
packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (22-Apr) : now 3
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?
beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that
dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024
Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
6m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Packers Draft Threads / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.