Brook it all depends on the term of the deal if it were to happen. What would the Jets have to give up? Brady I think is a better option since you will not have to give up anything for him.
I didn't leave anything out. That is the facts. They finished in 3rd place and went 9-7. I watched it go down but you can google it
In response to your specific question. I'm completely torn. From a football standpoint, purely performance on the field, he would elevate the offense to a level we have not had in like for ever at the QB spot, and would make all the receivers and the RB better immediately. Defenses would actually have to respect the pass on every down. His last year was a low year for a multitude of valid reasons yet his stats were head and shoulders better than anything we ever had. Ill go on record to say we might even have won the division or close to it if he was our QB last year. But with the pluses you will also get a lot of baggage that comes with it. For starters, star treatment, almost no OTAs, limited practices, special demands up the kazoo, all world expectations that provide real bad leadership vibes to a young team trying to get acquainted with the new QB. Secondly, he is volatile as hell and you have little assurance than if things don't go his way in year one he will be there year two to complete the expectations. Dealing with the incendiary NY media would be a nightmare. If we are pissed for QW stupid tweet, we haven't seen nothing yet. Third and most important, is the price to pay. Even the JD haters recognize that draft picks are precious and JD does a damned good job with them. Yes I heard the Wilson selection blah, blah, blah, as if great GM and HC never miss on QBs. Go see SF trade as an example. But we need to beef up the OL yet again, adding insurance to back up Becton and AVT. That will take draft picks and money. Most importantly, we need to bring in the new QB ASAP, someone that is willing to roll up his sleeves and get in the thick of it with this young team and develop the right chemistry, and yes, someone that Zach and may be a new rookie QB can learn from. Are we confident that Aaron is willing to commit 100% ? Those requirements should be stipulated up front. I'm afraid that negotiations alone will drag for ever, and knowing his egotistical attitude, end up nowhere and loosing on other good options. In summary I think Aaron is the best near term QB option, but not the best fit for a young team with more needs to fill.
Good analysis and assessment. If you were to create a "Positive/Negative" list out of this, I think the raw numbers would favor the Negative. But as is often the case with such lists, they aren't weighted, so that a list of 10 Negatives might not outweigh the 3 Positives. I believe that's the case here. And it's summed up by what you said: "...he would elevate the offense to a level we have not had in like for ever at the QB spot, and would make all the receivers and the RB better immediately." Anyone having doubts about getting Rodgers needs to step back and reflect on that statement. Not since Joe Namath have we had a QB of this caliber...that's over half a century! That's so outrageous that people might well be forgiven for not being able to grasp it. Certainly if the compensation - to GB and to Rodgers - is ridiculous, then no, it doesn't make sense to do, but the preponderance of rumors on this indicate that compensation would be relatively reasonable given Rodgers's age, coming off a down year, and the Packer's desire to move him - but not to an NFC team. If Rodgers given them 2 good years, even if he doesn't take them to the SB, it enables them - if they're smart - to find and groom their long term FQB, be that Zach or someone else, and continue building on the solid foundation they have so far. He's not a long term solution, but he's not a long term investment. Getting him makes so much sense for the Jets, it's the single biggest reason it probably won't happen.
Here are Brett Favre's stats prior to tearing his bicept: 347 attempts 245 completions 70.6% comoletion rate 2,461 yards 20 TD's 13 Int's 94 passer rating Jets record was 8-3. Unfortunately Favre got hurt but to suggest that it was a bad move to sign Favre for one year to take a shot at the Super Bowl is terrible take. If he didn't get hurt the Jets had as good of shot as any playoff team at winning the SB. To put his 11 games into perspective, Pennington had the highest completion percentage with 67.4% while Favre was over 70% pre injury. Only one QB had a passer rating over 100 (Rivers) and only 5 QB's had a passer rating better than Farve's before he got hurt. 2008 was an exciting season until Favre got terribly injured. He absolutely should have told the coaching staff and he's an asshole for not doing so, but Kellen Clemens wasn't the answer. Woody took a chance by signing Favre and it was actually working until he got hurt. There was a reason why the fanbase was excited then and still remembers what could have been had Favre not torn his bicept. To act like we signed an aging vet well past his prime is ridiculous. Just look at his following year with Minnesota (107.2 passer rating, 33 TD, 7 int). I'm not attacking the poster. I'm attacking the post.
I know that many fans are on board with Rodgers, but I'd still rather have Derek Carr. Rodgers is turning 40 this December, Carr is about to turn 32. We don't know how much Rodgers has left in the tank. I wouldn't be against it, because the idea of Wilson sitting behind Rodgers is nice, but the idea of suddenly being super bowl contenders, I don't buy it. They need more than Rodgers for that IMO.
Great feedback. At the end of the day I would get behind the move 100%. And especially in NY, winning trumps all else.
I'm still on the Carr over Rodgers train for what you've mentioned but also the compensation (both in terms of draft capital to acquire and contract) would be drastically different IMO, but I do think the Jets HAVE to go into this offseason with one of those 2 guys in the fold. The main thing for me is compensation for both of them. I think if Carr is traded, it's likely for something in between the Wentz and Matt Ryan trades from last year so I'm guessing it would take a Day 2 pick and maybe a late round pick, I'll just say a 2nd/3rd and a 6th, but that could be a lot lower if the Raiders feel like they absolutely have to move him and maybe you can get him for a 3rd/4th. It's also very easy to move on from Carr at any point prior to the next few seasons he's under contract (through 2025) as after next season there would only be a 3.75M dead cap hit if we were to move on prior to 24 and a 1.8M dead cap hit if we were to move on prior to 25. He would count 33M, 42M, and 41.3M towards the cap each of the next few years if he were to stick around and while that may sound like a lot for Carr, with all of the new contracts that are about to be given out to the young, ascending QBs, it should correct itself that he's making top 10-15ish money on this contract which is about where he stacks up in terms of NFL QBs. This is even without the possibility that Carr could just get released and might not cost any draft capital at all. Rodgers on the other hand is probably going to cost you 2 premium picks, whether it's the 2 1's that's been floated out there or a 2024 1st rounder and a Day 2 pick in 2023, either way it'll be quite a bit more than what you can probably get Carr for in a trade. Then we get into the albatross which is Aaron Rodgers' contract. The best case scenario would be he leads us to the SB in 2023 and then retires prior to 2024 but even then we'd have to restructure his deal and would still be on the hook for a roughly 30M dead cap hit the following year (2025). If he plays in both 2023 and 2024, the Jets would basically have that same dead cap hit in 2025 but would also have one of the same amount in 2026. To me it looks like whoever trades for Rodgers will have a 30M dead cap hit in 2025 or have 30M dead cap hits in 2025 and 2026. Rodgers has said that he's willing to restructure his current deal so maybe there's some sort of cap magic we can pull off to make his contract more team-friendly but I'm no capologist so I'm not even gonna pretend to know what that would look like. IF we can pull the scenario above off (restructure Rodgers' deal) and the trade compensation is more reasonable, I'd probably rather have Rodgers but idk how likely both of those are.
Yes, the amount of compensation will be a factor - for both Rodgers and Carr - but the saying "Penny-wise; pound foolish" bears consideration. Of course there are no guarantees, but if we go on the assumption of both players being healthy and wanting to play in NY for the Jets, IMO Rodgers gives us the much better odds of reaching the playoffs and SB. And BTW: it's highly unlikely that GB gets two 1sts for him...maybe this year's 2nd and a conditional 3rd->1st in 2024 depending on if he plays most of the games and how far we get with him. If we can't get Rodgers, then Carr would be my backup choice.
There's definitely Pro's and Con's to both guys. I do think people are sleeping on Carr a little bit as I don't think the level of play we'd receive from them will be drastically different next year. There's no guarantee Rodgers snaps back into his '20-'21 MVP caliber form in '23. It's possible, but I think anyone expecting him to step in and throw for 4K+ yards and a 40:5 TD:INT ratio after turning 40 might be setting themselves up for disappointment. Like I said, I'm just of the mindset right now that we've gotta get one of these guys so as long as that happens, I'll be fine with it.
One thing I continue to hear and honestly rightly so. People afraid Rodgers will come here and not get us into a championship or we end up one and done both years and he retires. This could presumably happen and it would suck even if it is the catalyst behind us becoming a "winning" franchise. But there is the other side of the coin that does not get brought up nearly as much as the latter. What if year one he takes us to the AFC championship while building a repor with his new receivers, RBs and TE and the OL gels. Year two he takes us to a super bowl on the wings of above average/great play and an elite defense. He won't retire after that, he sticks around and maybe gets us close or back again. Look, I am not saying that this is likely but what else is not likely is that he comes here and busts and our team is ruined for the next decade. As a matter of fact I would think the latter would be more likely but it never gets mentioned where as the doubters have no problem regurgitating the same darksider BS of injuries, busts, draft capital, cap room... Just haven't seen the optimistic possibilities mentioned very often.
