Aaron Rodgers not consulted on Packers' QB coaching change
- Thread starter Da-news-now
- Start date
- Messages
- 7,425
- Reaction score
- 6,252
I got a little ticked about what he apparently said. Then I got to thinking about it, and there are a lot of people who might agree with him for jumping ship.
I do agree that he's not bigger than the organization. Nobody is, and that included Curly Lambeau, and he started the whole darned thing!
I do agree that he's not bigger than the organization. Nobody is, and that included Curly Lambeau, and he started the whole darned thing!
- Messages
- 6,078
- Reaction score
- 5,456
i for one am not suggesting that we let rodgers "run the team". but rodgers is not just any old player either. we had vivid proof of that this season. when the entire success and/or failure of the organization hinges so completely on one person, it's a good idea to make that person feel wanted and valuable and a part of the process - especially when you are making major changes that might directly impact that person's performance.
so what would have been the harm to have an open line of communication with rodgers? let him know what's happening. keep him informed. ask him his opinion on possible replacements (with the understanding that his pinion is only one of many that will be considered).
one of my employers went through a period of significant turnover. at the time, i was just an hourly employee with no management responsibility. but i was asked to be a member of the panel that interviewed the candidates for one of the new department managers that was being hired. well-run organizations are good at making employees feel involved and valued. poorly-run organizations don't know how to communicate. don't know how to make their top performers feel valued. keep employees and low-level managers in the dark. believe me i've worked for a couple of those too. it doesn't make you feel like going above and beyond. and it makes you start looking around for something better.
- Messages
- 18,366
- Reaction score
- 6,356
Though it seems it was pretty clear AVP had wanted a one year deal and that Rodgers had to know that if he was as close with AVP as he makes it out to be. Also Van Pelt and Bennett were announced at same time they would not be back so it seems like AVP decided to leave the team even before this as it was not like they fired Bennett he did not get hired as OC then left because of that. AVP from reports if you believe them felt that if he had signed a longer contract in GB they would have blocked him from interviewing elsewhere. So to me it seems AVP wanted to explore other jobs and if Rodgers and him were so close why did AVP not tell Rodgers this in first place that he was wanting to see what else was out there for jobs to try to advance his career and act like it was a shock that he was not coming back?
- Messages
- 1,722
- Reaction score
- 698
Remember, a lot of this buzz is being pushed out by the guys who can't go a lunch break without creating a hot take about something *coughcoughstephenacoughcough*
- Messages
- 7,425
- Reaction score
- 6,252
CC's point is a good one. It's the "quiet season" on the NFL, unless you're associated with what's left in the hunt. Reporters are looking for ways to build their viewership, and there's nothing better than reading a little controversy into the situation surrounding Van Pelt, and Rodgers. Fits in nicely with the situations surrounding McCarthy.
I'm going to avoid reading too much into it, not because I don't like a conspiracy theory, but because I believe that Rodgers was talking about someone he's developed a working relationship, and likes, as a friend, at the same time. Supportive to a friend, not from a "gonna leave because of it," attitude.
I'm going to avoid reading too much into it, not because I don't like a conspiracy theory, but because I believe that Rodgers was talking about someone he's developed a working relationship, and likes, as a friend, at the same time. Supportive to a friend, not from a "gonna leave because of it," attitude.
- Messages
- 953
- Reaction score
- 911
Rodgers was just answering a question for a few seconds in a 12(?) minute interview. He (I assume) was supporting his friend.
IMO, everyone in the higher-ups knew exactly what was going on for some time, and this includes Rodgers and AVP. Perhaps Rodgers decided he was not going to throw AVP under the bus on the media machine by mentioning what a dud he was as the QB coach, but try to support him as a friend by saying nothing really.
"Nobody consulted me about it"
I respect that.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,982
- Reaction score
- 3,554
I read that Rodgers is thinking that he won't play his entire career in GB, like what happened to BF.
What do we make of that comment?
What do we make of that comment?
- Messages
- 7,425
- Reaction score
- 6,252
He might be right. It could be by his choice, or the choice of the Packers. The third option, he plays in GB until he retires.
Personally, I think the moment they draft and start to cultivate his replacement, he'll be looking at his options outside GB. I wonder if he'd look the the West Coast for a team?
I think he's a smart man. Green bay would be foolish not have a plan to replace him at some point. Father time won't slow down and he has had 2 collarbone injuries. Personally I would like to avoid another Favre fiasco and work a trade both parties like when the time is right. Chargers come to mind as a nice landing spot... close to his LA home and not a team we would face until a SB.
I know that freaks people out and they say never but there have been 9 Packer HC and 11 starting QB in my lifetime. Point being it will happen at sometime.