Search

Broncos Mailbag: Why does giving up so much for aging Aaron Rodgers make sense? - The Denver Post

Denver Post Broncos writer Ryan O’Halloran posts his Broncos Mailbag periodically during the offseason. Submit questions to Ryan here.

Everyone is looking at the good side of things if the Broncos get Aaron Rodgers, but why is nobody worried if he only plays for a few more years and then we have to start over again like when we lost Peyton Manning? To me, it’s not worth it. I’d rather see Drew lock succeed and if not, go a different direction next year. And that doesn’t include Rodgers. What are your thoughts on this?

— Chris O’Hearon, Gunnison, Utah

Amazingly to me, Chris isn’t alone in his objection to the Broncos trying to acquire Rodgers, citing his age (37) and what he would cost in a trade (lots).

If Rodgers has three elite years remaining, the Broncos should make the trade. That would be worth the price, which would likely start with two first-round picks. Reigning MVP quarterbacks, regardless of age, rarely become available (ever?).

The key statistic when it comes to Rodgers’ long-term availability is starts before his age-30 season.

Rodgers: 78.

Peyton Manning: 128.

Tom Brady: 94.

Russell Wilson: 96.

Rodgers spent his first three NFL seasons sitting behind Brett Favre. He has only missed 16 starts in 13 years (seven in ’13 and nine in ’17). He has plenty of good football left in him.

If a Rodgers trade doesn’t happen, the Broncos should give Lock every chance to win the Week 1 starting job. Regardless of if it’s Lock or Teddy Bridgewater starting the majority of games this year, the Broncos need to return to the Quarterback Well in 2022 if thing don’t go well.

Hypothetical: If Aaron Rodgers is serious he will not play another down for the Packers, and if the Packers are not willing to go the extra mile with him to make him happy, are they really so self-destructive as to allow Rodgers to sit out a season instead of trading him and getting what they can get, which should be a heckuva haul? It seems to me if the Packers actually believe Rodgers is not coming back this year, his value is as high as it will ever be, and if they miss the opportunity to trade him this year, they stand to lose a lot more than just Rodgers. Where am I wrong?

— Bill Cubin, Casper, Wyo.

Bill, you’re not wrong and you hit on the key point of why I think Rodgers-to-the-Broncos should be on the radar. At some point, the Packers must raise the figurative white flag on salvaging the relationship and get top value for him.

If the Packers enter mid-July still understanding Rodgers wants out, then it’s time to trade him. Wait it out until mid-season — his value goes down. Wait it out until after the season (if he sits out) — his value goes way down.

The Packers can get more for a 37-year-old Rodgers this summer than they will a 38-year-old Rodgers next offseason.

Kick-start the Jordan Love Era (or the temporary Blake Bortles Era) by getting a players to help immediately and draft picks to help down the road.

Ryan, how much would you be willing to give up in order to get Aaron Rodgers? I have no doubt he’d instantly throw us into championship contention, but how much of our future are we going to lose?

— Victor, San Diego

Two first-round picks. Two players from the roster (non-rookies). And an imaginative set of pick swaps and/or conditions.

An example: The Broncos trade their 2022 third-rounder and 2023 second-rounder to Green Bay for the Packers’ fourth in ’22 and third in ’23. The picks sent to the Packers get elevated a round based on the Broncos’ playoff performance.

Ryan, help me here. I am looking at the plethora of front office promotions initiated by general manager George Paton and am trying to make sense of them all. Could you construct an organization chart for me to clarify this rash of promotions and where they fit structurally? Perhaps most of what we are seeing here are salary increases with titles to justify them.

— Allan Tremblay, Edmonton

Not merely salary bumps/fancier titles at all.

The current football-side front office chart: Paton (GM), Darren Mougey (director of player personnel), A.J. Durso (director of pro personnel) and Brian Stark (director of college scouting).

Kelly Kleine’s title is executive director of football operations/assistant to the general manager and Roman Phifer’s title is senior personnel executive.

The big mover is Mougey, whose previous title was previously assistant director of college scouting, so he leap-frogged Durso and Stark with his promotion.

Hey Ryan, quick question about the offensive line. The line actually looks decent. Which line battle are you most interested in watching? I have to say that the battle for center and right guard will be the most intriguing with Quinn Meinerz being the wild card.

— Del, Lamar

The Broncos should be set at left tackle (Garett Bolles), left guard (Dalton Risner) and right guard (Graham Glasgow).

Center: Meinerz, the rookie third-round draft pick, is expected to compete with Lloyd Cushenberry, who didn’t miss a snap last year. If Cushenberry keeps the spot, do the Broncos have Meinerz challenge Glasgow at right guard? I don’t think so.

Right tackle: The Broncos signed Bobby Massie last month and he should be the favorite to start.

Backup offensive tackle: The Broncos signed Cameron Fleming and he should challenge Calvin Anderson.

Denver Post Broncos writer Ryan O’Halloran posts his Broncos Mailbag periodically during the offseason. Submit questions to Ryan here.

Adblock test (Why?)



"much" - Google News
June 01, 2021 at 06:45PM
https://ift.tt/3p7cKpT

Broncos Mailbag: Why does giving up so much for aging Aaron Rodgers make sense? - The Denver Post
"much" - Google News
https://ift.tt/37eLLij
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Bagikan Berita Ini

0 Response to "Broncos Mailbag: Why does giving up so much for aging Aaron Rodgers make sense? - The Denver Post"

Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger.