Men In Tights Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 No conditional pick from the Packers perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charty Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 For what it's worth, from today's Boston Herald....... Source: Packers to deal for Moss By Michael Felger Boston Herald Patriots Beat Columnist Thursday, March 15, 2007 - Updated: 10:25 AM EST For those holding out hope that the Patriots [team stats]’ plans to revamp the wide receiver position included trading for Randy Moss, we have some bad news for you. A source in Wisconsin said today that the Packers and Raiders are on the verge of announcing a trade that would send the troubled receiver to Green Bay in exchange for backup quarterback Aaron Rodgers. There are expected to be other particulars in the deal. According to the source, Green Bay would also give up a seventh-round pick in 2008, while the Packers would receive Raiders tight end Courtney Anderson as part of the deal. The Packers would also receive a conditional pick from the Raiders in the 2009 draft which would be based on Rodgers’ production in Oakland the next two seasons. The source indicated that Moss has agreed to restructure his contract, which calls for $20 million in base salary the next two years. Moss and Packers quarterback Brett Favre are said to have been talking on the phone throughout the process. Press conferences could be held as early as Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 For what it's worth, from today's Boston Herald....... Source: Packers to deal for Moss By Michael Felger Boston Herald Patriots Beat Columnist Thursday, March 15, 2007 - Updated: 10:25 AM EST For those holding out hope that the Patriots [team stats]’ plans to revamp the wide receiver position included trading for Randy Moss, we have some bad news for you. A source in Wisconsin said today that the Packers and Raiders are on the verge of announcing a trade that would send the troubled receiver to Green Bay in exchange for backup quarterback Aaron Rodgers. There are expected to be other particulars in the deal. According to the source, Green Bay would also give up a seventh-round pick in 2008, while the Packers would receive Raiders tight end Courtney Anderson as part of the deal. The Packers would also receive a conditional pick from the Raiders in the 2009 draft which would be based on Rodgers’ production in Oakland the next two seasons. The source indicated that Moss has agreed to restructure his contract, which calls for $20 million in base salary the next two years. Moss and Packers quarterback Brett Favre are said to have been talking on the phone throughout the process. Press conferences could be held as early as Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 wow. so it looks like CJ to the raiders then at #1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 For what it's worth, from today's Boston Herald....... Source: Packers to deal for Moss By Michael Felger Boston Herald Patriots Beat Columnist Thursday, March 15, 2007 - Updated: 10:25 AM EST For those holding out hope that the Patriots [team stats]’ plans to revamp the wide receiver position included trading for Randy Moss, we have some bad news for you. A source in Wisconsin said today that the Packers and Raiders are on the verge of announcing a trade that would send the troubled receiver to Green Bay in exchange for backup quarterback Aaron Rodgers. There are expected to be other particulars in the deal. According to the source, Green Bay would also give up a seventh-round pick in 2008, while the Packers would receive Raiders tight end Courtney Anderson as part of the deal. The Packers would also receive a conditional pick from the Raiders in the 2009 draft which would be based on Rodgers’ production in Oakland the next two seasons. The source indicated that Moss has agreed to restructure his contract, which calls for $20 million in base salary the next two years. Moss and Packers quarterback Brett Favre are said to have been talking on the phone throughout the process. Press conferences could be held as early as Friday. I'd really be surprised if Thompson traded Rodgers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I'm just happy to see him and his salary cap hit go-- but the Raiders are giving them Moss, Anderson and a pick for Aaron Rogers and a 7th in 2008? Seems like a lot for nothign if they are planning on drafting Russel anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKnight Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 If this deal goes down Favre will defenitly be on my draft day radar next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 wow. so it looks like CJ to the raiders then at #1? After the workout that JaMarcus Russell just had, I wouldn't be so sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I'd really be surprised if Thompson traded Rodgers. Why, because he has been so good? I like the deal and I like Courtney Anderson in the deal as well. I would rather give up Rodgers as opposed to a 1st or 2nd round draft pick. Maybe take a chance on Troy Smith in the 3-4 round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Why, because he has been so good? I like the deal and I like Courtney Anderson in the deal as well. I would rather give up Rodgers as opposed to a 1st or 2nd round draft pick. Maybe take a chance on Troy Smith in the 3-4 round. Troy Smith is going to be a WR in the NFL, not a QB, the only passes he will be throwing is the occasional trick play like a reverse pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Why, because he has been so good? I like the deal and I like Courtney Anderson in the deal as well. I would rather give up Rodgers as opposed to a 1st or 2nd round draft pick. Maybe take a chance on Troy Smith in the 3-4 round. Why in the 7 Hells would they want a smurf who throws wobbly 10 yd outs? If GB is going to cut ties with Rodgers, I'd suspect they'd be in the market for Stanton in the 2nd - though I think he'll be gone by the time they come up - or more likely Edwards or Kolb. Kolb especially has some Favre-like traits in him, but I like Edwards' chances as a pro much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Why in the 7 Hells would they want a smurf who throws wobbly 10 yd outs? If GB is going to cut ties with Rodgers, I'd suspect they'd be in the market for Stanton in the 2nd - though I think he'll be gone by the time they come up - or more likely Edwards or Kolb. Kolb especially has some Favre-like traits in him, but I like Edwards' chances as a pro much better. I just pulled the first QB name I could think of. Any of those names look good to me and could easily replace Rodgers. I may eat my words in 3-years but what can you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Why, because he has been so good? I like the deal and I like Courtney Anderson in the deal as well. I would rather give up Rodgers as opposed to a 1st or 2nd round draft pick. Maybe take a chance on Troy Smith in the 3-4 round. Because it flies in the face of everything that Thompson has preached in the past - build through the draft, retaining your own players, not reaching in free agency or trades, etc. Doing this trade says: 1. Thompson made a mistake with his first ever pick, Rodgers 2. His tennant of building through the draft is out the window 3. The Pack is making a final run for Favre I'm actually in favor of trading for Moss at this point. As I said, I'd be surprised if Thompson does it for the reasons listed above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Men In Tights Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 Because it flies in the face of everything that Thompson has preached in the past - build through the draft, retaining your own players, not reaching in free agency or trades, etc. Doing this trade says: 1. Thompson made a mistake with his first ever pick, Rodgers 2. His tennant of building through the draft is out the window 3. The Pack is making a final run for Favre I'm actually in favor of trading for Moss at this point. As I said, I'd be surprised if Thompson does it for the reasons listed above. I agree with those reasons and I think it is obvious they are doing it for #3 and he is putting his ego aside on the Rodgers deal. Unlike Sherman with keeping two freaking punters on the roster for the entire year because he couldn't admit he made a mistake. I will give him all kinds of credit if he puts his ego aside and makes this deal. I also think Thompson realizes that Rodgers probably wasn't the best pick in that situation as he was the best player on the board it didn't exactly fill a need. I also don't think it ruins his tennant of building through the draft as he is only giving up one draft pick and not something like the Herschel Walker deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 This has to signal that BrettFavre (in John Madden voice) will be playing for not one, but two more seasons. Can you imagine how disruptive Moss will be if BrettFavre retires after only one season? Agree with Demon as well...BrettFavre will be on my radar as well...lots of weapons to throw to as long as their running game pans out. He could be a borderline starter and a definite solid back up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolly Rodgers Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 So if you are the Raiders, do you still pick Russell with the #1 pick or do you go with CJ? They can't possibly be thinking of starting Rodgers all year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Vatican Hitsquad Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 So if you are the Raiders, do you still pick Russell with the #1 pick or do you go with CJ? They can't possibly be thinking of starting Rodgers all year... Well, really, how is Rogers any worse than Russel? Has anythign been seen from Rogers to suggest he was a bust? I am seriously asking as I know nothign of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolly Rodgers Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Well, really, how is Rogers any worse than Russel? Has anythign been seen from Rogers to suggest he was a bust? I am seriously asking as I know nothign of him. From what I've heard from GB fans, he has looked pretty poor. However, he really hasn't played much at all. I just cant see them going with Rodgers, Walters, and Sopo for an entire year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Well, really, how is Rogers any worse than Russel? Has anythign been seen from Rogers to suggest he was a bust? I am seriously asking as I know nothign of him. Rodgers has gotten NO snaps that matter - he played a bit in '05 in GB's blowout win over NO (threw no passes), in a blowout loss to Bal, and in the blowout loss to NE in '06 (or maybe it was the NYJ loss) - and played the second half with a broken foot. So he hasn't really had a chance to show much when the lights are on. In his preseason appearances, he's looked a bit inaccurate and his arm strength isn't anything that will knock your socks off either. But on the plus side, he seems to be a bright, hardworking, team-oriented guy who could be pretty good in the locker room - I see his max as being a competent starter who can lead a team but not carry it. That's a bit of a rose-colored write up, but the truth is that nobody really knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Because it flies in the face of everything that Thompson has preached in the past - build through the draft, retaining your own players, not reaching in free agency or trades, etc. Doing this trade says: 1. Thompson made a mistake with his first ever pick, Rodgers 2. His tennant of building through the draft is out the window 3. The Pack is making a final run for Favre I'm actually in favor of trading for Moss at this point. As I said, I'd be surprised if Thompson does it for the reasons listed above. Eh, if you can trade a backup QB for a starting WR and TE, that seems sound enough to me. 1)Thompson is a Wolf disciple; Wolf's credo is don't compound a mistake by hanging onto it. 2)As said above - he's getting a starting WR and TE (or, at worst, top backups for depth) at 2 positions for a guy who probably isn't that hard to replace. I'd love to see Stanton in GB, but he seems pegged to go near the top of the 2nd round. 3)Possibly; but then again, if Anderson and Moss work out, you've helped your offense in several ways - and a stronger team is better for everyone. Anderson could be a long-term solution - he's young yet. Moss is probably two years and done, but I think it would be a good trade - Moss will be more productive relative to other WRs than Rodgers is relative to other QBs over the next few years. And IIRC Rodgers is a FA in '09, so they could always make a run at him then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatman Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 3)Possibly; but then again, if Anderson and Moss work out, you've helped your offense in several ways - and a stronger team is better for everyone. Anderson could be a long-term solution - he's young yet. Moss is probably two years and done, but I think it would be a good trade - Moss will be more productive relative to other WRs than Rodgers is relative to other QBs over the next few years. And IIRC Rodgers is a FA in '09, so they could always make a run at him then. The issue for me is that I can't see Randy being a model citizen if Brett isn't there (who knows how he'll even be with Brett). Maybe they cut him once Favre retires, but then you've essentially traded your QB of the future to rent Moss for one or two years, plus a mediocre (at best) TE. You said it yourself - not enough meaningful snaps to judge Rodgers. If they're talking about trading him they must not think much of him at this point, but it's very hard to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 The issue for me is that I can't see Randy being a model citizen if Brett isn't there (who knows how he'll even be with Brett). Maybe they cut him once Favre retires, but then you've essentially traded your QB of the future to rent Moss for one or two years, plus a mediocre (at best) TE. You said it yourself - not enough meaningful snaps to judge Rodgers. If they're talking about trading him they must not think much of him at this point, but it's very hard to say. Considering GB needs a TE in a bad way and honestly all those in the draft are probably mediocre, and that apparently a lot of other teams had doubts about Rodgers ( the plummeted in the draft), It is a pretty good trade. Now GB can draft a QB in the 2nd round for a lot less money that Rodgers would have cost them, they get a better TE than they probably would have gotten in the first round, and they get a WR that when he wants to play was one of the best in the league, I see this as a pretty good trade for the fudge packers. I'm sure before they started this discussion they got assurances that Favre would stick around for a couple of more years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Yes, but Leak outta Fla may be there for the Packers in the 2nd-so ya never know Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moneymakers Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 Packers, Raiders not close on Moss trade By BOB MCGINN bmcginn@journalsentinel.com Posted: March 15, 2007 Green Bay - The Green Bay Packers and Oakland Raiders are not close to a trade in which the Packers would acquire wide receiver Randy Moss, NFL sources familiar with the situation told the Journal Sentinel today. Officials from both teams labeled as inaccurate a report written by Michael Felger of the Boston Herald quoting a source in Wisconsin that the two teams "are on the verge of announcing a trade that would send the troubled wide receiver to Green Bay in exchange for backup quarterback Aaron Rodgers." "It's all a joke," a personnel man for one of the two clubs said. "It's not true," said another personnel man for one of the two teams. "That's just stupid." Felger, who covers the New England Patriots, is a native of Wisconsin and has friends in the state. His four-paragraph story appeared on the Herald Web site at mid-morning. Later, Felger added a paragraph indicating that a source close to Rodgers adamantly denied his report. The Raiders rated Rodgers over Alex Smith before the 2005 draft. The only quarterback on their roster is Andrew Walter. Obviously, they need quarterbacks. But earlier in the week an NFL source with knowledge of the Raiders told the Journal Sentinel that he doubted the team would have interest in Rodgers. On Feb. 28, the Journal Sentinel reported that the two teams had been discussing Moss for a considerable length of time. On Tuesday, the Journal Sentinel reported that Packers GM Ted Thompson had spoken to Raiders owner Al Davis about a deal for Moss, and that the Raiders were confident about their ability to obtain a draft choice for Moss. In the last few days, however, other NFL sources said that Thompson is inclined just to wait out Davis with the expectation that the Raiders either will release Moss or trade him to Green Bay for a mid-to-late round draft choice. Rodgers, a first-round draft choice in 2005, hasn't been overly impressive during two training camps and two appearances in the regular season. Also, in November, he suffered a broken left foot, an injury from which he apparently now is fully recovered. Still, the Packers not only don't have another viable backup to Brett Favre, they also have no heir apparent. They definitely want to see more of Rodgers as they determine whether he can play. The Packers probably wouldn't give up Rodgers to any team in exchange for a player that they seem convinced they can get on the cheap later on. Thompson was on the road in Georgia on a scouting trip and unavailable for comment. link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chadman Posted March 16, 2007 Share Posted March 16, 2007 For the life of me, I don't understand what all the consternation is about me having LJ as an avatar and posting about the Vikings. I guess from now on I will change my avatar to represent the team I am posting on in all threads... I explained this once to you, John, guess I'll do it again. I grew up in Missouri, started out a Chiefs fan, and still consider them "my team." I moved to Minnesota a few years ago, and have adopted the Vikings due to living here and being plugged in to them so closely. So, I'm a Chiefs fan first, Vikings fan second. At this point, I know a lot more about the Vikings than I do the Chiefs, as I get all the local info. Sorry to take up space on this topic, which I consider pretty silly. Just answering critics, who have taken this on as some kind of serious offense, I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.