Green Bay isn’t going to trade Rodgers without getting at least a decent young QB back in return, which disqualifies Denver’s offer involving garbage Drew Lock.

Baker Mayfield... that should be their minimum threshold IMO.

And it doesn’t matter that they have Jordan Love. He’s on a rookie contract and Green Bay is now in a position by potentially trading Rodgers and getting a proven young QB in return that they were not in when drafting Love.

Also Rodgers does not have a no trade clause in his contract which gives Green Bay trade flexibility.

If Watson isn’t banned from the league, GB could send him there for Watson + picks….

Rich Eisen on Aaron Rodgers.

https://youtu.be/ZahOQCIa_HI

GB should not do this but Baltimore should be calling and offering Lamar

All these media guys fail to mention that it’s GB who holds the cards here. They want to talk about who Rodgers would consider going to but since he doesn’t have a no trade clause they can send him to whoever offers a good match for them or he can also just sit out and continue losing money. And Eisen wants to say it’s about getting Love on the field but wasn’t he third string and inactive most if not all weeks last year…

That and firing the GM might do it...

They apparently already offered Rodgers the highest paid contract. It’s more than money.

It’s Gutekunst

Imagine drafting someone's replacement one year and then trying to win him back by giving him the biggest contract ever the next year.

That's just an epic level of mismanagement.

I trust his old close teammate more than some of these sources. We’ll see

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Former <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Packers?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Packers</a> John Kuhn tells <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSSportsRadio?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@CBSSportsRadio</a> he&#39;s spoken to <a href="https://twitter.com/AaronRodgers12?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@AaronRodgers12</a> this week. &quot;At age 37 he&#39;s hoping to insure his career in GB DOES get to 40. He&#39;s seen what&#39;s happened to other QB&#39;s. It may take drastic measures to get there.&quot; Still a chance he stays? &quot;Absolutely!&quot;</p>&mdash; Mike Clemens (@MikeClemensNFL) <a href="https://twitter.com/MikeClemensNFL/status/1390120057288728576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 6, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

If I’m Denver and I can swap a decent TE and pass rusher (plus a few picks) for an MVP QB, I’d do it with no hesitation. You guys are acting like they’d be giving up Aaron Donald and Kelce.

Hopefully the Packers get half their team along with the picks and then Rodgers immediately plummets off a cliff like Manning in ‘15. Would be the most hilarious thing ever.

Hopefully all of this Rodgers nonsense fades soon. It's just a distraction, they're not moving him because at the prices proposed, I just don't see a team making that offer. Now, if you told me that Rodgers was going to play for another 5 seasons at a 35+ TD and <10 INT pace, sure - go for it. But, again... just because Brees and Brady played to the age of 42 and beyond doesn't mean every top QB will start doing that. Brees, while still good, was a shell of his former self in his last 2 seasons, only starting 23 games.

Green Bay doesn’t want to trot Love out this year and go 3-13, so Rogers certainly has leverage.

But don’t just take it from me.

“A lot of smart Packers writers are essentially saying that it’s all over. Demovsky thinks there’s less than a 5 percent chance Rodgers is the team’s starter going forward. Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel wrote on Tuesday that the team should “be prepared” to trade Rodgers. “The Packers undoubtedly will give it time to see if Rodgers changes his mind, but they should set a deadline of June 1 to reconcile. If they can’t convince him to report, they should start shopping him around with the intention of trading him before training camp starts,” he wrote.”

https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2021/5...en-bay-packers

You clearly don’t understand how any of this works.

Rodgers has no leverage outside of the empty threat of retirement, which his buddy AJ Hawk has already said isn’t happening.

Also, as you can see just a few posts above yours, somebody that is a friend and has actually spoke to Rodgers obviously doesn’t agree with those in the media.

He doesn't have to retire. He can just sit out. If he sits out then GB will be forced to trade him.

It's a very real possibility.