Albert Breer on how the trade happened

[Rubi]

It’s gonna be really insane when they take AR over young , stroud 

[TLGPanthersFan]

2 hours ago, OldhamA said:

I think it was a bad trade.

If the guy we select isn't a quality starter for the next ten years then we'll go down as a cautionary tale.

Of course you do. 

[Khyber53]

4 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

Breer Is the best around at getting the behind the scenes info on major stories like this.

This was a pretty solid get, too, and he had to be sitting on a lot of this information for a while (at least a while in this rush to twitter age). Solid work.

Thanks for sharing. That's a lot of good insight into the goings on and makes me feel a lot better about the whole deal. It seems that even though this moved fast, it wasn't rushed in any way.

[Mr. Scot]

2 hours ago, JawnyBlaze said:

The report was that we offered three firsts and two seconds but they required DJ and it was agreed upon that he would be the value of the final first round pick. 

I haven't seen that confirmed anywhere in the articles I've read.

The only thing that I've seen confirmed is that the Bears really wanted Moore. We definitely hated giving him up but us counter offering a third first rounder instead just isn't on record that I've seen.

[Mr. Scot]

24 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

That's a lot of good insight into the goings on and makes me feel a lot better about the whole deal. It seems that even though this moved fast, it wasn't rushed in any way.

That seems to be his M.O.

Probably a big reason why teams are willing to talk to him.

[rebelrouser]

1 hour ago, stratocatter said:

Who here is sold on Fields? 

Not me; he is the reason i didn't want AR. We really screwed the Colts. Their pick is just not that valuable right now. 

[Khyber53]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

That seems to be his M.O.

Probably a big reason why teams are willing to talk to him.

I'd imagine both styles have their uses for the front offices, if they're smart about it.

[MHS831]

20 hours ago, Eric4280 said:

Didn’t GB offer their first for him?

they did, but at the time it was going to be for a late first rounder-and they were desperate at the time (3-1) and felt they were one player away from a Super Bowl run--I read the packer boards at the time--many did not want to do it, even in those situations.  So my point was, in my opinion, that the market value was not a first for him--the market value that the Packer sports writers were giving it at the time was a second and a fourth.

[LinvilleGorge]

7 minutes ago, MHS831 said:

they did, but at the time it was going to be for a late first rounder-and they were desperate at the time (3-1) and felt they were one player away from a Super Bowl run--I read the packer boards at the time--many did not want to do it, even in those situations.  So my point was, in my opinion, that the market value was not a first for him--the market value that the Packer sports writers were giving it at the time was a second and a fourth.

I think Packers fans are just super conservative by nature. It works out in terms of generally being competitive year in and year out but only getting two rings out of three decades of high level 1st ballot HOF play between Favre and Rodgers is flat out underachieving. Just no other way to frame it.

 

[thefuzz]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

I think Packers fans are just super conservative by nature. It works out in terms of generally being competitive year in and year out but only getting two rings out of three decades of high level 1st ballot HOF play between Favre and Rodgers is flat out underachieving. Just no other way to frame it.

 

If you think of it strictly as a business, it's one of the best out there.

If you want to win awards and be a flash in the pan here and there, it's not such a great plan.

 

The Packers remind me of Wal-Mart or Microsoft.  Nothing special at all, but will always be around, making lots of money.