Terry Bradshaw was on trend on Twitter today. Fortunately, not because he had finally done what he was supposed to have done in 2007.
Bradshaw continued his attack on Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers during a performance on Colin Coward’s show.
Among other things, Bradshaw said that Rodgers “has perhaps the worst leg job I̵
The more intriguing topic came from Bradshaw’s comments on Rodgers’ contract. Bradshaw compares Rodgers’ desire for a new contract to Bradshaw, who is potentially calling FOX and demanding a new deal, although he has a few years left.
This is a misleading opinion. Bradshaw has one contract – his deal with FOX. Rodgers (like every player) has two, his individual agreement with the Packers and the broader contract between the NFL and the NFL Players Association. Although Rodgers has had a three-year deal with the packers, the employment contract entitles him to apply the lever to the packers, such as not appearing.
Will there be financial consequences? Yes. Is Rodgers entitled to bear these consequences and withhold services? Absolutely.
It was cleaner for Tom Brady to leave New England because his individual contract had expired and the team did not apply the franchise label. And it would have been easier for Rodgers to get away if he hadn’t agreed to a deal that would last until 2023 and that gave the Packers flexibility in the back every year.
This remains the crux of the problem. Packers want to take the opportunity to make decisions for Rodgers for a year. Rodgers wants to interrupt this process.
Rodgers isn’t the only one to have done this. Carson Wentz did it in Philadelphia. Matthew Stafford did it in Detroit. Deschawn Watson is in the process of doing so in Houston. And Russell Wilson will eventually do it in Seattle.
The only questions at the moment are whether the packers are digging or making a deal, and whether Rodgers will eventually return to the packers, acting as if the whole thing is exaggerated and / or fabricated.