He saw neither of these things coming and now, according to a report from Yahoo! Sports Charles Robinson, . It's understandable, but not unusual.
Rodgers, of course, was asked about these reports while meeting with the media on Tuesday afternoon. And Rodgers, of course, downplayed any concerns/complaints/frustration by saying his job is to play quarterback.
#Packers QB Aaron Rodgers asked how much input he wants, and how much he should have, in personnel decisions: "I know my role, and that's to play as well as I possibly can at quarterback." Acknowledges some departures are personally tough for him, but "those are team decisions."— Ryan Wood (@ByRyanWood) April 17, 2018
But he also declined to really dive into whether or not he should be included in conversations about certain directions the franchise goes.
"I don't know if that's a question for myself, really. I think that's, again, they're paying me to play quarterback to the best of my abilities, and their job descriptions are to handle those type of things," Rodgers added, via Jason Wilde of ESPN Milwaukee. "So I think you just act accordingly in those situations."
That sounds like a pretty passive aggressive way of saying, "Yes, I would prefer to be consulted before they cut my friend and top receiver." But it could also be Rodgers declining to give an obvious soundbite that would crank up the noise around the Packers.
Rodgers was a little less passive on Twitter, throwing out the hashtag "#fakenewstuesday" when quote tweeting an article from the Packers about his comments and saying that the title "needs more click bait."
I feel like the title of this article needs more click bait. Come on GBP, make something up, or talk to some unnamed sources close to me or something to beef up the clicks. #dalailamaisapackersfan #bighitter #totalconsciousness #relax #fakenewstuesday #GBSnowday #meditation https://t.co/HnAvXBAsyl— Aaron Rodgers (@AaronRodgers12) April 17, 2018
At the end of the day, there's a nuanced level that you need to find here. Rodgers should probably have some input as the quarterback; he's the most important player on the roster, the Packers need him operating at maximum efficiency and prefer him to be happy. On the other hand, this isn't A-Rodg and the Packerettes we're talking about. The Packers have to make decisions that are a net positive for the franchise as a whole over the long haul.
Plus sometimes change can benefit a player. We've seen Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger and Eli Manning all have changes at the offensive coordinator position that resulted in quick, positive returns. (Not all of those lasted over the long haul, but they did result in improvements out of the gate.) Perhaps getting Rodgers out of his comfort zone will lead to a strong and healthy 2018.
One thing is guaranteed: we're going to end up discussing this matter several more times over the course of the coming months, what with Rodgers' new contract still on the horizon.