Green Bay Packers Forum
3 Pages<123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Laser Gunns  
#16 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 1:14:29 PM(UTC)
GOOD!

the spot will go to either a RB or WR with return ability.

Joe McKnight fits the bill, and was had a workout recently.

but I just can't see us not having 5 WR on the roster,

I don't think Johnson or Dorsey have experience as returners, so they will stay on the PS. Ted may have to go outside Wisconsin to pick up a guy.
Offline wpr  
#17 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 2:02:38 PM(UTC)
Pack93z said: Go to Quoted Post
Chris Rainey works out for the Chiefs, runs in the low 4.3s.... kid was a dynamic open space player for the Gators in college.

He has some legal issues..


so you are saying he is not Packer People? Pass. ;P
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 9/23/2013(UTC)
Offline texaspackerbacker  
#18 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 2:44:11 PM(UTC)
Rainey sounds good to me, but so far he has no link to the Packers at all - work out or whatever. McKnight also sounds good, and he did work out. I don't know anything about Hill. What is he - speed back, power runner, shifty?

With a strong chance of both Lacy and Starks coming back for the Detroit game in addition to Franklin, I don't think it is automatic they sign a RB. I still hope they don't use Cobb as the primary returner.
Offline sschind  
#19 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 3:04:33 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
Rainey sounds good to me, but so far he has no link to the Packers at all - work out or whatever. McKnight also sounds good, and he did work out. I don't know anything about Hill. What is he - speed back, power runner, shifty?

With a strong chance of both Lacy and Starks coming back for the Detroit game in addition to Franklin, I don't think it is automatic they sign a RB. I still hope they don't use Cobb as the primary returner.


I agree about Cobb but one can't help but wonder if our W/L situation might be different (3-0 perhaps) had we left the duties up to him and done away with Ross from the start. I have to think that the only reason we stuck with Ross was because no one else stepped up and Mike McCarthy did not want to risk Cobb. A little less caution may have resulted in a win or two. Of course it may have resulted in 2 losses anyway along with the loss of a huge part of our offense as well. Its all water under the bridge now though.

Offline nerdmann  
#20 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 3:30:51 PM(UTC)
Joe Thomas, baby!
Offline Bigbyfan  
#21 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 5:58:35 PM(UTC)
The Packers almost have to sign a WR to replace him. Like someone already said, I cannot see the Packers only keeping 4 receivers on the roster.
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#22 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 6:07:07 PM(UTC)
Bigbyfan said: Go to Quoted Post
The Packers almost have to sign a WR to replace him. Like someone already said, I cannot see the Packers only keeping 4 receivers on the roster.


I don't know, unlike years past, they are not running empty nearly as often. And when they do, it is more TE involvement. Even if they don't get a WR, they still have 7 receiving options, not including RB.
Offline nerdmann  
#23 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 7:12:54 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't know, unlike years past, they are not running empty nearly as often. And when they do, it is more TE involvement. Even if they don't get a WR, they still have 7 receiving options, not including RB.


Is Bostick that much of a drop off at WR compared to Ross?
Offline DakotaT  
#24 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 7:16:43 PM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
so you are saying he is not Packer People? Pass. ;P



Shame on you

[mfing]
Offline wpr  
#25 Posted : Monday, September 23, 2013 7:42:57 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
Shame on you

[mfing]


love you man. at least you read my posts. [happy]
Offline play2win  
#26 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:33:11 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Is Bostick that much of a drop off at WR compared to Ross?


I can't imagine how....
Offline Zero2Cool  
#27 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:39:51 AM(UTC)
Makes room for Josh Cribbs!!!
Offline Bigbyfan  
#28 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 2:36:31 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't know, unlike years past, they are not running empty nearly as often. And when they do, it is more TE involvement. Even if they don't get a WR, they still have 7 receiving options, not including RB.


What happens if 1 or 2 of our receivers get injured in a game? Do we just throw out any plays that require 3 receivers? You can't just throw a tightend over there and expect the same results. Tightends have enough to worry about memorizing their plays, doubt they know the routes of every receiver on every play. Also there's a difference between having a receiver run a certain route as planned, and having a tightend try to duplicate the same results. Going into a game with only four receivers is a bad move.

Offline steveishere  
#29 Posted : Tuesday, September 24, 2013 3:00:03 PM(UTC)
Bigbyfan said: Go to Quoted Post
What happens if 1 or 2 of our receivers get injured in a game? Do we just throw out any plays that require 3 receivers? You can't just throw a tightend over there and expect the same results. Tightends have enough to worry about memorizing their plays, doubt they know the routes of every receiver on every play. Also there's a difference between having a receiver run a certain route as planned, and having a tightend try to duplicate the same results. Going into a game with only four receivers is a bad move.



If they lose 2 WRs they are going to do less 3+ WR stuff whether there's a Ross on the roster or not. They've been doing 95+% of their work with just 3 so far. Being shorthanded by 1 mostly useless WR for a single game won't make much difference.
Offline cheeseheads123  
#30 Posted : Monday, September 30, 2013 9:59:05 AM(UTC)
Any news yet on a replacement?
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Yerko

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / OlHoss1884


Tweeter