Green Bay Packers Forum
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nerdmann  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, September 3, 2014 10:52:05 AM(UTC)
Rob Demovsky said:
GREEN BAY, Wis. — When the Green Bay Packers boarded their plane bound for Seattle on Wednesday, they did so knowing their entire starting defense should be intact for Thursday's opener against the Seahawks.

That's because inside linebacker Brad Jones was a full participant in Wednesday's practice, according to the official injury report released by the team.

Jones, who missed the preseason finale because of a quardriceps injury, was listed as probable.


More bad news. lol
Sponsor
Offline nyrpack  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, September 3, 2014 3:06:32 PM(UTC)
relatively injury free is big , now lets stay this way for awhile !!
Offline Dulak  
#3 Posted : Friday, September 5, 2014 3:47:34 PM(UTC)
this is why I dont like brad jones ...

he helped cost us that game
Online beast  
#4 Posted : Friday, September 5, 2014 6:34:48 PM(UTC)

I'm still wondering how Richardson or Hyde might look at ILB... at least in a part time role... just wondering.

Some other teams (mainly 4-3 team) have taken a college Safety guy and had them gain some weight to play a speed LB role in the NFL. But if the Packers are going light and using more 4/5 man fronts looks with the OLBers being more agressive it might be interesting to see a speed LB in there like a big Safety.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 9/5/2014(UTC)
Offline wpr  
#5 Posted : Friday, September 5, 2014 10:13:34 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
More bad news. lol


If someone had Nancy Kerrigan-ed him they would have had a better chance to win.

Every time I watch him play I can't help but wonder why Uncle Teddy invested $11 million in him.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Dulak on 9/6/2014(UTC)
Offline Dulak  
#6 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 3:13:19 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
If someone had Nancy Kerrigan-ed him they would have had a better chance to win.

Every time I watch him play I can't help but wonder why Uncle Teddy invested $11 million in him.


11 mil huh? ya yesterday I thought it was 8 geez ... I havnt liked him since his first year - he just didnt have that edge - least hawk tries his ass off and IMO was great last year and hope he is going to be good this year also.

Offline wpr  
#7 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 5:38:09 AM(UTC)
Dulak said: Go to Quoted Post
11 mil huh? ya yesterday I thought it was 8 geez ... I havnt liked him since his first year - he just didnt have that edge - least hawk tries his ass off and IMO was great last year and hope he is going to be good this year also.



I don't see his pay check so I can't say for sure. This is where I got the info.

Quote:
Brad Jones signed a 3 year / $11.25 million contract with the Green Bay Packers, including a $3,000,000 signing bonus, $3,000,000 guaranteed, and an annual average salary of $3,750,000

source.
Offline nerdmann  
#8 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 5:46:08 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
If someone had Nancy Kerrigan-ed him they would have had a better chance to win.

Every time I watch him play I can't help but wonder why Uncle Teddy invested $11 million in him.


Because he has the speed to cover.
Offline wpr  
#9 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 5:57:36 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Because he has the speed to cover.


This concept of GB going smaller and quicker reminds me of the George Cumby era in GB. They had a lot of small quick players who couldn't block or tackle but they were fast right up to the time that The Fridge or someone else got a hold of them and knocked them on their rear.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 9/6/2014(UTC)
Offline steveishere  
#10 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 6:42:52 AM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
This concept of GB going smaller and quicker reminds me of the George Cumby era in GB. They had a lot of small quick players who couldn't block or tackle but they were fast right up to the time that The Fridge or someone else got a hold of them and knocked them on their rear.


Except they got smaller but they aren't small. They went more from abnormally large to normal size.
Offline wpr  
#11 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 7:16:43 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
Except they got smaller but they aren't small. They went more from abnormally large to normal size.


never said it was the same thing. Jut said it reminded me of the old days. But then again giving up 400 yards with over 200 rushing maybe it is the same thing after all.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 9/6/2014(UTC)
Offline Wade  
#12 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 8:28:40 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Because he has the speed to cover.


Speed to cover? Or speed to get even farther out of position?

thanks Post received 2 applause.
nerdmann on 9/6/2014(UTC), all_about_da_packers on 9/6/2014(UTC)
Offline CaliforniaCheez  
#13 Posted : Saturday, September 6, 2014 7:40:26 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm still wondering how Richardson or Hyde might look at ILB... at least in a part time role... just wondering.

Some other teams (mainly 4-3 team) have taken a college Safety guy and had them gain some weight to play a speed LB role in the NFL. But if the Packers are going light and using more 4/5 man fronts looks with the OLBers being more agressive it might be interesting to see a speed LB in there like a big Safety.




Back in history the Bears converted a college safety into a linebacker and the results were pretty good.
I think his name was Brian Urlacher or something like that.


thanks Post received 2 applause.
nerdmann on 9/6/2014(UTC), yooperfan on 9/7/2014(UTC)
Offline Dulak  
#14 Posted : Sunday, September 7, 2014 3:42:14 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
Because he has the speed to cover.


ya I know thats why they kept him - but seriously he really isnt that good - sucked at OLB thats why they moved him and he is sucking it up at ILB - I mean he is ok at his job but the suckage part - penalties and just lack luster performance isnt going to win us any games.

Hawk got beat on one of the major passes too this game - but least he tries and tends to know his assignments more. I used to be quite down on hawk but after last years performance I like the dude.

Id like one of our 2nd year or rookies to replace jones ...

Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
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
13m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

26-Mar / 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


Tweeter