Green Bay Packers Forum
3 Pages<123>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline DoddPower  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 1:07:00 PM(UTC)
yooperfan said: Go to Quoted Post
Green Bay football is reality football not fantasy football.
The reality is Ted Thompson is General Manager of the Packers.
Why waste your time fantasizing about these trades.
Not going to happen folks!


Because we're bored at work? Way to go Debbie Downer.

Yooper
Offline DoddPower  
#17 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 1:12:15 PM(UTC)
By the way, I would add Josh Gordon, WR from Cleveland to the list. I know they are saying they aren't trading him for a 2nd anymore, but if they were, that would be a no-brainer, imo. The guy is a big player like Jordy Nelson (6'3), and faster. He gets separation, which the current Packers wide receivers often struggle with. I think getting what is basically a sure-fire good or better wide receiver for a late second round pick is worth it. The Packers would be nearly impossible to stop with all those weapons.

I know it's not a need, but getting a guaranteed play-maker for a 2nd round pick is pretty sweet. Ted may be able to pull out another Nelson with that pick, but it could also turn into another Pat Lee or Brandon Jackson. I don't know his contract details, but I bet he's still pretty cheap for another season or two, which would give the Packers flexibility in working out future deals.

One can dream (if yooper allows it).
Offline sschind  
#18 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 2:33:56 PM(UTC)
DoddPower said: Go to Quoted Post
By the way, I would add Josh Gordon, WR from Cleveland to the list. I know they are saying they aren't trading him for a 2nd anymore, but if they were, that would be a no-brainer, imo. The guy is a big player like Jordy Nelson (6'3), and faster. He gets separation, which the current Packers wide receivers often struggle with. I think getting what is basically a sure-fire good or better wide receiver for a late second round pick is worth it. The Packers would be nearly impossible to stop with all those weapons.

I know it's not a need, but getting a guaranteed play-maker for a 2nd round pick is pretty sweet. Ted may be able to pull out another Nelson with that pick, but it could also turn into another Pat Lee or Brandon Jackson. I don't know his contract details, but I bet he's still pretty cheap for another season or two, which would give the Packers flexibility in working out future deals.

One can dream (if yooper allows it).


I would absolutely love to see Gordon in Green Bay and if all it would take would be a second rounder it would be a steal. The Browns front office would have to be totally incompetent if they were to let that happen, which means the probability is good that it will happen.
Offline beast  
#19 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 2:52:16 PM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Did I miss something? Is Finley lost for a good portion of the season?


When talking about TEs, why does it all have to be about Finley? I didn't say a single thing about Finley and you're all defensive about him, for what ever reason. Got a crush on Finley or something?


sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Because that is the only reason that it might be considered a good idea for the Packers to trade for Gonzo.


So the reason of having two good TEs for a season isn't a good idea for the Packers?

Let's be honest, Mike McCarthy loves TEs, and now that the Packers have the running game and the WRs the weakness is over the middle. Why not have two good (maybe great) TEs?


Nelson, Cobb, Finley, Gonzo and Lacy all on the field at the same time with Jones, Starks and Franklin rotating in as needed.

Sounds like a pretty good group to me.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 10/9/2013(UTC)
Offline Yerko  
#20 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 3:51:00 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
When talking about TEs, why does it all have to be about Finley? I didn't say a single thing about Finley and you're all defensive about him, for what ever reason. Got a crush on Finley or something?




So the reason of having two good TEs for a season isn't a good idea for the Packers?

Let's be honest, Mike McCarthy loves TEs, and now that the Packers have the running game and the WRs the weakness is over the middle. Why not have two good (maybe great) TEs?


Nelson, Cobb, Finley, Gonzo and Lacy all on the field at the same time with Jones, Starks and Franklin rotating in as needed.

Sounds like a pretty good group to me.


Thinking about Gonzalez and Finley on the field at the same time...

mind blown


I would love for the Packers to go trade for Jarius Byrd. We would have one of, if not THE best defensive backfields in the entire NFL. Morgan Burnett could use a good pairing to play next to, he deserves it.

I am not so high on the Josh Gordon idea, but I wouldn't hate it. I know other NFL teams would because giving Rodgers another big receiver is just not fair.


I am on a high of how well our offensive line played this past weekend or else I'd be throwing an offensive lineman's name into the mix here. I really like how the line is coming together.
Offline nyrpack  
#21 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 3:52:31 PM(UTC)
very few trades are made in the nfl, dont think anything looks promising !!
Offline sschind  
#22 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 7:53:09 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
When talking about TEs, why does it all have to be about Finley? I didn't say a single thing about Finley and you're all defensive about him, for what ever reason. Got a crush on Finley or something?




So the reason of having two good TEs for a season isn't a good idea for the Packers?

Let's be honest, Mike McCarthy loves TEs, and now that the Packers have the running game and the WRs the weakness is over the middle. Why not have two good (maybe great) TEs?


Nelson, Cobb, Finley, Gonzo and Lacy all on the field at the same time with Jones, Starks and Franklin rotating in as needed.

Sounds like a pretty good group to me.


Because Finley is the Packers starting TE and that is why any talk of the Packers and a TE should involve Finley. Your group sounds good but I would prefer Nelson, Cobb, Jones, Finley and Lacy and that is who we have so we don't need Gonzo. If Mike McCarthy loves his TEs so much why don't we see more of them on the field or more of them getting involved. Quarless has 4 catches and Taylor has 2. I don't believe that the only reason our backup TEs don't have more catches is because they are not good enough. I don't see Mike McCarthy changing his game plan to get him involved TE so if they trade for Gonzo either he or Finley will be spending a lot of time on the bench or as a decoy.

If I have a crush on Finley I wonder what that says about your feelings towards Gonzo.
Offline beast  
#23 Posted : Wednesday, October 9, 2013 8:18:56 PM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Because Finley is the Packers starting TE and that is why any talk of the Packers and a TE should involve Finley.


If that's true, then you would be a hypocrite because you talk had talk of the Packers and a WR and didn't involve the Packers starting WRs. But I think it's more likely you thought I was insulting Finley and went into defense mode.
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
I would absolutely love to see Gordon in Green Bay and if all it would take would be a second rounder it would be a steal.


sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Your group sounds good but I would prefer Nelson, Cobb, Jones, Finley and Lacy and that is who we have so we don't need Gonzo.


Just because someone perfers something doesn't mean there is no need for something else. For example, I perfer a shut down CB, but that doesn't mean the Packers don't need an upgrade at Safety to go with Burnett.


sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
If Mike McCarthy loves his TEs so much why don't we see more of them on the field or more of them getting involved.


Because they're not talented enough when compared to the other players (WRs/RBs)

sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't believe that the only reason our backup TEs don't have more catches is because they are not good enough.

See you already had the answer and used it try to defend your point of veiw. But lets be honest the back-up TEs aren't that good other than maybe Quarless and he has a problem with catching the ball.

sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
If I have a crush on Finley I wonder what that says about your feelings towards Gonzo.


It says nothing, because I haven't gotten defensive and then attack someone idea over Gonzo. That's because there was no reason to, because no one has said anything bad about Gonzo here (just like no one has said anything bad about Finley here).

But even if people do say bad things about Gonzo, I can handle it because they'll probably be right, he's old, very well could be retiring after this season.
Offline steveishere  
#24 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 6:15:37 AM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Because Finley is the Packers starting TE and that is why any talk of the Packers and a TE should involve Finley.


When we talked about the Packers bringing in Matthew Mulligan this offseason it had nothing to do with Finley. There are other players on the team than the "starters" and some of those players are even important. They don't just play 22 guys on Sundays.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
beast on 10/10/2013(UTC)
Offline sschind  
#25 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 7:32:27 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
When we talked about the Packers bringing in Matthew Mulligan this offseason it had nothing to do with Finley. There are other players on the team than the "starters" and some of those players are even important. They don't just play 22 guys on Sundays.


Yes but one must presume that they would not bring in Gonzo to fill the same role as Mulligan. The only reason you would bring in a player like Gonzales is to throw him the ball...a lot... and that would affect your starter.

Offline steveishere  
#26 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 7:36:55 AM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Yes but one must presume that they would not bring in Gonzo to fill the same role as Mulligan. The only reason you would bring in a player like Gonzales is to throw him the ball...a lot... and that would affect your starter.



No different than bringing in a legit #4 WR which we had last year and everything seemed to work ok. Guys like DJ Williams and Andrew Quarless weren't drafted to be crappy back ups, reserve blockers, or ST players.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
beast on 10/10/2013(UTC)
Offline Yerko  
#27 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:41:16 AM(UTC)
nyrpack said: Go to Quoted Post
very few trades are made in the nfl, dont think anything looks promising !!


There have been a few big name trades already this season. A lot more action than we are used to. I was shocked when the Browns traded away Trent Richardson because when do we ever really see a team trade a star player in the middle of the season?

I think a thread like this just gets people thinking. While there is a slim chance to anything ever happening in season with the Packers, its still fun to talk about.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 10/10/2013(UTC)
Offline sschind  
#28 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:35:59 PM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
No different than bringing in a legit #4 WR which we had last year and everything seemed to work ok. Guys like DJ Williams and Andrew Quarless weren't drafted to be crappy back ups, reserve blockers, or ST players.



No they weren't and they are not huge parts of the offense either which is my point. You don't trade for a guy like Gonzales unless you plan on using him as a pass catcher. Right now the Packers are not using their backup TEs as pass catchers.

This happens every time a big name hits the market, be it through free agency or trade possibility or whatever. Someone decides that just because they were a great player at one time or another that they would be a great benefit for our team. I just don't see it. Would it be a disaster? of course not, I just don't see much, if any upside to it.
Offline beast  
#29 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 3:09:48 PM(UTC)
sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
The only reason you would bring in a player like Gonzales is to throw him the ball...a lot..


You make that sound like a bad thing... if a player is making plays then they should be getting the ball. And you can have more than one TE on the field at a time.

sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
Right now the Packers are not using their backup TEs as pass catchers.


Because they can't catch the ball... and not making plays when they get their chances. Lets be honest, Gonzales and Finley both would.

Online buckeyepackfan  
#30 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 4:47:53 PM(UTC)
HELL NO!!!!

Paul Posluszny

Everyone is busy talking about the fire sale in Cleveland, but no one is talking about the fact they should be doing something similar in Jacksonville. I mean, look at what it did for the Browns who are now in a tie for first place in the AFC North. Posluszny has not been a star at the linebacker position, but he has been consistent, similar to A.J. Hawk. He would fit well in the Packers defense and provide some needed depth at the position without breaking the bank.

All three players could provide some help to a Packers team that is deep, but is fighting a bit of a losing battle with injuries.

THAT'S ALL WE NEED IS ANOTHER FRICKIN' A.J. HAWK!!!!!!!
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 / isocleas2

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

26-Mar / 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


Tweeter