Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
3 Pages<123>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
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 !!
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.
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.
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.
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.

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.
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.
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.
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.

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!!!!!!!
nerdmann  
#31 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 4:54:16 PM(UTC)
We've still got Bostick.

Although I guess they don't think he's ready yet.
wpr  
#32 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 6:58:16 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!


yoop it looks like some guys enjoy watching a pole dancer for 2 hours then go home and taking an ice cold shower. Shrug
DakotaT  
#33 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 7:13:40 PM(UTC)
nerdmann said: Go to Quoted Post
We've still got Bostick.

Although I guess they don't think he's ready yet.


They should give Bostick some playing time, cause the other guys aren't doing jack. I've watched Taylor and Quarless miss gimme balls and of course Finley always has his moments. Our offense required production from the TE position.
Gaycandybacon  
#34 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 8:51:40 PM(UTC)
We don't need to trade for anybody. We got depth at every position except Saftey. Saftey I would trade for. But the Packers never will.
sschind  
#35 Posted : Thursday, October 10, 2013 9:04:20 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
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.



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



If they are throwing the ball to Gonzo a lot then Finley will become like the rest of our guys. Mike McCarthy does not run an offense like Bill B. did with Hernandez and Gronkowski. If we had Finley and Gonzales one of them would be wasted. Frankly I would rather have the draft pick than a guy who would be done after this year (most likely.) Especially if that guy won't have much of an impact which I don't think he would.
beast  
#36 Posted : Sunday, October 13, 2013 11:00:38 AM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
No different than bringing in a legit #4 WR


You're right on the money, it'd be nice to be able to play Gonzo, Finley, Nelson and Cobb right now with Jones being out and Ross cut.

sschind said: Go to Quoted Post
If we had Finley and Gonzales one of them would be wasted.


Sounds like you're saying Mike McCarthy doesn't know how to use two good TEs.

DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
They should give Bostick some playing time, cause the other guys aren't doing jack.


They should have him practicing at WR because that's what he is. A huge, slow WR (which is fast for a TE). And he could help fill in for Jones if he's injury for a while.
DoddPower  
#37 Posted : Sunday, October 13, 2013 1:23:39 PM(UTC)
I know Cleveland isn't trading him, but Gordon would look especially good in Green and Gold at this point.
beast  
#38 Posted : Sunday, October 13, 2013 1:40:33 PM(UTC)
DoddPower said: Go to Quoted Post
I know Cleveland isn't trading him, but Gordon would look especially good in Green and Gold at this point.


I strongly doubt the Browns would be willing to trade Gordon.


Giants seem to be listening to offers for WR Hakeem Nicks, who they haven't been able to work out a long term deal with (at least not yet).


Jags seem to be listening to all offers on any of their players, sounds like they're trying to trade RB Jones-Drew ("at the right price") and they have seem to have a love/hate relationship with WR Justin Blackmon. Love his talent but sounds like they might be having some problems with him off the field. I doubt they'd be willing to trade him, because they seem to love his potential, but maybe they could ask about him.
nerdmann  
#39 Posted : Sunday, October 13, 2013 1:43:44 PM(UTC)
Brandon Lloyd?
DoddPower  
#40 Posted : Sunday, October 13, 2013 1:44:22 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
I strongly doubt the Browns would be willing to trade Gordon.


Giants seem to be listening to offers for WR Hakeem Nicks, who they haven't been able to work out a long term deal with (at least not yet).


Jags seem to be listening to all offers on any of their players, sounds like they're trying to trade RB Jones-Drew ("at the right price") and they have seem to have a love/hate relationship with WR Justin Blackmon. Love his talent but sounds like they might be having some problems with him off the field. I doubt they'd be willing to trade him, because they seem to love his potential, but maybe they could ask about him.


Yeah, I'm just saying it would be nice! Justin Blackmon is a beast, I can't imagine him going anywhere. He could very likely be the Packers best WR if he was on this team. Nicks is good, but he's pretty disappointing a lot of time, too. But still, he'd obviously be better Boykin et al.

Hopefully James Jones can come back soon. If so, the Packers still have weapons, especially if they can keep improving their run game. I wouldn't expect any big moves if Jones comes back. If both are done for the season, it's going to be a long rest of the season, probably.

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

Fan Shout
uffda udfa (13h) : Packers re-sign Christine Michael
Smokey (14h) : Easier said than fixed .
Nonstopdrivel (15h) : The web version lists who started the thread; the mobile version lists who last updated it.
Nonstopdrivel (15h) : Also, there's a weird disparity between the web version and online version of this site.
Nonstopdrivel (15h) : ;-)
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : Packers wanted D. Ware in 2005. Thank you Cowboys!
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : lol Rourke
Nonstopdrivel (21-Mar) : I HATE HATE HATE the way all threads get marked as read after viewing a few of them in one session. It's obnoxious.
Smokey (21-Mar) : Check out this site, NFLdraftscout.com , a great resource site.
Smokey (20-Mar) : Jared Cook signs with Raiders .
Smokey (20-Mar) : I did watch SB 45 on YouTube the other night, very eye opening .
Smokey (20-Mar) : Watching Spring Training Baseball, Nationals vs Yankees, very interesting .
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : B1G making some noise in that bracket
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : The more join, the more talk, the better. including John
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : no forum should need one person, we have others, speak up!
gbguy20 (19-Mar) : slow forum needs more uffda
Smokey (19-Mar) : There's always next year .
Smokey (18-Mar) : Virginia is still in it !
Smokey (18-Mar) : On Wisconsin
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Down goes Villanova!! Badgers!!!
Zero2Cool (18-Mar) : Might have went into your SPAM or JUNK folder??
yooperfan (18-Mar) : Funny I never got the invite
wpr (17-Mar) : Ignoring the Signing Bonus, Jones' base is only $725K above the vet min
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Not many seem interested, but I did invite those from last year.
dhazer (16-Mar) : no bracket challenge Kevin?
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Blame twitter on the /home page here lol
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Datone Jones Vikings deal $3.75M, $1.6M signing bonus, $1.5M salary, $31,250 per game active, $150K workout bonus, $1.25M sacks-pt incentive
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Nope. I don't care to read up on Vikings players. :-)
Bnoble (15-Mar) : Anyone see any numbers on Jones deal?
uffda udfa (14-Mar) : Datone to Minnesota.
musccy (14-Mar) : A more $ than I'd prefer, but still glad Elliott is back
uffda udfa (14-Mar) : Jayrone back on a one year 1.6 deal.
Zero2Cool (13-Mar) : Martellus Bennett Contract Details: New Packers TE has just $3.85M cap hit in 2017
Zero2Cool (13-Mar) : Packers have $28 under cap yet
hardrocker950 (13-Mar) : Walden would be a nice pickup...
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
38m / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / blueleopard

8h / Announcements / Smokey

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

12h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

17-Mar / Around The NFL / Smokey

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

17-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

Headlines