Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
3 Pages<123
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline DanJustDan29  
#21 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 8:05:43 AM(UTC)
DanJustDan29

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 10/12/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3
Applause Received: 7

James Starks is a playoff man...no worries...right?
Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another. -Vince Lombardi
Offline Zero2Cool  
#22 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 8:22:02 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,966
Applause Received: 2,221

Originally Posted by: DanJustDan29 Go to Quoted Post
James Starks is a playoff man...no worries...right?


I think we should hold off on playoff talk, until the Packers secure a position lol
"I do not think there is any thrill that can go through the human heart like that felt by the inventor as he sees some creation of the brain unfolding to success... such emotions make a man forget food, sleep, friends, love, everything." - Nikola Tesla

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 2 applause.
Porforis on 11/30/2012(UTC), nerdmann on 11/30/2012(UTC)
Offline steveishere  
#23 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 10:57:20 AM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 48
Applause Received: 981

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
But the point was they could have.. correct?

Just like the other guys they have placed on IR prior to Bishop, they could have designated them as well. Point was he could have been eligible.

But at the end of the day, maybe returning in the playoffs after a whole year off makes the issue moot. By doing it that early, they would have given up the tag for an area at that point where there was depth. Unlike other areas, like the Oline, where the tag would have maybe been more valuable to the team.


I think teams can only use the "designated to return" thing on 1 player.
Offline Pack93z  
#24 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 11:09:45 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 398
Applause Received: 1,078

Originally Posted by: steveishere Go to Quoted Post
I think teams can only use the "designated to return" thing on 1 player.


Correct, hence the reason that using it on Bishop in preseason, a position that looked deep, was a risk and very well may have played into not using it on him.

We had DJ Smith sitting there ready to roll.

Yes. 1 player per team. Twins statement of them being on the final roster is a correct statement, it just was this year teams could have used it for exceptions like Bishop that was placed on the IR prior to the rule being announced.

Message modified by user Friday, November 30, 2012 11:20:06 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
Offline PackFanWithTwins  
#25 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 11:30:01 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
Correct, hence the reason that using it on Bishop in preseason, a position that looked deep, was a risk and very well may have played into don't using it on him.

We had DJ Smith sitting there ready to roll.

Yes. 1 player per team. Twins statement of them being on the final roster is a correct statement, it just was this year teams could have used it for exceptions like Bishop that was placed on the IR prior to the rule being announced.


I wonder why they made the rule this way. The way it is now. A player can be hurt before camp, and through PUP can be returned to the team during the season. Or hurt once the season starts and through the IR return designation. But when hurt during preseason, they will have to be kept on the team through the final cuts.

Why not just say, if not eligible for PUP, one player can be designated for return from IR. And let the teams designate that at any time during pre-season or regular season.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline Pack93z  
#26 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 11:44:10 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Bronze: 2012

United States
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 398
Applause Received: 1,078

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
I wonder why they made the rule this way. The way it is now. A player can be hurt before camp, and through PUP can be returned to the team during the season. Or hurt once the season starts and through the IR return designation. But when hurt during preseason, they will have to be kept on the team through the final cuts.

Why not just say, if not eligible for PUP, one player can be designated for return from IR. And let the teams designate that at any time during pre-season or regular season.


That is a good question, personally I think this will be expanded much like MLB DL designation. It only makes sense for the NFL, clubs and players.

The NFL can get stars back in the same season and it would allow for players to heal and still keep the level of talent on the field Sundays as high as possible.

Clubs get more flexibility with the roster limits and carrying injured players on the roster.

And the players, if hurt may get to play again in a season where the club in the past may have IR'd them and filled their roster spot. Young players and players with incentives in their contracts would greatly benefit from this. Union has more dues coming and and more players drawing revenue.


I think a couple things were there in that decision.

1. Avoiding it being a way to stashing a player. I think this comes into play when they expand this program.. I think it has every intention of being expanded.

2. They were in a rush to implement and try it for evaluations of the success or failure of the program.

I think when there's enough will and aggression, there's no shortage of talent either.

UserPostedImage
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

Tweeter

Recent Topics
18m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DakotaT

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Reignman

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Since69

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

20-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

19-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

18-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / luigis

18-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

18-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind