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

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Zero2Cool  
#21 Posted : Monday, May 6, 2013 5:19:44 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
[mfing]

I figured Woodson for about 180 lbs. Thanks for making a dumbass out of me. [grin1]


[wasntme]
wpr  
#22 Posted : Monday, May 6, 2013 7:07:17 PM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
I don't understand why people can't comprehend the complete loss of speed and bum shoulder deficiencies Wood has. It is why he wasn't picked up by anybody yet. Now, if you need a dime corner to line up on a slot receiver, or to blitz - then Wood might be our man. But what should the compensation be for a guy like that?

I have confidence that McMillian will seize the job and do well. Charles Woodson is a corner, not a safety - he is too small to be an every down safety.


I can not imagine IF they did bring him back that it would be for much more than league min of $940,000 and he would be more than a situational role player.
play2win  
#23 Posted : Monday, May 6, 2013 7:08:57 PM(UTC)
I like many players that we have, but if Charles can come in and beat another player for a position fair and square, the staff will have to consider his age vs losing a younger player who just needs time to develop. Tough call.

Regardless, Woodson as a pure Safety could be good with his experience. Good for many of those younger players. If his wheels are too slow to get the job done, I would side with the youth.
buckeyepackfan  
#24 Posted : Monday, May 6, 2013 8:20:53 PM(UTC)
Dakotat said: Go to Quoted Post
Well they did take a corner in the draft and they can keep Bush and move him to one of the backup safety positions. I'm not too concerned about the secondary, just want to see more improvement out of the safeties. Considered Woodson a temporary fix last season, not a solution to losing Collins.


WHAT??????

Topic..........a sign Charles Woodson will return



Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused
MintBaconDrivel  
#25 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 5:19:11 AM(UTC)
JerseyAl said:
For seven years, Charles Woodson was everything Packers fans wanted–a leader and defensive difference-maker.

Oh, and an expensive free agent acquisition.

But scheduled to count $9,437,500 against the salary cap in 2013, the Packers opted to release Woodson and use that money elsewhere. Since then, the Packers have signed Aaron Rodgers and Clay Matthews to lucrative contract extensions and brought in 11 players via the draft.

But one position that wasn’t addressed by the Packers in April’s draft was safety. [...]
DakotaT  
#26 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 5:38:05 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: Go to Quoted Post
WHAT??????

Topic..........a sign Charles Woodson will return



Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused Confused


If you were actually capable of reading between the lines, you would understand that drafting the corner from Iowa would move Bush to safety, leaving no room to sign Woodson. Sorry I didn't connect all the dots for you in actual verbiage.
Zero2Cool  
#27 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 5:40:27 AM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
If you were actually capable of reading between the lines, you would understand that drafting the corner from Iowa would move Bush to safety, leaving no room to sign Woodson. Sorry I didn't connect all the dots for you in actual verbiage.


There is no world where Jarrett Bush (you're a lazy ass who can't type the players first name so I have to assume) makes Charles Woodson expendable, none, zero, absolutely not possible.
DakotaT  
#28 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 5:41:52 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
There is no world where Jarrett Bush (you're a lazy ass who can't type the players first name so I have to assume) makes Charles Woodson expendable, none, zero, absolutely not possible.


How many more Bush's do we have? And yes, I am a lazy ass when there is absolutely no money on the line. Wood is going to cover all the punts and kickoffs then, cause that's what backup players do?
Zero2Cool  
#29 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 5:49:46 AM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
How many more Bush's do we have? And yes, I am a lazy ass when there is absolutely no money on the line. Wood is going to cover all the punts and kickoffs then, cause that's what backup players do?


No clue, haven't checked the roster, hence why I had to assume. Making the reader assume is awful and disrespectful ... it's like killing kittens with a rusty spoon anally. I now just checked the roster and I can't find "Wood" on there so I have to once again assume this is a trick question, perhaps even rhetorical?

DakotaT  
#30 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 6:12:54 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
No clue, haven't checked the roster, hence why I had to assume. Making the reader assume is awful and disrespectful ... it's like killing kittens with a rusty spoon anally. I now just checked the roster and I can't find "Wood" on there so I have to once again assume this is a trick question, perhaps even rhetorical?



[roflmao]

I forget about that rapist/rapier wit of yours sometimes.
play2win  
#31 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 7:19:05 AM(UTC)
Oh, my... and it just gets better, and better...
PackerTraxx  
#32 Posted : Tuesday, May 7, 2013 4:38:33 PM(UTC)
If Woody is better than what we have and he is willing to play for us for a reasonable amount the should be here. Giving player PT and hoping they develop is for teams that are rebuilding. To use a George Allen quote "the future is now". That will be true for us as long as Rodgers keeps playing at a high level.
dhazer  
#33 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 4:57:36 AM(UTC)
How fast players can fall from the ranks, look at Woodson with Green Bay and I was just reading that Nnamdi Asomugha has to fight for a roster spot with the 49ers. To think just a few years ago these 2 guys were the studs in the secondary
DakotaT  
#34 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 5:32:14 AM(UTC)
PackerTraxx said: Go to Quoted Post
If Woody is better than what we have and he is willing to play for us for a reasonable amount the should be here. Giving player PT and hoping they develop is for teams that are rebuilding. To use a George Allen quote "the future is now". That will be true for us as long as Rodgers keeps playing at a high level.


Doesn't the concept of playing the younger guy so that he gets better ever resonate against this line of thinking? Does Wood even have a good year left in him? I remember last year when Wood was injured and the Packers were on a winning streak, nobody even wanted him back on the field because Jennings and McMillian were getting it done. It's a tough call either way, but I think the Packers have moved on and are happy with their young safeties.
Yerko  
#35 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 7:47:35 AM(UTC)
The only two things that would make me want to see Woodson back on the Packers are...
1. Injuries to DBs leaving the Packers with no other options.
2. Taking a gigantic paycut. I am sure there will be another team in need of a corner soon that would be willing to pay Woodson more money than the Packers would.

I applaud everything Woodson has done for the Packers. The one thing the Packers will miss greatly is his leadership and locker room presence. No one on the defense will be able to fill those two voids immediately. Now his play is different. It has declined so much that there a numerous guys on the roster that can play at a higher/better level than Woodson. Signing Woodson just because he is still out there would hinder the development of all these young players trying to secure their starting position.

buckeyepackfan  
#36 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 9:11:04 AM(UTC)
Yerko said: Go to Quoted Post
The only two things that would make me want to see Woodson back on the Packers are...
1. Injuries to DBs leaving the Packers with no other options.
2. Taking a gigantic paycut. I am sure there will be another team in need of a corner soon that would be willing to pay Woodson more money than the Packers would.

I applaud everything Woodson has done for the Packers. The one thing the Packers will miss greatly is his leadership and locker room presence. No one on the defense will be able to fill those two voids immediately. Now his play is different. It has declined so much that there a numerous guys on the roster that can play at a higher/better level than Woodson. Signing Woodson just because he is still out there would hinder the development of all these young players trying to secure their starting position.



From what I have read from most here your opinion is right on.

Nobody wants the young guys cut, nobody wants Woodson back at a high price.

Just some on here can't comprehend the scenario that if there are multiple injuries and there is a need for a Safety, Charles Woodson would be the best 1st option, a better option than a rookie or a UDFA.

play2win  
#37 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 11:17:22 AM(UTC)
Yerko said: Go to Quoted Post
The only two things that would make me want to see Woodson back on the Packers are...
1. Injuries to DBs leaving the Packers with no other options.
2. Taking a gigantic paycut. I am sure there will be another team in need of a corner soon that would be willing to pay Woodson more money than the Packers would.

I applaud everything Woodson has done for the Packers. The one thing the Packers will miss greatly is his leadership and locker room presence. No one on the defense will be able to fill those two voids immediately. Now his play is different. It has declined so much that there a numerous guys on the roster that can play at a higher/better level than Woodson. Signing Woodson just because he is still out there would hinder the development of all these young players trying to secure their starting position.



I don't know about this Yerko. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and I agree with much of what you are saying here.

To me, Charles Woodson brings more onto the field than the ability to play a position. You mentioned the leadership qualities and locker room presence. I've often thought he would be one of those types to take a younger player under his wing so to speak, and show him how the game is played at this level.

Last season, I realized Charles Woodson does not work this way. It was in an article I read somewhere, and he said he wasn't there to show these younger players anything. No extra time with them, giving pointers on technique, etc. I wish I had a link, but it was something written last season. I was kind of shocked.

Then, I realized his leadership is more through example. How he plays. How he practices. How he prepares.

I do think the guy was slightly miscast in Capers' system, just during last season, maybe a little towards the end of 2011. His wheels are not what they once were, and it affected his ability to stay with a WR in coverage. He's been playing a hybrid CB/S position in the system, and it worked great when he was on top of his CB skills, and he had the ability to run with other younger WRs - because he could tackle like nobody's business. Last season, it was readily apparent that he lost that speed, but Capers kept positioning him in that same capacity. He often got flagged for holding or pass interference in his attempts to stay with these younger players in coverage.

Now, I do believe he would be better as a pure SS. His ability to snuff out a run is still as keen as anyone in the game, and he can stop a RB, usually at the line. He still has enough speed to hang with many TEs, which he could find himself getting a big dose of at SS. He still blew up plays behind the line of scrimmage last year.

If Capers wants to continue using a hybrid CB/S in his defense, he ought to use one of the younger guys there, someone with good cover skills who can tackle. McMillian comes to mind as a possibility. So does the newly signed UDFA Dame Smith. I think that would be far more dynamic for our defense, and more effective in covering both the run and the TEs releasing through the secondary.

Woodson's innate sense of where a play is going and his ability to snuff it out is still there. I just don't think he should be playing any kind of CB anymore. He may transition really well to SS. If he did come back at a reasonable price to do this, I would be pretty happy about it.
QCHuskerFan  
#38 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 11:24:52 AM(UTC)
I really hope to see Woody on the field...

... when he is inducted to the Packer HOF.


Otherwise, no. He's old, slow, beat up, and expensive. Other than that, of course, he's perfect.
PackerTraxx  
#39 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 11:57:32 AM(UTC)
DakotaT said: Go to Quoted Post
Doesn't the concept of playing the younger guy so that he gets better ever resonate against this line of thinking? Does Wood even have a good year left in him? I remember last year when Wood was injured and the Packers were on a winning streak, nobody even wanted him back on the field because Jennings and McMillian were getting it done. It's a tough call either way, but I think the Packers have moved on and are happy with their young safeties.


If the younger player is playing at a similar level of course you would go with him because of years left and his upside. But if mgm't determines Woody would clearly be better, then Woody would be the logical choice. This is, of course, assuming a workable contract. We will have to be very lucky to follow Rodgers with a third in a row HOF QB so we need to move to win now. These decisions are why Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy get paid slightly more than us.
play2win  
#40 Posted : Wednesday, May 8, 2013 2:05:16 PM(UTC)
I do think there is a lot of sentiment involved in discussing the possibility of his return to GB. That, and we should be just fine without him. We have the talent to get the job done. Like Traxx said, if the staff feels they are best off having him return at what I would imagine to be a decent price, fine. I would be happy to see that.
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
Smokey (7h) : GB needs to trade up in the draft to get THE Ohio State CB - Marshon Lattimore !
Zero2Cool (13h) : QB Mark Sanchez joining the Bears.
Zero2Cool (16h) : double it up
Zero2Cool (16h) : I'm kidding, relax....
Zero2Cool (16h) : and now he has been cut
uffda udfa (23-Mar) : Per Schefter: Former Skins DT Ricky Jean Francois signed a one-year, $3M deal with Packers, per source.
uffda udfa (23-Mar) : Per Schefter: FormerSkins DT Ricky Jean Francois signed a one-year, $3M deal with Packers, per source.
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : lol by .01 not what i thought
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : he's faster than Montgomery
uffda udfa (22-Mar) : Packers re-sign Christine Michael
Smokey (22-Mar) : Easier said than fixed .
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : The web version lists who started the thread; the mobile version lists who last updated it.
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : Also, there's a weird disparity between the web version and online version of this site.
Nonstopdrivel (22-Mar) : ;-)
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
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
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / shield4life

3h / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

23-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

23-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

23-Mar / Announcements / Zero2Cool

23-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Mar / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

23-Mar / Fantasy Sports Talk / Smokey

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / gbguy20

Headlines