1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up/a> or Log In

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member! Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Bishop signs with the Vikings

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Shawnsta3, Jun 11, 2013.

  1. MackemPacker
    Offline

    MackemPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Messages:
    74
    Location:
    Sunderland, England
    Ratings:
    +27 / 0 / -0
    I was looking forward to seeing him back, he makes the most big plays of our ILBs. It has to be injury related because Brad Jones wasn't THAT good in 2012.

    Terrell Manning to get his chance?
  2. ThxJackVainisi
    Offline

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    2,779
    Ratings:
    +1,917 / 49 / -33
    I disagree. As I posted I don't get what they're doing at ILB but I don't think it's Thompson holding onto Hawk because he drafted him so high. Listen to what the coaches say about Hawk - they view him as almost a coach on the field and he's been very durable. Again, don't get me wrong, I'd have Bishop and Jones on the roster and jettison Hawk, all I'm saying is I don’t think you have Thompson's motivation right. BTW, I don't think Thompson would have thought twice about waiving/trading Hawk if he hadn't agreed to the pay cut.

    IMO they let Harrell hang around because they had already paid him his signing bonus - the gamble was if he could get healthy they may have gotten a return on their investment. I believe he got $8M in guaranteed money so the cost of keeping him around wasn't that great compared to the "reward" if he ever could've gotten healthy. BTW, the big mistake with Harrell was twofold IMO: There were reports that the Packers were offered a sweet deal for the pick involving (I believe) the other team's second round pick in that draft (and perhaps another pick) and their first rounder of the next draft. But Ted said he doesn't do that (trade important picks from one draft to another) and views each draft on its own. And the second mistake of course was picking a guy with such an extensive injury history - I think he sprained his ankle upon being born.

    Brian Brohm is an example of Thompson being unemotional about "his" draft picks. He was the number 56 pick overall and he lasted one year with the Packers.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. realcaliforniacheese
    Offline

    realcaliforniacheese A-Rods Boss

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,938
    Location:
    Yucaipa, Ca
    Ratings:
    +808 / 15 / -5
    Is this something that happens at county fair's back there?:D
    • Funny Funny x 2
  4. HardRightEdge
    Offline

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    3,062
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings:
    +1,310 / 65 / -6
    Packer Fan Since:
    1959
    Decisions are often made for multiple reasons, and you touched on some of the ones associated with releasing Bishop: cost vs. benefit, injury status/future injury risk, $'s over-allocated to the position, and perhaps some thoughts on the potential of the bench players.

    Evidently, the Packers offered Bishop a reduced contract. So, injury status/ future risk is not the issue in isolation. It's the risk measured against the cost and measured against the available alternatives. As you noted with Harrell, he got a lot of guaranteed money up front, so keeping him around to see if he could become anything did not entail much cost. Bishop, on the other hand, is due some meaningful pay come week 1.

    With Bishop, we have 3 guys who appear to be making more than the league median average for the position, ILB being the lowest paid position after fullback. So why Bishop and not Hawk? Because Hawk is durable while being a known commodity. Some might argue Hawk has remained relatively injury-free because he doesn't hit people very hard very often in a business-decision kind of way. But that has to be balanced against the risk that Bishop pulls up lame again.

    This is an unfortunate situation. We missed his physical presence in the middle of the field last season, and I believe his absence will be felt going forward.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. PackerFlatLander
    Offline

    PackerFlatLander Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Messages:
    449
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, IL
    Ratings:
    +286 / 7 / -2
    Packer Fan Since:
    1982
    Good point, you're right about that.
  6. PackerFlatLander
    Offline

    PackerFlatLander Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Messages:
    449
    Location:
    Bloomingdale, IL
    Ratings:
    +286 / 7 / -2
    Packer Fan Since:
    1982
    Hell, I wouldn't know. I'd have to drive pretty damn far to find a county fair, lol.
  7. JBlood
    Offline

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,129
    Ratings:
    +708 / 17 / -0
    I think they've decided it is unlikely he'll be the same player as before the injury. If he were "100%" why isn't he participating in the OTAs? Too bad, he was our best hitter by far.
  8. NelsonsLongCatch
    Offline

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,107
    Location:
    Chi-Town
    Ratings:
    +579 / 31 / -20
    I don't know why everybody is getting all excited. You would think the Packers were cutting Patrick Willis. Bishop has been injured the past two years. Nobody knows how healthy he is or is he's lost a step. Hawk renegotiated his contract, Brad Jones is getting starter money and obviously the Packers like Terrell Manning.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. 13 Times Champs
    Offline

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +1,377 / 86 / -17
    Packer Fan Since:
    1960
    The thoughts of another season with Jones and Hawk as our ILB's makes me want to throw up. :sick: This isn't good news. :(
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. PackFanNChiTown
    Offline

    PackFanNChiTown Bear Fan's Bane

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    713
    Location:
    Plainfield, IL
    Ratings:
    +348 / 22 / -4
    I think it's because when he's healthy, Bish is one of the best on the field at that position. When Hawk & Jones are at their best, they're slightly above average. I'll grant the "on-field coach" aspect for Hawk, but what we need is a bruiser that can get pressure up the middle which these two aren't great at IMHO.

    Losing Bish makes me think they're cutting potential greatness in favor of mediocrity, though that may be an extreme conclusion. It's what's got ME excited though anyway.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. NelsonsLongCatch
    Offline

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,107
    Location:
    Chi-Town
    Ratings:
    +579 / 31 / -20
    I really can't see TT letting "potential greatness" go for no reason. (NOTE: I wish I could put the word "greatness" in extra, extra quotations)
  12. ivo610
    Offline

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    15,068
    Location:
    Madison
    Ratings:
    +3,536 / 86 / -26
    Cheeseheadtv made a good point when they pointed out Teds track record with cutting ties with injured vets.
  13. FrankRizzo
    Offline

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,774
    Location:
    Dallas
    Ratings:
    +1,608 / 59 / -33
    Packer Fan Since:
    1969
    The odds are that at least one of Brad Jones & Terrell Manning will get hurt. No Bishop, and no DJ Smith. Who does that leave?
    Did Jones & Hawk fare well vs Kaepernick & Peterson last year? Did those games happen or not?
    I don't see people run like crazy like that on teams with 2 good ILBs.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. PackFanNChiTown
    Offline

    PackFanNChiTown Bear Fan's Bane

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    713
    Location:
    Plainfield, IL
    Ratings:
    +348 / 22 / -4
    Agreed. I guess the point I was making was people are getting excited because they just want the damn ILB position to be better and feel Bish was one of the best players on the roster to make that happen. May be pure emotionalism but then again we're football fans and this is a time to reflect on our team's chances of making it to the Super Bowl (oh please oh please oh please God we'll do anything if you just get us back to the Super Bowl and we win it cuz we love the Pack and hate the damn Niners and just want to get to Super Bowl number five and then six and then seven and just let us win some more Super Bowls PLEEEAASASSSSSEEEEEEE) a few more times...
  15. mayo44
    Offline

    mayo44 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Well, aside from the fact that when Barnett went down in 2010 and Hawk took over play-calling responsibilities our defense took a sharp turn for the better.
  16. mayo44
    Offline

    mayo44 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    Don't underestimate how much improvements on your DL can help your LBs.
  17. mayo44
    Offline

    mayo44 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    No, he's not. Matthews is.
  18. mayo44
    Offline

    mayo44 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    And you think this is something unique to the Packers? It's the same everywhere else.
  19. mayo44
    Offline

    mayo44 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0
    HuH?
  20. Einstein McFly
    Offline

    Einstein McFly Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    286
    Ratings:
    +177 / 9 / -1
    Packer Fan Since:
    1988

    He WAS our best hitter on defense. We haven't seen him play in a loooong time and there are a bunch of guys who get paid big bucks to evaluate guys football players who have been watching him since last year. Why do people assume he's at his best just because he says so? At his peak was he a better ILB than Hawk? Oh hell yes. Would be be better if he was a step slower? Probably not. Does he do us any good on the bench if he's injured again? Nope. Do we need money for guys who don't have his injury history? Yeah, maybe we do. If he's at 100% it would be dumb to cut him, but people need to stop acting like there aren't a bunch of totally acceptable reasons to cut him at this point.
  21. FrankRizzo
    Offline

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,774
    Location:
    Dallas
    Ratings:
    +1,608 / 59 / -33
    Packer Fan Since:
    1969
    True, the coaches know a lot more than we fans do!

    However, that doesn't always mean they are right and we are wrong.
    Cullen Jenkins was proof of that.
    Joe Johnson, BJ Sander, Justin Harrell, etc. are some other ones.

    Nonetheless, that was a very serious injury, but we'll see what Bishop is like when he plays again.
    I'd really like it to be for us though.
    Hawk forces NO turnovers and I think Brad Jones is still an OLB.
  22. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,698
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings:
    +2,544 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    This is a VERY valid point..

    Then add in how Greene thinks Neal might work out LB may just be a reason why Bishop COULD be let go
  23. longtimefan
    Offline

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    15,698
    Location:
    Milwaukee
    Ratings:
    +2,544 / 76 / -14
    Packer Fan Since:
    1975
    I thought that we knew way more...That is why we are so good at this forum stuff
  24. ExpatPacker
    Offline

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,070
    Location:
    A Galaxy Far, Far Away
    Ratings:
    +388 / 7 / -0

    I'm hoping this has something to do with it as well.

    When I first heard how they were trying Neal at OLB and the glowing reports that came out of it, I was thinking, oh God no, does this 'extra option' reflect a lack of confidence in Nick Perry to take over the position? I'm hoping this isn't the case.
  25. GeeDogWarrior
    Offline

    GeeDogWarrior 0 - 0

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2011
    Messages:
    386
    Location:
    Titletown, Mexico
    Ratings:
    +139 / 2 / -1
    Shields, James Jones and Raji's contracts are coming up - clear some space - lock up whoever.

    Idk, It sort of sucks if we're gonna let go of Bishop - He's a thumper.
    It's not the end of the world, we went the whole season w/o the guy - defense did above avg til people just started running it at Walden. We got some young guys that could be good - Brad Jones did good for a guy that was an OLB forced to play MLB midway through the season, AJ is meh - idk.

    Maybe draft a thumper in next year's draft - roll with avg at MLB this year. :oops:

    I just hope our Dline/other OLBs step it up and help compliment Clay this year.

Share This Page