Pack and BJ close to1 year deal

[bubba]

4 million seems like a lot of money to pay a fullback. Afterall we have seen him play on defense. Rarely heard his name but they claim he was out there somewhere maybe.

 

[adambr2]

Still hasn't agreed to it...maybe this isn't happening after all. We'll see. He can negotiate with any team tomorrow if he isn't signed by then.

 

[Ace]

Still hasn't agreed to it...maybe this isn't happening after all. We'll see. He can negotiate with any team tomorrow if he isn't signed by then.

All part of the process as far as I can tell. Wonder how hard he's kicking himself now for not jumping at 8 mil per and 20 guaranteed ... if that was ever true ofcourse.

 

[Raptorman]

Well I wish this would happen already. That way the talk of him going to MN will end.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

Well I wish this would happen already. That way the talk of him going to MN will end.

Instead of buying a Raji jersey you could just get a Mike Vick jersey!

 

[Ace]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...nts-know-how-to-get-a-deal-dunn-with-the-team

Is it just me or does this article offer nothing in regards to this situation?

 

[Vltrophy]

Instead of buying a Raji jersey you could just get a Mike Vick jersey!

That's not funny. Who wants a jersey of someone who'll miss at least 1/2 the season

 

[adambr2]

Doesn't sound like this is a foregone conclusion to me at all:

https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/442357428282068992

Would be kind of funny if the market is even worse than expected, we pull our current offer, and he ends up having to crawl back for $3M and no incentives.

 

[longtimefan]

That's not funny. Who wants a jersey of someone who'll miss at least 1/2 the season

Matthew fans

 

[jaybadger82]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...nts-know-how-to-get-a-deal-dunn-with-the-team

Is it just me or does this article offer nothing in regards to this situation?

It's BleacherReport. What were you expecting?

 

[Ace]

It's BleacherReport. What were you expecting?

Well I know but come on...

 

[longtimefan]

It's BleacherReport. What were you expecting?

They have very creditable writers..Guys that have insider sources and take time writing articles..

So dont just dismiss them

 

[jaybadger82]

They have very creditable writers..Guys that have insider sources and take time writing articles..

So dont just dismiss them

Meh. See my comments here.

As a consumer of the internet, I think much of their content is obnoxious: lots of gimmicky top ten list, everything's a slideshow, too much opinion-oriented journalism. Makes me bristle. Other consumers might feel differently. Good for them.

I'm not sure what makes you say their writers are "creditable" or that they have inside sources, though. They made some improvements a couple years ago but the b/r model for selecting and vetting correspondents is still fast and loose compared to other sporting news outlets and I've never heard of b/r actually breaking a major sports story.

What's your basis for calling their writers credible or saying they have inside information?

 

[longtimefan]

Meh. See my comments here.

As a consumer of the internet, I think much of their content is obnoxious: lots of gimmicky top ten list, everything's a slideshow, too much opinion-oriented journalism. Makes me bristle. Other consumers might feel differently. Good for them.

I'm not sure what makes you say their writers are "creditable" or that they have inside sources, though. They made some improvements a couple years ago but the b/r model for selecting and vetting correspondents is still fast and loose compared to other sporting news outlets and I've never heard of b/r actually breaking a major sports story.

What's your basis for calling their writers credible or saying they have inside information?

Aaron Nagler-

 

[Ace]

Aaron Nagler-

I am actually a big big fan of Aaron Nagler.

 

[ivo610]

Meh. See my comments here.

As a consumer of the internet, I think much of their content is obnoxious: lots of gimmicky top ten list, everything's a slideshow, too much opinion-oriented journalism. Makes me bristle. Other consumers might feel differently. Good for them.

I'm not sure what makes you say their writers are "creditable" or that they have inside sources, though. They made some improvements a couple years ago but the b/r model for selecting and vetting correspondents is still fast and loose compared to other sporting news outlets and I've never heard of b/r actually breaking a major sports story.

What's your basis for calling their writers credible or saying they have inside information?

They hired arguably the most knowledgable packers reporter a couple years ago.

 

[jaybadger82]

Does the presence of one good reporter make all or even the majority of- bleacher report contributors "credible" or reliable sources of inside information?

-IMO, this doesn't make their brand particularly credible as a whole. Bleacher report still has plenty of hacks churning out suspect content for with relatively little editorial oversight. Its content remains largely characterized by opinion-driven pieces and meaningless top ten lists. It's the internet content equivalent of ESPN's First Take. Crappy filler to sell banner ads. As far as breaking news stories or providing insider information, take a look at this quote from an interesting SFWeekly article that ran a little over a year ago:

Perhaps uniquely among journalistic entities, Bleacher Report has a "blanket policy" forbidding its writers from seeking out and breaking news. A dictum on the site states: "While we don't doubt that some B/R writers have contacts they know and trust, a problem arises when we're asked to take a leap of faith that those sources are both legitimate and accurate." Bleacher Report is designed to engage in the far more lucrative practice of pouncing on news broken by others, deploying its legions of writers to craft articles — or better yet, multi-page slideshows — linking to its own voluminous archives, and supplanting original stories on the Google rankings. Breaking a story is no longer valuable: owning it is.

I don't mean to club this to death but, as an internet consumer, I don't really dig what they're offering at b/r. Seriously, give that SFWeekly article a quick read and explain to me what's attractive- or even redeeming- about the majority of bleacher report's content.

I'm not disparaging Nagler and, to the extent that you're saying, "just because it's bleacher report doesn't necessarily mean it's total crap," I might agree. But I'm unwilling to filter through all the garbage in order to find the quality bits. Especially when, for the most part, that garbage was reverse engineered to get my click, not to communicate breaking or objective sports information. That's not journalism.

This may just be a disagreement over taste. By and large, bleacher report's content just doesn't pass the smell test for me. Others can have the final word but citing one good writer doesn't lend credibility to the entire bleacher report operation.

Seriously, read that SFWeekly article...

 

[longtimefan]

I used to think BR wasnt a good source for info...But with Nagler writing for them changed some of my views..

I trust Nagler and I know he does his research--- he wouldnt write just to "write"

He has been on CNN a few times to talk about the NFL...Not saying being on CNN is the only reason to trust him, rather it shows that a huge company realizes Nagler knows his stuff..

I really dont read any of the other contributors..

 

[longtimefan]

I want absolutely no part of him going forward. 0 sacks in last 39 games and has never forced a fumble in his career and graded out dead last according to PFF against the run. I don't know what happened to him whether it was him getting lazy or scheme but whatever it is I'm done with him. It's actually amazing he was offered this deal in the 1st place, and then for him to turn it down makes me question his intellegence.

Bill Michaels aka The Big Unit here in Milwaukee area on WSSP 1250 AM has been tossing out his thoughts on BJ..He is claiming that when BJ was really good, he was the NT..Once he got moved, he sucked.

While it might be true, but to watch BJ this year, he sure didnt look like he was trying to do anything.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/12447/bj-raji

That link seems to back up his theory, 10.5 sacks his 1st 3 years, and no sacks last 2 years

I wonder if the Packers said to him, we will move you back to NT????

 

[longtimefan]

Does the presence of one good reporter make all or even the majority of- bleacher report contributors "credible" or reliable sources of inside information?

-IMO, this doesn't make their brand particularly credible as a whole. Bleacher report still has plenty of hacks churning out suspect content for with relatively little editorial oversight. Its content remains largely characterized by opinion-driven pieces and meaningless top ten lists. It's the internet content equivalent of ESPN's First Take. Crappy filler to sell banner ads. As far as breaking news stories or providing insider information, take a look at this quote from an interesting SFWeekly article that ran a little over a year ago:



I don't mean to club this to death but, as an internet consumer, I don't really dig what they're offering at b/r. Seriously, give that SFWeekly article a quick read and explain to me what's attractive- or even redeeming- about the majority of bleacher report's content.

I'm not disparaging Nagler and, to the extent that you're saying, "just because it's bleacher report doesn't necessarily mean it's total crap," I might agree. But I'm unwilling to filter through all the garbage in order to find the quality bits. Especially when, for the most part, that garbage was reverse engineered to get my click, not to communicate breaking or objective sports information. That's not journalism.

This may just be a disagreement over taste. By and large, bleacher report's content just doesn't pass the smell test for me. Others can have the final word but citing one good writer doesn't lend credibility to the entire bleacher report operation.

Seriously, read that SFWeekly article...

I did read it..I never said I disagree with you on B/R

I may read some other "hacks" when some one provides a link...But for the most part, I just read Nagler..

 

[FrankRizzo]

LOL ... everyone has an opinion don't they.
Some have opinions based on what they see with their own eyes.
Others let someone who writes make their opinions by giving their opinions.

 

[Ace]

Bill Michaels aka The Big Unit here in Milwaukee area on WSSP 1250 AM has been tossing out his thoughts on BJ..He is claiming that when BJ was really good, he was the NT..Once he got moved, he sucked.

While it might be true, but to watch BJ this year, he sure didnt look like he was trying to do anything.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/12447/bj-raji

That link seems to back up his theory, 10.5 sacks his 1st 3 years, and no sacks last 2 years

I wonder if the Packers said to him, we will move you back to NT????

I dont put too much stock in anything Bill Michaels says, or anybody on WSSP for that matter. Its an opinion based station looking for shock value, you cant tell me for one second they actually believe some of the crap they spew, and they're arguments are normally not based on fact rather their opinion. Ive been listening to WSSP since their inception, Im not entirely sure why, and its just plain awful. Just my .02.

 

[longtimefan]

I dont put too much stock in anything Bill Michaels says, or anybody on WSSP for that matter. Its an opinion based station looking for shock value, you cant tell me for one second they actually believe some of the crap they spew, and they're arguments are normally not based on fact rather their opinion. Ive been listening to WSSP since their inception, Im not entirely sure why, and its just plain awful. Just my .02.

I understand, however you can not deny how BJ's production went down when moved

 

[Ace]

I understand, however you can not deny how BJ's production went down when moved

Oh absolutely but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that either. I guess I'm just saying he isn't telling us anything we don't already know, and what I know is purely from an eye test standpoint seeing as I don't know all the ins and outs of what he is supposed to do or what they asked him to do. That is probably my biggest pet peeve with everyone on WSSP. NONE of them offer anything of substance when it comes to breaking down a player and that's what I want to hear. Another reason Im really happy I came here becasue you can get that here.

They've also severely tainted LeRoy Butler and Ted Davis, 2 guys who I really liked before they joined the station. I can't even listen to Ted call a Bucks game anymore because of WSSP lol

 

[longtimefan]

Oh absolutely but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that either. I guess I'm just saying he isn't telling us anything we don't already know, and what I know is purely from an eye test standpoint seeing as I don't know all the ins and outs of what he is supposed to do or what they asked him to do. That is probably my biggest pet peeve with everyone on WSSP. NONE of them offer anything of substance when it comes to breaking down a player and that's what I want to hear. Another reason Im really happy I came here becasue you can get that here.

They've also severely tainted LeRoy Butler and Ted Davis, 2 guys who I really liked before they joined the station. I can't even listen to Ted call a Bucks game anymore because of WSSP lol

I feel that way towards Steve the homer.. He gets a caller on the phone and lot of times he talks over them and the caller has trouble telling his point