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 or

    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!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

Are we going to bring in a WR?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by pyledriver80, Sep 5, 2006.

  1. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    i love your 'freak out' attitude. its ...interesting.

    rookie,veteran, whoever gets the job done. Moll and Spitz are getting the job done. Colledge wasnt. he was disappointing.

    but keep freaking out, and entertaining me. I need entertainment till sunday.
     
  2. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    I agree, going in to the year with 2 rookies on the Line is insane. The REAL problem is he has even more youth behind them. It just baffles me, sorry.

    And then we go out and sign some guy who is 330 Lbs.? I thought we wanted light O-lineman to run this scheme. If you wanted big balls of Lard there were much better ones available or hell we could have just kept Whittacker. I heard next year TT is just going to place 2 of his Blow Up Dolls at each guard spot.


    I just don't get the fascination with Youth,Youth and Youth. You need a nice equal balance, and this team does not have it.
     
  3. TomAllen

    TomAllen Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +0
    Glad that I entertain you. I could say the same about you, but the bottom line is that you can't count on starting rookies, and think that they are going to get the job done. It's totally risky.

    If TT signs a good vet O-lineman who can start and a good 2nd/3rd WR, i'll start to fell a little differently towards him.

    But until then, he hasn't shown me all that much.
     
  4. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    why would any good veteran starting o-linemen be available? your whole argument is flawed.

    however, depth at WR (not starters,1,2, or 3) is needed.
     
  5. TomAllen

    TomAllen Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +0
    Lineman get cut all the time to make room for younger talent--like Hank Fraley that was let go from the Eagles.

    The point is that they would be a better option than rookies.

    But I know to your line of thinking, if TT doesn't sign them then they were too expensive, or don't fit the scheme, or insert excuse here, or something "flawed" like that.

    Bottom line..a veteran is more than likely a better option than starting a rookie.
     
  6. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    You're right. There are no good Lineman available because they are

    "Old"
    'Don't fit the scheme"
    "Too Expensive"
    "Not Talented"
    "enter any other excuse here"

    You are right.....THE ONLY OPTION WE HAD WAS 2 ROOKIES!
     
  7. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Nice Tom.....I see we think alike
     
  8. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    yeah, GB drafted 5 linemen in 2 years to NOT play them. Im glad you guys arent the GM.

    and dont ever tell me what im thinking, i wont put up with that ****.
     
  9. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    What does this have to do with anything?

    Why do we have 2 inexperienced rookies starting with nothing but more youth behind them? Why is thier only 4 WR's, 2 with no experience?

    According to your logic TT shouldn't bring in a WR because they must not be good if available. Is this correct?
     
  10. cyoung

    cyoung Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,276
    Ratings:
    +2
    Peter Warrick still avaliable I say take him (he is still a FA right? nothing on yahoo sports says he was taken)
     
  11. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    No, he's still available, but since he is available he must stink
     
  12. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Pay attention, Pyle.

    Your boytoy is talking about bringing in a vet to START. There arent many vet linemen who are probably good enough to start out there at this time.

    As far providing DEPTH to the WRs (as in, 5th, 6th WR) yeah there are some guys who can do that.

    depth is not the same thing as a starter. You're a coach, right?

    try and keep up.
     
  13. cyoung

    cyoung Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,276
    Ratings:
    +2
    I didn't think about that, Well his receiving yards havent been good since 2003 (Cincinnati 819 yards...and thats his best) And an average punt return...hmh ok lets not take him
     
  14. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    hes definitely not a starter.

    im sorry ur not grasping the concepts we're throwing around here.
     
  15. CaliforniaCheez

    CaliforniaCheez Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    2,486
    Ratings:
    +0
    On a 45 player game day roster rarely would you have more than 4 WR's active.

    How many formations use more than 4 WR's? If you do why not a good RB instead of a WR?

    Why pay the cost of an NFL salary for a player who will not be active for the game? If an injury occurs he will not be activated until the next week. That can be done with one of the practice squad players.

    Gardner or another "then cutable" veteran can be added after week one.

    No worries.
     
  16. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    So why won't TT bring in a decent veteran O-lineman?
     
  17. TomAllen

    TomAllen Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    365
    Ratings:
    +0
    As usual, you talk in circles, and your post makes NO sense, whatsoever..
    But thats why I find them so comical, so keep 'em coming.

    Almost any veteran lineman (unless he is physically on his last legs) who has started in the NFL that is available would be an upgrade on the GB Packer offensive line to the ROOKIES that TT has provided MM!

    That's what you are failing to understand. And if you can't get that then I can't help you. Rookies have to develop. Vets have experience. Do you understand? Because it makes a big difference in the NFL.

    I don't know how to make it any clearer. Maybe I can type slower for you.
     
  18. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    ah, the NFL scout. How ya doin.

    You know, our coaches really like the young guards, right? But im sure you know more.

    but yeah, any jobber we bring in off the streets is better than they are. I now see what ur getting at. well...i disagree. So does TT\MM and people who get PAID to make those decision. lol. wow. :thumbsup:
     
  19. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    You are right but what happens when 1 or even 2 WR's go down during the game? How do you run a 4 WR set with 2 guys?
     
  20. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Yep Just a Jobber. There is noone out there that isn't just a "jobber". If there is they "don't fit the scheme" or are "slow" or yada, yada, yada

    When TT brings in that "JOBBER" WR let's watch your tune change.
     
  21. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0


    And by the way, please stop with the "people in charge" stuff. The guys in Cleveland get paid, the guys in Arizona get paid, on and on.


    It doesn't make you effective, sorry. For the last time we as fans have the right to qiuestion anything, that is what this forum is for. Everyone should just stop posting and let GB do whatever they want because they are absolutely, 100%, hands down RIGHT and FLAWLESS because they are getting paid to do so.


    Worst excuse ever!
     
  22. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    you're not getting it...still.

    you guys want TT to bring in a vet...to START (at least tommy does). Thats not happening.

    we all want TT to bring in a #6 (not #1,2,3) WR.

    do you see the difference?

    I dont think you do.

    right now, players available are ROLE players, and players who provide DEPTH. NOT starters, ESPECIALLY starting guards(a hot commodity). WTF is wrong with you?

    holy ****, man. getting drunk early? Wait till Sunday.
     
  23. NDPackerFan

    NDPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 20, 2005
    Messages:
    2,253
    Ratings:
    +4
    Is it almost September 10th yet? You would think we were all cheering for different teams for cripes sake....GO PACK GO!
     
  24. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    No I want TT to bring in a Vet for depth. I already gave up on TT doing it for a starter. He SHOULD have done it, but now its to late.

    Who exactly is our #5 reciever?
     
  25. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Umm. I still go for the female team. I haven't changed that nor will I. Thank you!




    We should have a 4 page limit on threads. Hit fourth page LOCK! :)
     

Share This Page