Bishop signs with the Vikings

VolvoD

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
1,101
Reaction score
303
Location
York, PA
Trash? Longwell. Yup he sucked after the Vikings picked him up. How many kickers did the Packers go through because they didn't want to pay him? What I find funny is that Packer fans think that certain other teams should not look at and sign players the Packers no longer want. Just about every Packer player the Vikings have signed has done well for the Vikings. Sharper, yup he was trash as well. And Bryce Paup, well he went to the Bills first. Oh, wait, Packers didn't want to pay him. Defensive player of the year in his first year with the Bills. Bucky Scribner. Packers didn't want to pay him either. Gilbert Brown. Oh wait, that one went the other way.

It's a business. Plain and simple. You try to get the best players for your team. And if one suits your needs you sign him. It matters not what team they came from. Except the Packers. After all, every player on the Packers was drafted by them, right?

So the Vikings Business plan is to win no superbowls. ....business is good.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Someone on the radio this morning said they should have waited to see him in TC, but they would have risked him getting injured and they would have had to do an injury settlement to waive him. In hindsight I think it's clear this decision was made at the Jones signing. They weren't going to pay three players to start at ILB and Bishop was the odd man out. The money they save can be used to help extend a player whose contract is up after this season or rolled into next season to sign Raji, Shields, Finley, or EDS. There's a little irony because they're emphasizing causing fumbles and a healthy Bishop would no doubt lead ILBs in that department - but just a little irony because of his injury.


I wish the Packers had better starting ILBs, but it's not like the cupboard is bare regarding backups. Francois played ILB in 2011 and over three games (I think) had 3 passes defended and two INTs. Obviously the staff wasn't that excited about those stats or it would have been him and not Jones signing that extension. But he knows the D and at least did OK IMO. Lattimore also knows the D. Manning is talented and this will be his first "real" TC. I think the odds are good one of those three would be able to step up and be a decent backup. Sam Barrington will be thrown into the mix and so may Jarvis Reed. Obviously we can't count on rookies but some have surprised over the years.
 

13 Times Champs

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
3,924
Reaction score
424
Location
Virginia
...? What have Jenkins and Barnett done since they left?

Barnett with Buffalo: Has played in ALL 32 games since leaving GB. In 2011 he recorded 130 tackles and three sacks. In 2012 he recorded 112 tackles and 2 sacks. I'd say those are pretty good numbers.


In 2011 Jenkins recorded 5.5 sacks, 24 hurries and seven tackles for loss. In 2012 he recorded 30 QB pressures, 4 sacks and 1 forced fumble. Jenkins at 32 is now wearing down but it is telling that the Packers have been looking for a replacement for him since he left.
 

APGu28

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
51
Reaction score
3
Awesome 16th post there chief.

Sorry I'm not an expert like you. Can't provide the great insight that you are, which appears to be an image of poop and the most redundant phrase that Packers fans utter.
 

APGu28

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
51
Reaction score
3
obviously wont be cheap, he got cut because he didnt restructure.


Yes, but that doesn't mean he will get a big contract. Winfield and Woodson both got cut because they wouldn't restructure. They didn't get big deals. It depends what the market is.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,111
Reaction score
1,590
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Bishop will likely get an incentive-laden contract that protects his new team should his hamstring uncoil again. TT did something similar when he got Cedric Benson, which really protected the team financially when Benson got injured. The Vikings or anyone else could do the same when structuring Bishop's contract
 

lambeaulambo

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
2,550
Reaction score
700
Location
Rest Home
Yes, but that doesn't mean he will get a big contract. Winfield and Woodson both got cut because they wouldn't restructure. They didn't get big deals. It depends what the market is.
21 is washed up, and look everybody - another Viking Troll!!
 

Bagadeez04

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
452
Reaction score
52
Location
Rochester, NY
Trash? Longwell. Yup he sucked after the Vikings picked him up. How many kickers did the Packers go through because they didn't want to pay him? What I find funny is that Packer fans think that certain other teams should not look at and sign players the Packers no longer want. Just about every Packer player the Vikings have signed has done well for the Vikings. Sharper, yup he was trash as well. And Bryce Paup, well he went to the Bills first. Oh, wait, Packers didn't want to pay him. Defensive player of the year in his first year with the Bills. Bucky Scribner. Packers didn't want to pay him either. Gilbert Brown. Oh wait, that one went the other way.

It's a business. Plain and simple. You try to get the best players for your team. And if one suits your needs you sign him. It matters not what team they came from. Except the Packers. After all, every player on the Packers was drafted by them, right?


I said plain and simple...I don't blame the Vikings for trying to improve their roster. However, it's pathetic that they have to keep gobbling up the Packers sloppy seconds year after year after year in order to get better. It simply is a reflection of the dominance the Packers have generally enjoyed over the Vikings, and the NFC North for that matter, over the years.

I'm not saying they are doing anything wrong. But if the Queens so badly want to emulate the Packers success, perhaps it would be more efficient stealing a front office guy and making him GM, instead of picking through these left-overs year after year.
 

PFanCan

That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
2,067
Reaction score
491
Location
Houston, TX
Bishop may be washed up because of injuries.

So discussing Vikings - Packers in a formal manner is considered trolling? Really?

When you have so few posts (as you have), any sarcastic or aggressive remark- however slight, is trolling for a response. For an example, see your post #119. That, is trolling.

Suggestion-- Establish yourself clearly as NOT a troll. Then, after a period of building a reasonable reputation, you can engage in more lively debates. There are several Viking fans here that have done just this.

Or, not. I don't really care. Trolls are fun.
 

Raptorman

Vikings fan since 1966.
Joined
Sep 1, 2006
Messages
3,168
Reaction score
438
Location
Vero Beach, FL
I said plain and simple...I don't blame the Vikings for trying to improve their roster. However, it's pathetic that they have to keep gobbling up the Packers sloppy seconds year after year after year in order to get better. It simply is a reflection of the dominance the Packers have generally enjoyed over the Vikings, and the NFC North for that matter, over the years.

I'm not saying they are doing anything wrong. But if the Queens so badly want to emulate the Packers success, perhaps it would be more efficient stealing a front office guy and making him GM, instead of picking through these left-overs year after year.

Dominance? Really? The last 50 games. Packer win 27, Vikings win 23. Man that's dominating. Since 1961, Packers 54 wins, Vikings 48 wins, 1 tie. More dominance. Since the Vikings joined the league in 1961. Division titles. Bucs, 3. Lions 3. Bears 11. Packers 15. Vikings 18. More dominance by the Pack. Everything in football goes in cycles(except for the Lions). Granted Green Bay has had a good run the last few years but to say they have dominance over the Vikings and the division is delusional. Packers had the 60's, Vikes had the 70's, Bears the 80's, 90's were split, and so far the Packers have done better the last 10 years. Cycles.

We shall see if he signs with the Vikes or someone else. So players released by the Packers are sloppy seconds. Tell me, the Free Agents the Packers sign from other teams. Are they sloppy seconds? Or are they just good players?
 

SpartaChris

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
3,024
Reaction score
671
This article may provide more insight into the decision to release Bishop:

http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/desmond-bishops-succesful-return-far-from-a-medical-certainty

Money quotes:


While nine of the 10 players in the study returned to play the next season, only five of the 10 played more than one game following the injury.

In addition, two of the 10 players returned and had major injuries occur to the same leg. One suffered a torn Achilles tendon and another re-ruptured the same hamstring (the player was a linebacker). On this note, it is worth noting that Bishop has already been dealing with a strain in the same hamstring he injured in August.

In its conclusion, the study found hamstring ruptures to be more rare and severe than typical hamstring injuries, such as a strain of the muscle fibers. It also concluded that the low long-term success percentage was indicative of the injury being a “marker for elite-level physical deterioration.”
 

Bagadeez04

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
452
Reaction score
52
Location
Rochester, NY
Dominance? Really? The last 50 games. Packer win 27, Vikings win 23. Man that's dominating. Since 1961, Packers 54 wins, Vikings 48 wins, 1 tie. More dominance. Since the Vikings joined the league in 1961. Division titles. Bucs, 3. Lions 3. Bears 11. Packers 15. Vikings 18. More dominance by the Pack. Everything in football goes in cycles(except for the Lions). Granted Green Bay has had a good run the last few years but to say they have dominance over the Vikings and the division is delusional. Packers had the 60's, Vikes had the 70's, Bears the 80's, 90's were split, and so far the Packers have done better the last 10 years. Cycles.

We shall see if he signs with the Vikes or someone else. So players released by the Packers are sloppy seconds. Tell me, the Free Agents the Packers sign from other teams. Are they sloppy seconds? Or are they just good players?

The stats over the last decade-ish (say since the inception of the NFC North) are pretty conclusive. Packers have won the North 6 times to the Queens 2, have gone to the playoffs 8 times to the Queens 5, have won 1 Super Bowl to the Queens 0. While the Vikings have been aided substantially by Packers cast-offs over this same time frame (some who were still good players), they continue to be inferior. I know you can't admit that, but what do you think of my suggestion?

Wouldn't it make more sense for the Vikings to hire a GM from within the Packers organization to improve their roster from within, to change the culture in Minnesota? To build an identity of their own? Rather than having to go back to the Packers garbage bin year after year to collect the scraps? It just seems kind of degrading to me that your team has to keep doing the same thing year after year to stay competitive with the very team they are trying to beat.
 

fanindaup

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
188
Reaction score
17
Location
Calumet, Michigan
Generally Bagadeez is correct in talking about Packer dominance in the division. From my perspective, since the beginning of the Favre era, the Packers have been the team to chase. Maybe it just seems like it, but the Packers have been in the playoffs on a regular basis. I'm also pretty sure they have the most Lombardi trophies over the past 20 years. You'll have to forgive us Packer fans for thinking the Vikings like to pick over our overpriced vets. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but it would seem that the Vikings sign an inordinate number of ex-Packers. The Packers generally don't sign a lot of free agents since they are a draft and develop team. Of course, there have been some notable exceptions, such as CW. One could argue that he was an example of a player who only lived up to his potential once he came to Green Bay. Others, such as Cedric Benson, are examples of sloppy seconds and why TT isn't generally very active in free agency. I think the point is still valid. The Vikings wish they could reproduce the success the Packers have had over the past two decades, and that's why they sign ex-Packers. That's the way we see it.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top