Craig Nall cut, should we get him?

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
I just saw where the Bills cut him. I always liked the guy.
Do you think we should try to sign him?
(I didn't see this anywhere on here, so if someone posted already I'm sorry!)
 

millertime

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Messages
841
Reaction score
0
Nope but some interesting high draft picks got cut this weekend. Quniton Moses could help out at LBer. Antonio Pittman might be an upgrade over Wynn. TE Garrett Mills
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
He's a decent QB. They didn't really even give him a chance at Buffalo. He got about 0 playing time.


He signed a big contract ( or at least for him it was big_ to come and take over the starting spot, and he never could
 
OP
OP
C

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
He's a decent QB. They didn't really even give him a chance at Buffalo. He got about 0 playing time.
Thats the way i saw it. And his time here, he was MUCH better then that guy Thompson that they just cut.
 

Danreb

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 11, 2006
Messages
574
Reaction score
0
Location
San Jose, CA
You guys know WHY he got 0 playtime in Buffalo right?

I don't get your guys' stupid astonishment with this guy and Ingle Martin. They're both garbage.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
You guys know WHY he got 0 playtime in Buffalo right?

I don't get your guys' stupid astonishment with this guy and Ingle Martin. They're both garbage.

Nall did have some good moments for the Packers, but was inconsistent. I don't think Martin even had any good moments. Maybe a lot of fans wanted Rodgers to fail, so they tried to believe these unheralded QB's were better than him. I never bought it, either.
 

PWT36

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
895
Reaction score
0
Location
De pere, Wi.
At best Craig Nall is a backup, I saw him many times in last training camp he participated here in Green Bay Believe me there were reasons why the Packers let him go to Buffalo . And why he is not the starting QB for the Bills. Packer GM Ted Thompson (no GM is perfect) has make some mistakes in 2005. 2006 thus far in 2007., not stopping Craig Nall from going to Buffalo was not one of them. Ingal Martin is just starting his second year in NFL and Craig Nall has been around a lot longer. . A comparison to both of their careers at this point would be unfair to Martin

I've seen a lot of NFL Qbs in the many years, I have been watching Green Bay Packer & NFL football (over 60 years) I would never say never .but I would say chances are slim for either of them to make it as a starter in the NFL. Age is quickly becoming a issue for Craig Nall
 

PackFanInSC

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
563
Reaction score
0
I would say there is absolutely no chance due to the fact that Nall was here under Sherman. He has no connection to MM.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
If we can get ingle or paul on the practice squad, i think we avoid getting a 3rd string qb all together.

Done. Thompson is on PS and we have only 2 QBs, which methinks is a GOOD thing. With the Iron Man as our starting QB, we only need 2 QBs. Keep the spot open for something else, I say.

Besides, Holiday can be our emergency 3rd QB.
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
If the packers are down to their 3rd Quarterback, they're probably already out of the game anyways so I really have no problem with 2 QB's on the roster.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
I don't see why everyone's down on Craig Nall. He was a decent backup in '04. He hasn't played in regular season besides with the Packers.

Fyi, here's his career stats:
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Passing | Rushing |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| 2004 gnb | 6 | 23 33 69.7 314 9.5 4 0 | 3 7 0 |
| 2005 gnb | 1 | 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 |
| 2006 buf | 2 | 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+
| TOTAL | 9 | 23 33 69.7 314 9.5 4 0 | 3 7 0 |
+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

I still prefer to have 2 QBs, to free up space elsewhere. And Porky is right, if we're down to our 3rd QB, we already lost the game anyways. But we have a QB with a history of playing through anything, and a 2nd string QB with a chip on his shoulder (which is a GOOD thing) and something to prove.

I'm just saying I liked Nall when I saw him in '04.
 

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top