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

Packers cut Chatman

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Chamuko, Mar 3, 2006.

  1. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Fergy can go, Chatman can go too. If they need someone to fair catch, I'm willing to work Sundays. One thing Chatman did have going for him was his lack of fumbles and he was an 'ok' 3rd or 4th WR. They must have someone in mind, well crap I hope they have someone in mind who can be as sure handed and more talented at KR/PR and WR than Chatman was.

    I like the move.
     
  2. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    It should be clear that by cutting Chatman the receiving corps is under serious change. Apparently and most assuredly the Packers will pick up a decent return man and at least a #4 standin on the depth chart. As far as chatman's ability as a return man, he's a good guy to catch the ball but not much after that. And he should have been cut two years ago, but Sherman kept him in the ridiculous role as return man and didn't even bother to replace him in a period of three years (Chatman was allowed to stay in that role way too long.). This is Sherman's baggage and his failure to deal with the problem with special teams, and the return man is just another nail in his coffin. So, as a result, when an objective move is made by TT, some get upset, not realizing it was Sherman's poor subjectivity and anemic role as a head coach, and his failure to take action, the same action that is now being taken, and, should have been taken two years earlier.
     
  3. Buckeyepackfan

    Buckeyepackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    804
    Ratings:
    +0
    Did it ever occur to anyone, that to return a football you need blocking?

    We had so many injuries last year that there were new players on the return team every week.

    Bottom line. I'll say it again, in three years Chatman had 1 muff and 0 fumbles while returning punts.

    We only have so much money to spend in free agency, and as of right now 5 draft picks, if the players that do have experience keep getting let go, this teams roster is going to be filled with rookies and guys with 1 or 2 years experience.

    With or without Brett Favre that is not a winning combination.
     
  4. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    I can appreciate what you are saying. However, Chatman had his chance and his day too, thanks to Sherman, probably more so than anyone punt returner ever in the league.

    What's crazy is doing the same thing over and over and over again with ridiculous results, like Sherman did with Chatman. Keeping Chatman on has not created a winning combination and there is no evidence to believe otherwise. Actually, it's too early in the rebuilding process to even think about success at this stage of the game. Don't plan on this team being big winners until a new team is intact, and many of the holes plugged. Sherman's throwing away draft picks over the years has created some of this problem, and it will take time to turn it around. Probably the best thing to hope for at this time is exercising patience, and a "Let's wait and see attitude."
     
  5. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't like Chatman being let go, but that is because he grew on me so much as a player. He was the underdog, the one who had no chance, was written off, yet he came and played. He played in a world where his limitations did not exist to him, and we all saw he produced results, as the numbers he got for being a 4th WR are AMAZING, regardless of him being promoted due to injury. He had heart and will, something that can never be taught in football.

    But taking a more objective view, the fact is he could do only so much. Lets face it, his football ability and talent wasn't too good. He was short, and at times did have match up problems and struggled to stop the run against bigger players. The fact is we must allow MM and TT to bring in another WR before really any of us can truthfully say if this was a mistake or not. But TT and MM must have a plan or set their sights on someone, and I would be interested to know who....
     
  6. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    I just don't see who they are bringing in to replace him if they, as they said, are looking for bigger guys..!
     
  7. JbShell

    JbShell Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    796
    Ratings:
    +0
    Here Trom here is the quoate from TT were I get the Dense (sorry not dunce TYPO there) how can you not look at a return specialist games and only see him on Offense. Just make we worried that a shucks I didnt bother to look at the kids full body of work.

    I've always been a fan of big, physical people at that position," McCarthy said. "The bigger the target, the better your accuracy. We've got a lot of depth at that position.

    "A lot of these decisions were pretty much based off last year. We had a chance to talk about all these guys and our coaches had a chance to look at them. I did not see him on special teams. I only saw him on offense."
     
  8. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    k.

    i like the approach, i must say.

    KR\PR will work itself out, lets just have an offense thats not near last in the league again
     
  9. Buckeyepackfan

    Buckeyepackfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    804
    Ratings:
    +0
    Chatman had his chance and his day too, thanks to Sherman, probably more so than anyone punt returner ever in the league.

    Chatman was signed to be a return man, (remember we had Driver Fergusen and Walker)he did that job very well for two years, he was then told that he would not make the team unless he proved he could be a reliable 4th receiver, everybody wrote him off then but he proved everyone wrong by not only becoming a solid #4, when all the injuries started popping up he proved he could be a legitimate option for Brett.

    Chatman took every challenge given to him, and proved himself over and over again, I didn't see him quit(like Fergusen).

    A successfull football TEAM does not have to be loaded with superstars, in fact most are not, but most successful teams have guys like Chatman who overacheive, guys who go out and fight for their jobs everyday, making themselves the best football player they can be.

    I am just wondering what Brett is thinking?
    Walker is a big question mark, will he return to his old form?

    Fergesun proved he was all talk, he couldn't step up last year when his chance came.

    Murphey looks like he is done.

    Rod Gardner is a big question mark, he has never played up to his potential anywhere and is pretty much a head case.

    That leaves us with Donald Driver.(give Brett 4 of him and we would be play-off bound every year)

    Now Chatman is gone, how do these moves help make Brett decide to come back?

    Chatman's contract could not have been that much, and after all we are one of the few teams with cap money, it just seems to me you don't let a guy go that has proved he can do the job when there are so many question marks right now at the receiver position.
     
  10. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree, our 4th receiver doesn't need to be a superstar, he needs to be a reliable grinder like Chatman, who gives 100% and plays with heart.

    I don't see why we should part ways with him, really.
     
  11. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't understand it either, but then again, I'm not TT or MM and don't have special insight into what their plans are and intentions for the rebuilding structure of this team. Obviously GM's and HC's know their agenda much better than we do. I'll trust in their decisions until evidence argues otherwise.
     
  12. 4packgirl

    4packgirl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2005
    Messages:
    2,415
    Ratings:
    +0
    agreed, BP - like your approach!! :)
     
  13. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well, I like what TT and MM have been doing so far, but there will always be moves I disagree with, and this is one of those.
     
  14. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Ranking near dead last in the NFL for years is not doing your job well. Chatman was NOT only supposed to be sure handed he was also to give the Packers better field position then the 20 yrd line. He was great for fair catchs!

    Chatman = Very well .. <-- no... Desmond Howard did VERY well, Allen Rossum did VERY well, not chatman.
     
  15. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    If this just your opinion, that's fine, otherwise, if you disagree with the "new boys in town," state your reasons for feeling that way. In other words, if you feel they should have kept Chatman, then present a reasonable argument as to why they should have kept him, including any cap justifications, along with his weaknesses as a built-in "Sherman return man."

    With all due respect, I really get tired of some Packer fans blasting every move management makes and then "run off into the sunset" and never explain why they feel that way, other than, "I just feel it was wrong!" That's just a hellava dumb way to present an argument. And remember, I said with all due respect!
     
  16. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    Zero, you took the words right off of my tongue. I have always refered to Chatman as, "go nowhere, 20 feet right or left, maybe 15 feet back--- falldown--fair--catch, Chatman." And Sherman kept him in that position scene after scene, for three years. Anybody wonder why Sherman is in Houston?
     
  17. gopackgo4

    gopackgo4 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,080
    Ratings:
    +0
    I will say this though he was a tough son of a gun
     
  18. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    yep, he had heart. Gotta give him that. He'll land on his feet. IF sherman can get work some other place, then chatman will get a good job somewhere.
     
  19. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    Isn't Sherman working for Houston as OC. He may recommend Chatman for a spot as a receiver, but will not win an argument as a punt or kick returner.
     
  20. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Chatman is a luxury that you can keep if you have GREAT receivers already...Kind of a "spot player"...but you can't depend on him when you need to WIN a game....

    ...just not good enough...
     
  21. BACKIN-PACKIN

    BACKIN-PACKIN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2006
    Messages:
    182
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree!
     
  22. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    He gave his all......if he had some size to go with his heart, he COULD have been one of the best. He had a great attitude too. But other then the ONE TD run, his returns were pretty much average at best.
     
  23. GakkofNorway

    GakkofNorway Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,249
    Ratings:
    +0
    I don't see how other great receivers would affect his position as a 4th receiver? A 4th receiver is a 4th receiver even under mediocre receivers, it doesn't matter. We have never ever depended on Chatman to win a game, why do you even bring this up?

    Last season we depended on Donald Driver to carry the load, not Chatman, he was never asked to carry the load, but most of the passes he was thrown, he caught, even under pressure. I would say he's a pretty damn reliable 4th receiver.
     
  24. PackFanatic

    PackFanatic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    183
    Ratings:
    +13
    The Pack has done this before. released a player then brought them back in. If not I agree fergie should be gone as well. In time the draft will show us what is the philosophy of TT and the 3rd Mikey. And as for brett, I wish he would come clean on his intentions and not hold the process up too much so they can work the numbers in case we need to revamp the position.
     
  25. P@ck66

    P@ck66 Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,207
    Ratings:
    +0
    Gakk..

    Because you saw what happened last year when there were injuries now..didn't you? Or were you sleeping off too much Glogg from the night before?

    You need a 4th receiver who can at least step up in those situations, and Chatman really didn't. The Packers have had #4 receivers who have stepped up in the past and have become starters as #2 and #3 receivers (even #1 receivers) in GB or on other teams...
     

Share This Page