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!

Woodson looked bad and Manuel...

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Bruce, Aug 29, 2006.

?

Who looked worse Woodson or Manuel?

  1. Charles (I did not want to get my uniform dirty or sweaty) Woodson OR

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Marquand (If they would stop running around and stand still I would hit them) Manuel?

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Bruce

    Bruce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Ratings:
    +0
    Below I reprinted a couple of posts warning you what we were getting in Manuel -- I would like to believe that tonight was just the rust of not playing in awhile, but sadly he played about where he has throughout his career = which goes a long way to explaining why he was a career backup

    Bruce


    Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 2:43 pm Post subject: Re: Packers get their Safety in Manuel?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I am neither a Ted Thompson lover, nor a Ted Thompson hater -- false dichotomous thinking like that gets us NO where. Very well said DePack.

    I hope that the rumors were false.

    Remember Mark Roman not only beat him out in Cincinnati – it resulted in Manuel being cut.

    Here is what a former scout had to say about the possibility of the Packers acquiring him:

    Marquand Manuel is way slower than Mark Roman
    Marquand Manuel cannot be trusted in deep zone coverage or in man to man
    Marquand has no quickness
    Marquand has virtually no change of direction ability
    Marquand is efficient only if the play is in front of him
    Marquand has not produced turnovers in 4 seasons and averaged a little over 1 pass defended per year he has absolutely no ball skills

    Here is what Marquand Manuel is:
    A solid hitter – but an average tackler, I am not sure he is better than Mark Roman. He is strong
    He is a a undersized LB and a too slow safety,


    Hell, Todd Franz has more coverage skills than Manuel.


    Then in early May I posted:

    FWI:

    Over the course of his career playing in 59 regular season games Marquand Manuel had:
    0 sacks, 0 interceptions and 5 passes defended...
    [​IMG]

    last season alone Mark Roman had 2 interceptions and 8 passes defended. (He also has had 6 sacks over the course of his career)
    [​IMG]

    I'm not a huge fan of his, but to hope to cut him before being sure we have an adequate replacement and adequate depth is ignorant.

    Don't forget this is simply a rumor (though I speculated it would happen quite some time ago). He has been in camp and at the workouts since first popping off, and MM subsequently has said all was forgiven (for what it is worth).
     
  2. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Bruce, would you care to clarify what the rumour is? :)

    BTW - KEEP THE THREAD CLEAN OF PERSONAL ATTACKS.
     
  3. Bruce

    Bruce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Ratings:
    +0
    I attacked no one, so I am not sure what you mean.

    The post was from March 8th when rumors were swirling that M Manuel was the free agent at the top of Ted Thompson's Free Agency list. At the time some folks were salivating at the prospect of bringing in Manuel without knowing much about him. So I shared what a scout had to say about him coming to the Packers.

    The second post was one from May, when some posters were saying that they hoped the rumors of Roman being cut would come true. I knew and wrote about the deep bad blood between DB Coach Shitenhiemer (he would not have a job in the NFL if not for his brother) and Mark Roman.

    I hope that clarifies your question
     
  4. Popcynical

    Popcynical Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    519
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think he said that for future reference...
     
  5. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Ah, the personal attacks comment wasn't directed at you Bruce. :) Just a caution since emotions are a little high.

    Thanks for the clear up. I thought the rumour may have been a new pickup in the following days....
     
  6. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
  7. Bruce

    Bruce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Ratings:
    +0
    We can only hope! Do you think it will help if we start some? :wink:

    Who looked worst :Charles "I didn't want to get my uniform dirty or sweaty" Woodson or Marquand "If they would stop running around and stand still I would hit them" Manuel?

    Marquand made TT's FA pickups of Freeman and Little last season look brilliant in comparison. (sorry but the performance deserved the shot)
     
  8. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hm.... Bruce I heard Jim Bates was on a plan which was heading straight for GB, care to confirm? :wink:
     
  9. Bruce

    Bruce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Ratings:
    +0
    Hm.... Bruce I heard Jim Bates was on a plan which was heading straight for GB, care to confirm? :wink:[/quote:2cxy5nzj]

    I heard a similar rumor, but the way I heard it was that Jim Bates was taking a plane as far away from GB as possible? I will take yours over mine though if given the choice.

    I added the following question above, so I will re-ask it here:

    Who looked worst:

    Charles "I didn't want to get my uniform dirty or sweaty" Woodson
    ----or----
    Marquand "If they would stop running around and stand still I would hit them" Manuel?

    Marquand made TT's FA pickups of Freeman and Little last season look brilliant in comparison. (sorry but the performance deserved the shot)
     
  10. jhensiak

    jhensiak Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2005
    Messages:
    112
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson sucked ***- plain and simple, he needs to be approached!!!!
     
  11. TOPackerFan

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson was God-awful. He gets the nod in my books because of his huge contract. TT please call Al Harris' agent right away because we can't afford to have him get disgruntled.
     
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Ratings:
    +0
    What did Charles ($39 million dollar contract) Woodson, who clearly wasn't thinking team when skipped mini-camps and OTA's, have to say about the abysmal performance in which he gave up at least two touchdowns and at least a handful of catches for approx. 100 yards???

    "It was all us," Woodson said "It's not good. It's pre-season and I'm glad it was. Now we can just keep working toward the regular season."

    [​IMG]

    Meanwhile, Marquand (I got my payday too) Manuel wanted to blame what seemed like to the rest of us his clear lack of speed and athletic ability on the team's communication.

    "It was just communication" Manuel said.

    Veteran CB Al Harris countered that he didn't think communication was a problem.

    "I don't know of any communication errors," Harris said.

    An interesting contrast in Veteran leadership standing up and taking responsibility, don't you think?

    Yes, this was just a preseason game. But it was the third preseason game with the starters playing almost 3 quarters in front of a National audience. Frankly, I hoped for more pride and leadership from the Packers' Big Money Free Agents! :angry:
     
  13. Schmitty

    Schmitty Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2005
    Messages:
    356
    Ratings:
    +0
    Seeing as Woodson is getting paid a boat load of money, he defenatly gets my vote. He better step it up come the regular season.
     
  14. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson flat-out gave up on several plays, which left Manuel alone to show his stuff. The result was Manuel abilities were completely exposed, which wasn't good for him or us.

    I was arguing awhile back that we needed to keep Roman on the roster and give him a fair chance to earn the starting spot. Worst case, Roman gets beat out and becomes a solid backup. The emergence of Underwood may have been why Roman was cut, and his injury was unfortunate, but it was still very short-sighted of TT to cut Roman just before TC.

    In the end, I hope that both Woodson and Manuel take a long look at last night's tapes and work hard to never let it happen again.

    GO PACK GO!!!
     
  15. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    I remember saying that Manuel was a waste. I was hoping I was wrong and I am still hoping. The thing that scares me about him is that we know woodson can play, he's done it before. We have no proof that Manuel can be a starting safety in this league.

    I mentioned last week that Tyrone Culver will be starting by week 6. We may want to move it up.
     
  16. thetombradyhater

    thetombradyhater Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 5, 2006
    Messages:
    990
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson played like crap yesterday, I know Manuel was by no means even solid but he definatly outperformed Woodson IMO
     
  17. PackerLegend

    PackerLegend Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,947
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson Missed Lots ofs tackles as did most players on our team it seems like every year there are times when no one on our team understands how to tackle.

    Woodson looked like he flat out gave up on most plays
     
  18. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    And that is the most worrying part... :(
     
  19. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    I'm not ready to give up on him yet, but if last night is all that Woodson has left in the tank, this free agency signing will hurt us for a few years ala Joe Johnson.
     
  20. Raider Pride

    Raider Pride Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,868
    Ratings:
    +2
    Bruce,

    I think Woody has made the team.

    Remember, this was a pre season game. He will open it up in week one against the Bears.

    Based on his injury history I do not want to see a pro bowl vet who has been biten by the injury bug, going crazy and knocking the snot out of people in the third pre season game.

    Trust me... He is like a great deal of NFL Vets... He has two gears... Regular season and Pre season.

    He will be fine, if he can stay healthy and I think he will this year. He will be invited to Honolulu!

    RP
     
  21. agopackgo4

    agopackgo4 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,365
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think that Woodson looked worse. Not only did he give up a couple of TD's on blown passes, but he had pleanty of miss tackles in the game too. I am more dissapointed in Woodson because I was expecing SOME things from him, but im not so dissapointed in Manual because to be honest i didnt see him being a big play guy for us anyway.
     
  22. DePack

    DePack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    3,904
    Ratings:
    +1
    He's being paid like a big play guy.
     
  23. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson is getting the votes because of the money he's making.

    I re watched the game last night. Woodson played awful, Manuel was horrible.
     
  24. TOPackerFan

    TOPackerFan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2004
    Messages:
    2,084
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good Lord, why would you do that?
     
  25. Bruce

    Bruce Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Ratings:
    +0
    Woodson played pathetic. RP when he was a young athlete perhaps he could have turned it off and on like that, but after spending the last several years collecting his check on injured reserve -- he does not have the speed or talent to wait to start practicing and playing.

    This isn't about "knocking the snot out of people" - he didn't play hard enough to knock the snot out of himself. And it wasn't just the poor tackling, he was consistently beaten (badly) by their 2nd receiver and worse.

    As for Manuel, he did not look like a guy worth of a roster spot, let alone starting. Hell, I am serious when I say his coverage skills make the Little and Freeman FA signings look great in comparison.

    I kept writing that he was too slow and lacked the coverage skills, but most did not want to listen. I am sorry, but I don't see upside either when the guy cannot cover and he can only tackle if the play is right in front of him, and even then only if the guy does not have time to do a juke or fake -- where do you hang your hat on upside potential?

    The idea of Woodson moving to safety is looking more and more like a real possibility.
     

Share This Page