Woodson should not..

Fuzznuts

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
561
Reaction score
1
be returning punts, EVER!

That's how he got hurt. He is too valuable to the defense to be returning punts.

WTF?

McCarthy should know this.

I think they gave in to Woodson lobbying for it!

Put Tramon back there..or someone else, not Woody!
 

bozz_2006

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,576
Reaction score
283
Location
Grand Forks, ND
Agreed. 100%. i've been saying it since we signed him. i think anyone who disagrees has to have their head examined. Is he a weapon returning punts? sure. but not worth the risk. not even close.
 

Packnic

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
Reaction score
6
Location
Salisbury, NC
you cant play scared football. thats not how you win. Charles could cut his hand off at home carving the turkey... does that mean he shouldnt be able to go home?

If Chuckwood is the best option to return punts... thats the mother ****** i want back there. you cant win football games being scared of injuries. you gotta go out there, and be the hitter.... not worry about breaking your ankle.
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
you cant play scared football. thats not how you win. Charles could cut his hand off at home carving the turkey... does that mean he shouldnt be able to go home?

If Chuckwood is the best option to return punts... thats the mother ****** i want back there. you cant win football games being scared of injuries. you gotta go out there, and be the hitter.... not worry about breaking your ankle.

Thank you for saving me the energy of typing those EXACT words.
 
OP
OP
F

Fuzznuts

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2007
Messages
561
Reaction score
1
He's not the best option.

He's old and injury prone.

Leave him at the position he's good at.
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
He's not the best option.

He's old and injury prone.

Leave him at the position he's good at.

Yes, exactly. I think he is good at returning punts for us but i think the risk far outweighs the reward. The extra couple of yards he might get us on punt returns means nothing if it completely throws our defense off and lets the Cowboys run up and down our defense like it was the Lions Defense.

We need Woodson covering receivers, not dodging undrafted free agents trying to knock him out on punts.
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
He's not the best option.

He's old and injury prone.

Leave him at the position he's good at.

you cant play scared football. thats not how you win. Charles could cut his hand off at home carving the turkey... does that mean he shouldnt be able to go home?

If Chuckwood is the best option to return punts... thats the mother ****** i want back there. you cant win football games being scared of injuries. you gotta go out there, and be the hitter.... not worry about breaking your ankle.

An eight-time pro bowler who can return punts IS the best option.
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
pack_in_black said:
He's not the best option.

He's old and injury prone.

Leave him at the position he's good at.

you cant play scared football. thats not how you win. Charles could cut his hand off at home carving the turkey... does that mean he shouldnt be able to go home?

If Chuckwood is the best option to return punts... thats the mother ****** i want back there. you cant win football games being scared of injuries. you gotta go out there, and be the hitter.... not worry about breaking your ankle.

An eight-time pro bowler who can return punts IS the best option.

I'll type it again

"Yes, exactly. I think he is good at returning punts for us but i think the risk far outweighs the reward. The extra couple of yards he might get us on punt returns means nothing if it completely throws our defense off and lets the Cowboys run up and down our defense like it was the Lions Defense.

We need Woodson covering receivers, not dodging undrafted free agents trying to knock him out on punts."
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
We apparently completely disagree whether Woodson's a good option. I'll side with MM (who is an NFL HC), and you can side with fuzznuts.

I'll leave it at that.
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
pack_in_black said:
We apparently completely disagree whether Woodson's a good option. I'll side with MM (who is an NFL HC), and you can side with fuzznuts.

I'll leave it at that.

Stop crying like a baby. I AGREE, HE'S OUR BEST PUNT RETURNER.

But its not worth getting him hurt. If he gets hurt, we are done. Our defensive scheme depends on having a healthy Woodson & Harris. Having 2 shutdown corners is the only way we can pull of this defensive scheme with 2 mediocre at best starting safeties.

Seriously, who gives a damn about the 8 yards he gets on punt returns. Its not like he'd Devin Hester or something.
 

Pack93z

You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime
Joined
Aug 2, 2005
Messages
4,855
Reaction score
8
Location
Central Wisconsin
We are forgetting one little detail... when Woodson signed here.. part of the agreement was a concession to let him returrn punts..

Now he may be talked about of that arrangement, but we need to address the returner spot in order to do that.
 

Zombieslayer

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 13, 2006
Messages
4,338
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
de_real_deal said:
I AGREE, HE'S OUR BEST PUNT RETURNER.

But its not worth getting him hurt. If he gets hurt, we are done. Our defensive scheme depends on having a healthy Woodson & Harris. Having 2 shutdown corners is the only way we can pull of this defensive scheme with 2 mediocre at best starting safeties.

Seriously, who gives a damn about the 8 yards he gets on punt returns. Its not like he'd Devin Hester or something.

I agree with De Real here that he is our best punt returner. Woodson's about to break one, and has a few long ones. However, he's too valuable to get hurt. We don't have solid safeties. It's the truth, and I know it hurts, but it's true. Hey, I like Bigby, but let's be realistic. He's a huge upgrade over Manual, but he's no Pro Bowler.

We need 2 shutdown corners more than we need a good punt returner back there.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
In my opinion, your best punt returner should be returning punts, regardless of who it is. For the past couple years, it's been Woodson. And until they get someone better, he should continue to do it. The Packers won some close games this season, and it's possible that having the second-best punt returner in there, instead of the best, may have cost them a game. (Look what happened to the Eagles against us, when they muffed two punts.)

I would love to see Tramon Williams outperform Woodson on punt returns, however, so Woodson could concentrate his efforts on defense.
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
de_real_deal said:
pack_in_black said:
We apparently completely disagree whether Woodson's a good option. I'll side with MM (who is an NFL HC), and you can side with fuzznuts.

I'll leave it at that.

Stop crying like a baby.


Thanks for the bait, ******. Nobody's crying. McCarthy obviously values the extra 8 yards of field position more than you do, and since he's got the best record in his first 28 games that any GB HC has EVER had, I'll trust his judgement.

EDIT: Watch the language please- Popcynical
 

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
I just want Woodson in there PERIOD.

There was a hell of a ripple affect back there last night when he wasn't in there. Even Harris sucked a few times.

You more than likely won't see him returning kicks again until the playoffs. That kind of settles the war between you guys. He will and he won't.

But you can bet your butt the best will be out there come playoff time. About the time we keep him out in a playoff game somebody flubs one back there and we lose the game.

Whose *** would you want to see hung out to dry then?
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
pack_in_black said:
de_real_deal said:
pack_in_black said:
We apparently completely disagree whether Woodson's a good option. I'll side with MM (who is an NFL HC), and you can side with fuzznuts.

I'll leave it at that.

Stop crying like a baby.


Thanks for the bait, ********. Nobody's crying. McCarthy obviously values the extra 8 yards of field position more than you do, and since he's got the best record in his first 28 games that any GB HC has EVER had, I'll trust his judgement.

Do you sit on McCarthys lap? Stop pretending to know what goes on in his head. You are such a cry baby, any time anyone dissagrees with you, you attack. Grow up and stop having temper tandrums whenever someone doesnt think exactly like you do.
 

pack_in_black

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,876
Reaction score
0
Location
Colorado Springs
de_real_deal said:
pack_in_black said:
de_real_deal said:
pack_in_black said:
We apparently completely disagree whether Woodson's a good option. I'll side with MM (who is an NFL HC), and you can side with fuzznuts.

I'll leave it at that.

Stop crying like a baby.


Thanks for the bait, ********. Nobody's crying. McCarthy obviously values the extra 8 yards of field position more than you do, and since he's got the best record in his first 28 games that any GB HC has EVER had, I'll trust his judgement.

Do you sit on McCarthys lap? Stop pretending to know what goes on in his head. You are such a cry baby, any time anyone dissagrees with you, you attack. Grow up and stop having temper tandrums whenever someone doesnt think exactly like you do.


Ok, I missed something, I guess. I never "threw a tantrum" or "cried like a baby". I offered a different opinion. YOU attacked. I'm sorry if you misunderstood my offering opinion, which is what we're here for, as a personal attack, but you hadn't even posted by the time I started my reply.

Yes, I sit on McCarthys lap, because its soft and fluffy, but that has nothing to with him having the best starting record of any GB head coach in the beginning of his tenure.


Woodson's the better option. I prefer him back there to anyone else we currently have.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
We are forgetting one little detail... when Woodson signed here.. part of the agreement was a concession to let him returrn punts..

Now he may be talked about of that arrangement, but we need to address the returner spot in order to do that.

That is not accurate. The rumor was he chose GB because of the chance to play OFFENSE.

In fact, when asked why he chose GB, Woodson stated MONEY.


It had nothing to do being forced to play safety in TB (which he said would do), or returning punts or being on offense. It was money. Period.
 

de_real_deal

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
591
Reaction score
0
pack_in_black said:
de_real_deal said:
pack_in_black said:
de_real_deal said:
pack_in_black said:
We apparently completely disagree whether Woodson's a good option. I'll side with MM (who is an NFL HC), and you can side with fuzznuts.

I'll leave it at that.

Stop crying like a baby.


Thanks for the bait, ********. Nobody's crying. McCarthy obviously values the extra 8 yards of field position more than you do, and since he's got the best record in his first 28 games that any GB HC has EVER had, I'll trust his judgement.

Do you sit on McCarthys lap? Stop pretending to know what goes on in his head. You are such a cry baby, any time anyone dissagrees with you, you attack. Grow up and stop having temper tandrums whenever someone doesnt think exactly like you do.


Ok, I missed something, I guess. I never "threw a tantrum" or "cried like a baby". I offered a different opinion. YOU attacked. I'm sorry if you misunderstood my offering opinion, which is what we're here for, as a personal attack, but you hadn't even posted by the time I started my reply.

Yes, I sit on McCarthys lap, because its soft and fluffy, but that has nothing to with him having the best starting record of any GB head coach in the beginning of his tenure.


Woodson's the better option. I prefer him back there to anyone else we currently have.

Lets hug, i dont want to argue with Packer fans. Thats what Bear fans are for
 

agopackgo4

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
1,365
Reaction score
0
Location
Wausau WI
There is no way in the world of hell that he should be back there. I say it to my dad every week. I dont think it is playing "scared football" or being too "passive" by not putting Woodson back to return kicks. I think it is being smart. Very smart. He doesnt do that great on his returns, and so you factor that in with the fact that he is injury prone. and how valuable he is to our secondary...I think thats pretty simple to see that he should not be back there. Give me one good reason why he should be returning kicks? Besides good hands. because there are other guys on the team with good hands that could return kicks.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
Pack93z said:
We are forgetting one little detail... when Woodson signed here.. part of the agreement was a concession to let him returrn punts..

Now he may be talked about of that arrangement, but we need to address the returner spot in order to do that.

That is not accurate. The rumor was he chose GB because of the chance to play OFFENSE.

In fact, when asked why he chose GB, Woodson stated MONEY.


It had nothing to do being forced to play safety in TB (which he said would do), or returning punts or being on offense. It was money. Period.




http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=418872
Woodson reeled in
Cornerback could see action on offense
By TOM SILVERSTEIN
[email protected]
Posted: April 26, 2006

The Green Bay Packers landed the big fish quarterback Brett Favre has been urging them to sign all off-season.

On Wednesday afternoon, cornerback Charles Woodson agreed to terms on a seven-year, $52 million contract with the Packers, his agent, Carl Poston, told the Journal Sentinel. Woodson, a four-time Pro Bowl player who twice was Oakland's franchise designation, chose the Packers over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

The Packers have Favre to thank in part for Woodson choosing Green Bay.

But it's not the only reason. According to Poston, Woodson picked the Packers because head coach Mike McCarthy agreed to let him play on offense as well as play cornerback.

"I think the fact that Brett committed to another year, that was one thing Charles was interested in," Poston said. "Another point is that they agreed to let Charles play offense as well as defense. That proved to be very beneficial to them. They wouldn't let him do that in Oakland."

Woodson, the 1997 Heisman Trophy winner, played on both sides of the ball at the University of Michigan and saw occasional action on offense during his first few seasons in Oakland after being selected with the No. 4 pick in the draft in 1998. He caught one pass for 19 yards in '99 and one pass for 8 yards in 2000 before then-coach Jon Gruden put an end to his offensive escapades.

According to Poston, the Buccaneers - coached by Gruden - weren't interested in allowing him to play on offense and wanted him to play safety. In the end, Woodson thought the best place for him was in Green Bay where he could enjoy personal and team success.

"It was a combination," Poston said. "What he wanted was to be with a team that was committed to winning. It was very tough with the Packers coming off a 4-12 season, but he felt with Brett in the twilight of his career that he would be looking to win it one more time."

Packers coach Mike McCarthy said that he had been in draft meetings all day and was unaware that the team had reached agreement on a deal with Woodson. But he said that when the 29-year-old cornerback visited the Packers April 3, he told Woodson that he would be able to play some wide receiver if he signed in Green Bay.

Woodson doesn't have the blazing speed he had coming out of college - he was timed in the 40-yard dash in 4.4 seconds at his pro day - but at 6-1, 200 pounds he is a physical player with outstanding athletic ability. The Packers signed him because they want him to play left cornerback opposite veteran Al Harris, but if he can add anything on offense they're willing to give it a whirl.

"It's something he and I talked about," McCarthy said. "I've always believed if you have a guy with special qualities you take advantage of it. We'll look at it."

Woodson also has return ability, but the Packers' main focus will be shoring up a cornerback position that features Harris and no one else. Ahmad Carroll, a first-round pick in 2004, hasn't shown the discipline or maturity to match his outstanding speed and has been a major disappointment.

The Packers have other cornerback candidates in Mike Hawkins, Jason Horton, Patrick Dendy and Therrian Fontenot, but none of them is ready to be a full-time starter. Woodson will move into a starting cornerback position and be asked to play the aggressive bump-and-run style defensive coordinator Bob Sanders demands in his scheme.

The Woodson agreement has no options or voidable years, making it unlikely the former Raiders cornerback will only be around for just one season, Poston said. Though the total value of the deal is $52 million, a good portion of it probably consists of incentives, escalators and large base salaries in the latter years.

The Packers were under the assumption they would at least have to pay Woodson $10 million in the first year because that is the salary he made last season as Oakland's franchise player. Poston would not say how much of the deal is guaranteed.

In Woodson, the Packers are getting a player who was one of the premier man-to-man cornerbacks in the National Football League, but also is known as a solid run defender and physical tackler. Lately Woodson has been slowed by injury, although those who have studied him say he isn't afraid of contact and will easily make the transition to safety when he loses his speed.

Over his eight-year career, Woodson has 17 interceptions (two returned for touchdowns), 5 ½ sacks and 14 forced fumbles. He has played in 106 of a possible 128 regular-season games

Last year, the Raiders played Woodson at numerous positions on the field, moving him from corner to the slot, to inside the box, to deep safety. He had 30 tackles and one interception before suffering a season-ending broken right leg in the sixth game of the season.

He missed seven games in 2002 with a broken shoulder, two games in 2004 with a knee injury and 10 in '05 with a broken leg. The Packers felt Woodson was healthy and weren't overly concerned with his injury history.

A Raiders source said Woodson would be better off staying at cornerback in the base defense rather than moving him around to various positions because he's a better player when he is focused. He said even at this stage of Woodson's career he was still capable of being a shutdown corner.

Kansas City Chiefs coach Herman Edwards agreed when asked about Woodson at the NFL owners meetings last month.

"I think Charles Woodson can do whatever he wants if his mind is right," Edwards said. "It's according to what he wants to do."

Poston said that Woodson, unlike fellow free agent LaVar Arrington, did not talk to Favre about Green Bay before signing. But Woodson did speak to Arrington, who is also represented by Poston and his brother, Kevin, and the two considered playing together in Green Bay.

Arrington ultimately picked the New York Giants because he wanted to play in the NFC East and remain near his Annapolis, Md., home.

"They were close to having both of them," Poston said.

Woodson was not the only free agent the Packers signed. Former New York Giants defensive tackle Kenderick Allen, a 6-5, 328-pound three-year veteran, signed a deal with the team.

Allen was scheduled to become a restricted free agent this off-season, but the Giants decided not to make him a qualifying offer. Last year he played in 14 games with two starts and had 21 tackles, two sacks and two fumble recoveries.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top