Running Back Rumors

[sheepshead]

DeAngelo Williams?

Rumors are the pack is in talks with "another team" and Williams name came up. Anyone want to do some digging?

[Joemailman]

I'll give Arrigo a call.

Edit: It was Arrigo!! http://bitterborderbattle.com/2010/09/29/deangelo-williams-a-possible-target/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=tjmarquardt

[sheepshead]

aahhhh the internets...an amazing thing

[gbgary]

i would hope the game would get tt on the phone if he wasn't already.

[red]

LOL

williams, yeah right. that would take at least 1 first round pick, maybe 2

[ND72]

LOL

williams, yeah right. that would take at least 1 first round pick, maybe 2

That was my first thought.

[Joemailman]

LOL

williams, yeah right. that would take at least 1 first round pick, maybe 2

Not according to Arrigo. :D

http://joeslockerroom.com/On_The_Sidelines.html

I received an email from a source with knowledge of the trade talks, and he said that the Panthers would want a player and a pick (like the Bills want with Lynch). I asked what the Panthers "needs" were and he replied "offensive line, wide receiver, defensive line, linebacker and corner back" but added "if the Packers were to offer a 3rd in 2011 and a conditional pick (a 3 that could go to a 2) in 2012, that could be enough to make it happen."

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I have been saying this would make sense for the last two weeks. He is 27 and on the final year of his contract and Stewart is a beast. They will probably not be able to pay top dollar for two running backs with one about to turn 28. He WILL NOT cost a first round pick and if thats what they want I would not do the trade. I bet he could be had for a second. If they get a second round pick for him I think they win at the end of the day. Running backs don't have long careers and they are a bad team that should gather picks and rebuild.

Imagine next year with Williams and Grant, that would be sweet.
I would trade a second, this team is really good. Grants injury really set back the offense, but I think this would solve it.

[mraynrand]

LOL

williams, yeah right. that would take at least 1 first round pick, maybe 2

That was my first thought.

Maybe Hershel Walker is still available

[Joemailman]

I have been saying this would make sense for the last two weeks. He is 27 and on the final year of his contract and Stewart is a beast. They will probably not be able to pay top dollar for two running backs with one about to turn 28. He WILL NOT cost a first round pick and if thats what they want I would not do the trade. I bet he could be had for a second. If they get a second round pick for him I think they win at the end of the day. Running backs don't have long careers and they are a bad team that should gather picks and rebuild.

Imagine next year with Williams and Grant, that would be sweet.
I would trade a second, this team is really good. Grants injury really set back the offense, but I think this would solve it.

I can't see TT giving up a high pick or two for a guy who will probably be on the down side of his career in 2-3 years. I think they like Starks and see him as an eventual replacement for Grant.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I have been saying this would make sense for the last two weeks. He is 27 and on the final year of his contract and Stewart is a beast. They will probably not be able to pay top dollar for two running backs with one about to turn 28. He WILL NOT cost a first round pick and if thats what they want I would not do the trade. I bet he could be had for a second. If they get a second round pick for him I think they win at the end of the day. Running backs don't have long careers and they are a bad team that should gather picks and rebuild.

Imagine next year with Williams and Grant, that would be sweet.
I would trade a second, this team is really good. Grants injury really set back the offense, but I think this would solve it.

I can't see TT giving up a high pick or two for a guy who will probably be on the down side of his career in 2-3 years. I think they like Starks and see him as an eventual replacement for Grant.

I don't see TT give up two picks either and wouldn't want him to do that. I think a fair trade would be Williams for a second. I think both side would win. I see him being a good back for another 3-4 years.

[swede]

Arrigo farts and all you goats faint.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I know all his shit is fake. I just think the trade makes sense.

[3irty1]

He'd be a good fit. Williams is a one cut burner type back.

I wouldn't put a trade past TT. If he really thinks were superbowl bound, what GM wouldn't get the missing cog even at a premium?

[Tony Oday]

Kuhn for the win!

[Packers4Glory]

I could see the Panthers trying to move one of those guys for a pick or picks. They are clearly in rebuild and playing a rookie QB. they need picks if for nothing more than to build an O-line around him.

What I don't know and didn't click to see if it talked about it, but what are the possible future salary cap considerations a trade w/ the Panthers would bring?

[retailguy]

He'd be a good fit. Williams is a one cut burner type back.

I wouldn't put a trade past TT. If he really thinks were superbowl bound, what GM wouldn't get the missing cog even at a premium?

Ted.

He wouldn't overpay for anything. (Well, at least that's what I've read here for the last 5 years anyhow, and today, I believe it.)

Again - In this case, we should run with what we have. I actually agree with him doing nothing.

[sharpe1027]

Wow, what a dynamic backfield we'll have with Lynch already as good as signed. I bet by next week we'll also have Peterson and Gore lined up. :roll:

[sheepshead]

Im trying to find the quote but Jennings said something to the effect that without a running game the Bears cover 2 zone shut himself and Donald down for the night. I think he tweeted it.

[mraynrand]

Im trying to find the quote but Jennings said something to the effect that without a running game the Bears cover 2 zone shut himself and Donald down for the night. I think he tweeted it.

Good for him. Maybe he should check the stats - Driver had nine catches. Jennings would have had 50 more yards receiving had he caught the bomb Rodgers placed in his hands. Maybe he should tweet that he stunk up the joint on Monday Night.

[sheepshead]

ok, but you have to admit we do need to run the ball some. 50-80 yards a game. with these guys or another guy.

[denverYooper]

Im trying to find the quote but Jennings said something to the effect that without a running game the Bears cover 2 zone shut himself and Donald down for the night. I think he tweeted it.

I doubt that on several levels. I doubt that he said that, and I doubt that the Bears don't try to take away the deeper stuff that is Jennings's bread and butter no matter who we have running the ball. Driver had 9 catches, so he hardly got shut down.

The twitter acct, "Greg85Jennings" is of dubious veracity and there is nothing regarding the lack of running game on it anyhow.

Besides, if he really did say that, maybe he should have hung onto that bomb near then end of the first half!

[ThunderDan]

Im trying to find the quote but Jennings said something to the effect that without a running game the Bears cover 2 zone shut himself and Donald down for the night. I think he tweeted it.

And to me that is perfectly fine. If the Tampa 2 shut down Jennings and Driver down you will have Finley one on one against Urlacher down the middle every play. I'll take Finley against ANYONE 1-on-1 down the seem with the safeties taking away the WRs.

I thought our quick passes to BJack were effectively runs on Monday night.

[Fritz]

Didn't anyone see that there was no where for any running back to run? Tauscher kept getting pushed back on the run blocking and Clifton couldn't block on the backside. Doesn't matter who your running back is.

[bobblehead]

Didn't anyone see that there was no where for any running back to run? Tauscher kept getting pushed back on the run blocking and Clifton couldn't block on the backside. Doesn't matter who your running back is.

I saw it. The bears DL whipped our OL in both aspects....just not quite as bad in the passing game.

[Little Whiskey]

the only thing that kept the packers from winning that game was the penalties. take those away and they kill the bears.


.......well penalties and points!

[outflow]

According to the NESN article here.... http://www.nesn.com/2010/09/should-patriots-go-after-marshawn-lynch.html

it is speculated that the Bills want a 4th rounder. Am I missing something???????

Now I read something that the Bills would want a player and a draft pick. So at this point is the hangup really Hawk????

[HarveyWallbangers]

According to the NESN article here.... http://www.nesn.com/2010/09/should-patriots-go-after-marshawn-lynch.html

it is speculated that the Bills want a 4th rounder. Am I missing something???????

Now I read something that the Bills would want a player and a draft pick. So at this point is the hangup really Hawk????

I wouldn't believe the rumors. Earlier, it was speculated that the Bills wanted a second round pick. Marshawn Lynch is better than Laurence Maroney, and the Pats got a fourth round pick for Maroney.

[ThunderDan]

According to the NESN article here.... http://www.nesn.com/2010/09/should-patriots-go-after-marshawn-lynch.html

it is speculated that the Bills want a 4th rounder. Am I missing something???????

Now I read something that the Bills would want a player and a draft pick. So at this point is the hangup really Hawk????

First off .... the Buffalo Bills will not trade Lynch to the Patriots. They may deal him but not to an AFC East team.

Second .... when Hawk has played he has been all over the field. He led the team in tackles last week and was 2nd in tackles against the Bears behind Tramon.

The hangup with Hawk is his contract and the more than $10,000,000+ he is supposed to make next year. Who wants to trade for a player that you know will only play 12 games or less for your team? Hell, even if he was a Pro Bowler for the Pack this year we would restructure or cut Hawk at that salary level.

[get louder at lambeau]

ok, but you have to admit we do need to run the ball some. 50-80 yards a game. with these guys or another guy.

Right now the Packers are averaging 95.8 ypg rushing.

The Bears are leading the league in rushing defense by a wide margin, at 39.7 ypg allowed. The Packers got 63. Some of that was Rodgers, but it helps to keep things in perspective. The other two teams that played the Bears got 20 and 36 yards rushing.

John Kuhn is tied with Marion Barber for most rushing yards gained against the Bears. Kuhn got 31 in 6 carries, Barber needed 11 to get the same yardage.

Our running game is OK. Not great, not horrible. OK.

[sheepshead]

I think 80 a game with this offense is good. Maybe we stand pat.

[sheepshead]

ok, im convinced, i just picked up Starks in my fantasy team.

[gbgary]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

[ThunderDan]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

[pbmax]

So at first Lynch was available, but not for a measly 3rd round pick. Now its a 4th round pick. I hate locking in a mortgage interest rate for this exact reason.




Bretsky come back! Its a mortgage joke! You won't get that anywhere else.

[gbgary]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

[Patler]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

[mmmdk]

It'll be a stark reality for Starks & Nance when Packer tackles are driven like ice trucks into the backfield.

[ThunderDan]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

I knew you hated Driver all of these years. You were just waiting for a chance to throw him under the bus. :lol:

I would think Driver and Lee would be the prime suspects. Maybe Jones. He has a high potential it seems but has now put the ball on the turf in 2 staight games.

[wist43]

I have been saying this would make sense for the last two weeks. He is 27 and on the final year of his contract and Stewart is a beast. They will probably not be able to pay top dollar for two running backs with one about to turn 28. He WILL NOT cost a first round pick and if thats what they want I would not do the trade. I bet he could be had for a second. If they get a second round pick for him I think they win at the end of the day. Running backs don't have long careers and they are a bad team that should gather picks and rebuild.

Imagine next year with Williams and Grant, that would be sweet.
I would trade a second, this team is really good. Grants injury really set back the offense, but I think this would solve it.

I agree... TT will never come off of a 2nd rounder though.

[Brandon494]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

No way do you trade Driver, you need his leadership if we are serious about making a strong push in the playoffs this season.

[Brandon494]

I have been saying this would make sense for the last two weeks. He is 27 and on the final year of his contract and Stewart is a beast. They will probably not be able to pay top dollar for two running backs with one about to turn 28. He WILL NOT cost a first round pick and if thats what they want I would not do the trade. I bet he could be had for a second. If they get a second round pick for him I think they win at the end of the day. Running backs don't have long careers and they are a bad team that should gather picks and rebuild.

Imagine next year with Williams and Grant, that would be sweet.
I would trade a second, this team is really good. Grants injury really set back the offense, but I think this would solve it.

I agree... TT will never come off of a 2nd rounder though.

Kinda like when he traded up for select Clay Matthews. Never say Never but I agree he won't do it.

[ThunderDan]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

No way do you trade Driver, you need his leadership if we are serious about making a strong push in the playoffs this season.

Then who do you trade to get this RB we need? If you think Hawk is junk why would any other team in the NFL want to trade for him? Maybe draft choices is the only way to go? Be honest when looking at the Packers in who you could trade.

Here is how I see it:
QB: No Trades (No 3rd QB with potential to trade Flynn away)
RB: No, we need one
FB: Maybe but what value would they bring
WR: We have a lot of these guys
TE: We have a lot of these guys
OL: Worried about Clifton and Tauscher, can't trade away promising back ups
DL: Seem thin here, I don't think you can trade Pickett or Jenkins
LB: 8 LBs on the team, don't have a lot of depth (Hawk is only potential trade with value but I would hate to have Bishop play)
CB: Maybe when Harris get's back you can deal Underwood or Lee (what would any NFL GM give us for either of those 2)
S: 4 on the roster, 1 (Peprah) cut when Bigby gets back
ST: No one to trade, maybe Bush has value as a gunner

So to get a player of value you really are looking at draft picks, a WR or a TE.

[Brandon494]

Picks, not our 2nd best WR who just signed an extension. Jones would get traded before Driver anyway. Like I said we don't have to get someone flashy, just a solid RB.

[steve823]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. Also add in Rodgers athleticism and we're fine.

With that being said, it would still be nice to get a solid RB ,but at a good price. No reason to give up too much.

[sheepshead]

given the state of the Green Bay rushing attack, you have to think coach Mike McCarthy will give the 6-foot-2, 218-pounder (Starks) a chance. "He's a big, athletic running back, and I think he has the ability to be a three-down player," McCarthy said on Sept. 16.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

What I want to know is, how in the hell is Joe Arrigo even employed? I've never seen him hit a "rumor," ever. Sure, he isn't that bad of a writer, and he knows what his audience craves, but the guy is complete shit.

Someone please explain this to me.

[vince]

I don't know if or where he works, but I promise you he's not getting paid for his Packers intel.

[gbgary]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

No way do you trade Driver, you need his leadership if we are serious about making a strong push in the playoffs this season.

no, never DD!! i like Jones but he'd be gone if they wanted him for Lynch if it was up to me. Driver is as good today as he's ever been...maybe better.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I disagree, Driver seems to have declined. I would much rather keep Jones than Driver at this point.

[Smidgeon]

I'm not sure that he's declined, but with the way Jones has been playing (minus the fumble), who has the better odds of being a better player in two years? Next year?

[Joemailman]

Whether Jones or Driver are more important to the Packers is a moot point. The Packers are a pass-first team. There is no way they would trade away a key ingredient of the passing game (Jones, Driver or Nelson) to shore up an alleged problem at RB.

[mission]

What I want to know is, how in the hell is Joe Arrigo even employed? I've never seen him hit a "rumor," ever. Sure, he isn't that bad of a writer, and he knows what his audience craves, but the guy is complete shit.

Someone please explain this to me.

He's a horrible writer.

I'm a bad writer, and when I read his stuff, I can't get through the first paragraph without seeing a bunch of errors. Couple that with the cheesy web design and you have the perfection combination of internet blogger guy with no legitimate connection to the team.

[Smidgeon]

Whether Jones or Driver are more important to the Packers is a moot point. The Packers are a pass-first team. There is no way they would trade away a key ingredient of the passing game (Jones, Driver or Nelson) to shore up an alleged problem at RB.

Oh, I definitely agree there.

[gbgary]

Whether Jones or Driver are more important to the Packers is a moot point. The Packers are a pass-first team. There is no way they would trade away a key ingredient of the passing game (Jones, Driver or Nelson) to shore up an alleged problem at RB.

i agree and wouldn't have it any other way...but to get something you have to give up something. without a better running game we're only an alleged superbowl team.

[Joemailman]

Keep in mind the Packers under MM start slow in the running game. In the first 3 games of the great 2007 season, the Packers rushed 59 times for 171 yards for a 2.9 YPC. In the 1st 3 games of 2010, the Packers have rushed 75 times for 285 yards, for a 3.8 YPC. Even if you take away Grant's carries, its 67-240 for 3.6. The running game has not been as bad as some people think, and is not why the Pack lost to the Bears.

[mraynrand]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/story_image/montana_feature1.gif

[Joemailman]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/story_image/montana_feature1.gif

Holmgren often used it in Green Bay as well, especially in the early years. After Sterling Sharpe, the top receivers were RB's and TE's.

[mraynrand]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/story_image/montana_feature1.gif

Holmgren often used it in Green Bay as well, especially in the early years. After Sterling Sharpe, the top receivers were RB's and TE's.

So did Shermy: when Freeman and Schroeder sucked in 2000 and 2001, Green was the #1 receiver.

[woodbuck27]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

Ahhh come on Patler. DD will retire with our team. He's also still very solid and isn't going anywhere.

[pbmax]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/story_image/montana_feature1.gif

Blashphemy! You must use the run to setup the pass. It never works the other way around.

[Patler]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

Ahhh come on Patler. DD will retire with our team. He's also still very solid and isn't going anywhere.

I just thought I would stir the pot a little! It is unlikely that Driver will ever be traded, and virtually no chance that it could happen this year. However, I would bet that 4-5 years ago people would have said the same thing about Favre. Therefore, I can't say that Driver will never be traded.

[imscott72]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

Ahhh come on Patler. DD will retire with our team. He's also still very solid and isn't going anywhere.

I just thought I would stir the pot a little! It is unlikely that Driver will ever be traded, and virtually no chance that it could happen this year. However, I would bet that 4-5 years ago people would have said the same thing about Favre. Therefore, I can't say that Driver will never be traded.

I could never support trading DD..Ever..One of the best Packer people we've ever had here. Back to the topic at hand, even if we trade for a running back, we still have issues with our tackles who can't seem to run block any more. Until something is done with Clifton and Tauscher, I don't think it matters who is brought in here, they're going to struggle.

[steve823]

As of 8pm pst the Panthers are listening to the Packers and the two sides are still talking players & picks, but the Panthers want to see what happens with their next 2 games (against the Saints and Bears). If they lose both games, the Panthers would be 1-5 and a deal is likely to happen IF the two sides (the Packers & Panthers) can (1) agree on compensation and (2) the Packers can sign Williams to a new deal that would keep him a Packers beyond the 2010 season according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The dialogue is good and going in a very positive direction.

Keep an eye on James Jones during these trade discussions as a possible trade chip. The Panthers need another WR opposite of Steve Smith (and would allow them to move Branden LaFell to the slot when they go 3 wide) and Jones could be a key figure in a potential Williams deal.

NOTHING is eminent regarding Williams or Marshawn Lynch for that matter. The Bills want a starting offensive lineman (a tackle to be specific) and a 2nd round pick for Lynch. That's a steep price to pay for Lynch who has a well documented off the field history. I was told by a source with knowledge of the trade talks that if the Packers were to pay that high of a price for a player it would be for Williams who has no character issues and has a reputation of being a great teammate and a smart football player.

[mission]

As of 8pm pst the Panthers are listening to the Packers and the two sides are still talking players & picks, but the Panthers want to see what happens with their next 2 games (against the Saints and Bears). If they lose both games, the Panthers would be 1-5 and a deal is likely to happen IF the two sides (the Packers & Panthers) can (1) agree on compensation and (2) the Packers can sign Williams to a new deal that would keep him a Packers beyond the 2010 season according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The dialogue is good and going in a very positive direction.

Keep an eye on James Jones during these trade discussions as a possible trade chip. The Panthers need another WR opposite of Steve Smith (and would allow them to move Branden LaFell to the slot when they go 3 wide) and Jones could be a key figure in a potential Williams deal.

NOTHING is eminent regarding Williams or Marshawn Lynch for that matter. The Bills want a starting offensive lineman (a tackle to be specific) and a 2nd round pick for Lynch. That's a steep price to pay for Lynch who has a well documented off the field history. I was told by a source with knowledge of the trade talks that if the Packers were to pay that high of a price for a player it would be for Williams who has no character issues and has a reputation of being a great teammate and a smart football player.

Where is that info from?? :shock:

[steve823]

I found it from a Broncos forum.

http://forums.denverbroncos.com/showthread.php?p=3438074

I just put the article in google and Joe Arrigo's blog came up, so now I'm pissed. Oh well, you never know.

[gbgary]

didn't he used to be on chatters?

[mission]

didn't he used to be on chatters?

yeah. seems like he's been on every packer forum over the years until people call him out and he moves on.

i just went to his website (before asking you the source) and didn't see that specific text on there so i was actually hoping there was something more to this.

a trade of this magnitude would definitely change my thinking about TT. way too good to be true for me, though.

[woodbuck27]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. Also add in Rodgers athleticism and we're fine.

With that being said, it would still be nice to get a solid RB ,but at a good price. No reason to give up too much.

TT will NOT give up much at all to improve our team in the RB position.

TT's not the type of GM who'll seize the moment and ' go for the HOME RUN ' move. That's frustrating to some Packer fans. It is what it is with GM Ted Thompson's ways. It may seem to some that this approach will not benefit us with the results we are so close to harvesting or enjoying, but that is moot. I sense that we have to remain patient with Ted Thompson; not be over optimistic this season. TT is certainly patient and believes in his style of managing our team and is in for the long term. To give us a competitive team that will be a consistent playoff contender.

TT has the support of many in Packer Nation. To be there demands TT's patience and a complete acceptance and understanding of TT's style of managing.

Does the debate lie here:

Is it about winning it all or the receipts? When was the last time a Packer game wasn't sold out? I personally hope that Ted Thompson goes for it and takes us deeper in the playoff this season. Will that ' be the case '? I don't know ! I cannot as yet predict that as the enevitable and positive result based on present circumstances. We just came off two stinker games . Losing a stinker of an effort in a penalty filled game and that was inexcusable on behalf of the discipline that MM and his coaching staff is totally responsoble for. Ity's MM and the coach's task to field a disciplined team and for his GM (Ted Thompson) to supply MM and his staff with the players with the correct work ethic, effort, discipline and talent to get it done.

That's all any of us can hope for. A team that wins more than it loses for a start and we have that now. We are 3 and 1 in a crazy start to this NFL season with only one team ' the KC Chiefs ' remaining undefeated, and only after week 4. We can enjoy that fact now . WE are contending for the NFCN Championship and tied with the team that defeated us in week 3 or the Bears in a game that was simply ugly from a standpoint of pathetic team discipline and without that usual ' coup de grace ', we win that game and sit today at FOUR and ZERO.

It takes discipline and alot more to win a Super Bowl. It takes alot to be NFC Champion. It takes alot to get to the NFC Championship game. It takes alot to win an NFCN Championship. It takes alot to make the playoffs 'as a Wild Card'. It takes alot to be a winning team.

You people that will accept nothing but a Super Bowl are sadly setting yourselves up for alot of pain. Those of you that hope that our team can be NFCN Champs are more realisticly balanced.

Personally as a Packer fan. I'd be pleased to see the Green Bay Packers win the NFCN. To be in the NFC Championship game would be a wonderful bonus. To win the NFC Championship and go to a Super Bowl? Let's be realistic Packer fans. WE have Ted Thompson as our GM. This man moves very slow , carefully 'all CAPS'. Any Packer fan certainly has witnessed that as ' a fact for our lives ', as Packer fans. He's generally speaking not willing to take even a calculated risk as I've observed him but he has had his moments of whatb some will deem genious. :D

I hope that he's being fair to himself and still on his learning curve. His prime objective being. To guide our team to a possible Super Bowl win. AS we see our team today. Are we really there yet? I don't see it but we're 3 and 1 and there's time on our side this season as not alot will be determined until we're into the last 40% of our schedule. Just RELAX and enjot the ride Packer fans.

This is what I know. Winning a conference Championship is all about balance, timing and consistency. Confidence inspired in the teams players and coaching staff. Provided in terms of seeing results that have a return in the 'W' column. It's having a HC and staff that takes care of problems as soon as they arise pro actively and not just saying what he knows we want or need to hear. A HC and his staff and his GM that deals with adversity as it arises and 'nips it in the bud '. A Head Coach that has the parts and ensures that the teams GM ' is on task '. The Head Coach is on the firing line as the first man that looks good or bad depended on how much support he gets from the man that must supply him with the talent needed to defeat the opposition. That would be the team we see in Green Bay or HC Michael Murphy ( MM ) and his GM Ted Thompson ( TT ).

A team approach with all hands on board and that, with lofty sights in mind or otherwise. A realistic approach to seeing objectives achieved. All players on that team ( a GM and his choice of HC and his staff and all team players ) working very hard as a collective; acting positively and supportively ' on the same page ' in terms of objectives.

If it's not working a ' fix it now ' approach may come at a huge cost and with all respect for those of you that totally love our GM, that's far and removed or not as I view Ted Thompson.

It's by far generally, just a wait and wait even more to see what TT will or won't do. Personally I've desired TT to be a tad more agressive. That's just my personality coming forward. I"ve long past given up hoping for TT and anything. I predict that it will be as we've always seen for any near future scenario involving team growth or reaction to adversity.

As a Packer fan I must now weigh in with Ted Thompson's personality and be very patient. Enjoy just, all ' he decides ' to give to me. Im right where I need to be or to enjoy the best our team has to offer and not be wildly optimistic.

Specific to the issue and concern regarding of our running game, or a closer examination of what he's already put in place. I believe that TT see's and hopes that a real prospect will presently be coming through in new addition Starks. TT may continue with the dual RB approach as MM and he see best for our West Coast Offense. Eventually adding the talent of Starks (lets be positive) to the production we've enjoyed with Ryan Grant when and hopefully he returns at 100%.

Till then it's just what it is. I know that that MM has to have the parts to ask his GM Ted Thompson for more if he needs more for his offensive game plans. Packer fasns are hungry to see their team get to the upper echelon in the NFL. To not go just so far and flop. On that note I want our GM to be on the job every waking moment of every day. Positive or ' Pro Active '. Always looking to improve our team. I want TT to see only one short or long term objective. To satisfy Packer Nation with a Super Bowl berth before the good parts TT does have in place gather rust.

I know that TT can be aggressive. I loved the move he made to add CB Charles Woodson to our roster. That move gave me real hope that TT was a ' go for it ' GM. Aaron Rodgers fell to us in the draft. TT knew he needed a solid College QB prospect with the tools and winning attitude to eventually replace Brett Favre. The reality of that move was one that set aside the now for the future. I believe the best move I've seen TT make was bringing in Charles Woodson. A solid FA signing and an aggressive move that has turned out very well for our team.

Do we need a solid RB now? Yes we do. Will TT wait and see what the results will be as the RB stable exists? I believe that will be it based on this man's ways. He may tweek the position a wee bit but make an aggressive move soon? Nope he'll stand pat unless he sets up a deal that is only in favor of his ways or personality. This man isw ultra conservative and careful. Obviously his boss (s) are fine with the TT ways.

We ... 'the Packer fans', can go with a wish and a prayer or simply enjoy our team try their best to win the NFCN. That best has to be supported all throughout the Packer Organization and in terms of the karma we as fans may offer.

Y'all may as well relax in terms of wants. Our GM is Ted Thompson. 8-)

GO PACK ! ... GO !![/i]

[imscott72]

As of 8pm pst the Panthers are listening to the Packers and the two sides are still talking players & picks, but the Panthers want to see what happens with their next 2 games (against the Saints and Bears). If they lose both games, the Panthers would be 1-5 and a deal is likely to happen IF the two sides (the Packers & Panthers) can (1) agree on compensation and (2) the Packers can sign Williams to a new deal that would keep him a Packers beyond the 2010 season according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The dialogue is good and going in a very positive direction.

Keep an eye on James Jones during these trade discussions as a possible trade chip. The Panthers need another WR opposite of Steve Smith (and would allow them to move Branden LaFell to the slot when they go 3 wide) and Jones could be a key figure in a potential Williams deal.



Hogwash..I don't believe it for a second. Wouldn't our own reporters have some knowledge of this?

[sheepshead]

As of 8pm pst the Panthers are listening to the Packers and the two sides are still talking players & picks, but the Panthers want to see what happens with their next 2 games (against the Saints and Bears). If they lose both games, the Panthers would be 1-5 and a deal is likely to happen IF the two sides (the Packers & Panthers) can (1) agree on compensation and (2) the Packers can sign Williams to a new deal that would keep him a Packers beyond the 2010 season according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The dialogue is good and going in a very positive direction.

Keep an eye on James Jones during these trade discussions as a possible trade chip. The Panthers need another WR opposite of Steve Smith (and would allow them to move Branden LaFell to the slot when they go 3 wide) and Jones could be a key figure in a potential Williams deal.



Hogwash..I don't believe it for a second. Wouldn't our own reporters have some knowledge of this?

at the JS...no, those guys never leave the office. they eat krispy kreams at look at the same sites we do

[Cheesehead Craig]

As of 8pm pst the Panthers are listening to the Packers and the two sides are still talking players & picks, but the Panthers want to see what happens with their next 2 games (against the Saints and Bears). If they lose both games, the Panthers would be 1-5 and a deal is likely to happen IF the two sides (the Packers & Panthers) can (1) agree on compensation and (2) the Packers can sign Williams to a new deal that would keep him a Packers beyond the 2010 season according to a source with knowledge of the situation. The dialogue is good and going in a very positive direction.

Keep an eye on James Jones during these trade discussions as a possible trade chip. The Panthers need another WR opposite of Steve Smith (and would allow them to move Branden LaFell to the slot when they go 3 wide) and Jones could be a key figure in a potential Williams deal.



Hogwash..I don't believe it for a second. Wouldn't our own reporters have some knowledge of this?

at the JS...no, those guys never leave the office. they eat krispy kreams at look at the same sites we do
You got that wrong. They are eating kringles.

[woodbuck27]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

Ahhh come on Patler. DD will retire with our team. He's also still very solid and isn't going anywhere.

I just thought I would stir the pot a little! It is unlikely that Driver will ever be traded, and virtually no chance that it could happen this year. However, I would bet that 4-5 years ago people would have said the same thing about Favre. Therefore, I can't say that Driver will never be traded.

You know my history posting RE: Favre and his status and future as a Packer and I certainly felt that as soon as TT drafted Aaron Rodgers back in the 2005 draft that Favre's days as a Packer were numbered.

I felt that Brett Favre's time was about over; and I refer specifically to the way he performed in that playoff game Vs ' the Vikings '. Specifically I refer to that dumb underhanded flip pass to (was it Bubba Franks?) when Favre easily could have run the pigskin in for six and all we got was that foolish smirk on his face.

I honestlt felt that the Packers last game of the 2004 season was the real beginning of Favre's end. His ticket out of Greeen bay was officially prior stamped on that day that the vikings eliminated us from post season play.

I came to forgive him for that mentle lapse as I"ve forgiven him often for his mere humanness but that play really pissed me off and was an embarassment to all Packer fan and to in particular Brett Favre. I hope in hindsight that Brett Favre feels the same as I and I believe many Packer fans must about that damn play.

It sucked really bad! I was never as pissed at Brett Favre and as embarassed to be a Packer fan as I felt after that stupid play.

That was ' the real beginning of the end ' for Brett Favre as a Green Bay Packer.

A question for you Patler.

Do you ( or I wonder? ) if any of the old guard here at PackerRats and formerly at JSO ... re-call the parody I wrote, of the Packer brass at 'an ice fishing shack get together' at a ficticious lake in Northern Wisconsin?

In that parody. I wrote a ficticious account of the Packer Brass's secret position. On ' a need to know only ' basis. Bringing in a new GM to replace GM Mike Sherman, who wore the hat as HC as well. To make a serious effort to remove the old guard including the undaunted Green Bay Packer Legend Brett Favre and to handle the delicate nature of that given Favre's notable populaity as an NFL Icon, a Green Bay Packer Great and first round HOFer.

I re-call at the time that my parody or ficticious story got a less than positive reaction :D from some fellow members. I felt instinctfully as I wrote that parody that Brett Favre would be shoved out one way or another no matter the cost.

When I wrote that parody. Ted Thompson was already hired as our GM and Mike Sherman was held over, and in effect demoted, to Head Coach.


GO PACK GO!

[imscott72]

Just got a tweet that the Eagles are after Lynch now that McCoy is hurt.

[mission]

Just got a tweet that the Eagles are after Lynch now that McCoy is hurt.

Watch them get him for like a 5th! :lol: :lol:

[imscott72]

Just got a tweet that the Eagles are after Lynch now that McCoy is hurt.

Watch them get him for like a 5th! :lol: :lol:

If that happens Packer Nation will have a meltdown..

[pbmax]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. Also add in Rodgers athleticism and we're fine.

With that being said, it would still be nice to get a solid RB ,but at a good price. No reason to give up too much.

TT will NOT give up much at all to improve our team in the RB position.

TT's not the type of GM who'll seize the moment and ' go for the HOME RUN ' move. That's frustrating to some Packer fans. It is what it is with GM Ted Thompson's ways. It may seem to some that this approach will not benefit us with the results we are so close to harvesting or enjoying, but that is moot. I sense that we have to remain patient with Ted Thompson; not be over optimistic this season. TT is certainly patient and believes in his style of managing our team and is in for the long term. To give us a competitive team that will be a consistent playoff contender.

TT has the support of many in Packer Nation. To be there demands TT's patience and a complete acceptance and understanding of TT's style of managing.

Does the debate lie here:

Is it about winning it all or the receipts? When was the last time a Packer game wasn't sold out? I personally hope that Ted Thompson goes for it and takes us deeper in the playoff this season. Will that ' be the case '? I don't know ! I cannot as yet predict that as the enevitable and positive result based on present circumstances. We just came off two stinker games . Losing a stinker of an effort in a penalty filled game and that was inexcusable on behalf of the discipline that MM and his coaching staff is totally responsoble for. Ity's MM and the coach's task to field a disciplined team and for his GM (Ted Thompson) to supply MM and his staff with the players with the correct work ethic, effort, discipline and talent to get it done.

That's all any of us can hope for. A team that wins more than it loses for a start and we have that now. We are 3 and 1 in a crazy start to this NFL season with only one team ' the KC Chiefs ' remaining undefeated, and only after week 4. We can enjoy that fact now . WE are contending for the NFCN Championship and tied with the team that defeated us in week 3 or the Bears in a game that was simply ugly from a standpoint of pathetic team discipline and without that usual ' coup de grace ', we win that game and sit today at FOUR and ZERO.

It takes discipline and alot more to win a Super Bowl. It takes alot to be NFC Champion. It takes alot to get to the NFC Championship game. It takes alot to win an NFCN Championship. It takes alot to make the playoffs 'as a Wild Card'. It takes alot to be a winning team.

You people that will accept nothing but a Super Bowl are sadly setting yourselves up for alot of pain. Those of you that hope that our team can be NFCN Champs are more realisticly balanced.

Personally as a Packer fan. I'd be pleased to see the Green Bay Packers win the NFCN. To be in the NFC Championship game would be a wonderful bonus. To win the NFC Championship and go to a Super Bowl? Let's be realistic Packer fans. WE have Ted Thompson as our GM. This man moves very slow , carefully 'all CAPS'. Any Packer fan certainly has witnessed that as ' a fact for our lives ', as Packer fans. He's generally speaking not willing to take even a calculated risk as I've observed him but he has had his moments of whatb some will deem genious. :D

I hope that he's being fair to himself and still on his learning curve. His prime objective being. To guide our team to a possible Super Bowl win. AS we see our team today. Are we really there yet? I don't see it but we're 3 and 1 and there's time on our side this season as not alot will be determined until we're into the last 40% of our schedule. Just RELAX and enjot the ride Packer fans.

This is what I know. Winning a conference Championship is all about balance, timing and consistency. Confidence inspired in the teams players and coaching staff. Provided in terms of seeing results that have a return in the 'W' column. It's having a HC and staff that takes care of problems as soon as they arise pro actively and not just saying what he knows we want or need to hear. A HC and his staff and his GM that deals with adversity as it arises and 'nips it in the bud '. A Head Coach that has the parts and ensures that the teams GM ' is on task '. The Head Coach is on the firing line as the first man that looks good or bad depended on how much support he gets from the man that must supply him with the talent needed to defeat the opposition. That would be the team we see in Green Bay or HC Michael Murphy ( MM ) and his GM Ted Thompson ( TT ).

A team approach with all hands on board and that, with lofty sights in mind or otherwise. A realistic approach to seeing objectives achieved. All players on that team ( a GM and his choice of HC and his staff and all team players ) working very hard as a collective; acting positively and supportively ' on the same page ' in terms of objectives.

If it's not working a ' fix it now ' approach may come at a huge cost and with all respect for those of you that totally love our GM, that's far and removed or not as I view Ted Thompson.

It's by far generally, just a wait and wait even more to see what TT will or won't do. Personally I've desired TT to be a tad more agressive. That's just my personality coming forward. I"ve long past given up hoping for TT and anything. I predict that it will be as we've always seen for any near future scenario involving team growth or reaction to adversity.

As a Packer fan I must now weigh in with Ted Thompson's personality and be very patient. Enjoy just, all ' he decides ' to give to me. Im right where I need to be or to enjoy the best our team has to offer and not be wildly optimistic.

Specific to the issue and concern regarding of our running game, or a closer examination of what he's already put in place. I believe that TT see's and hopes that a real prospect will presently be coming through in new addition Starks. TT may continue with the dual RB approach as MM and he see best for our West Coast Offense. Eventually adding the talent of Starks (lets be positive) to the production we've enjoyed with Ryan Grant when and hopefully he returns at 100%.

Till then it's just what it is. I know that that MM has to have the parts to ask his GM Ted Thompson for more if he needs more for his offensive game plans. Packer fasns are hungry to see their team get to the upper echelon in the NFL. To not go just so far and flop. On that note I want our GM to be on the job every waking moment of every day. Positive or ' Pro Active '. Always looking to improve our team. I want TT to see only one short or long term objective. To satisfy Packer Nation with a Super Bowl berth before the good parts TT does have in place gather rust.

I know that TT can be aggressive. I loved the move he made to add CB Charles Woodson to our roster. That move gave me real hope that TT was a ' go for it ' GM. Aaron Rodgers fell to us in the draft. TT knew he needed a solid College QB prospect with the tools and winning attitude to eventually replace Brett Favre. The reality of that move was one that set aside the now for the future. I believe the best move I've seen TT make was bringing in Charles Woodson. A solid FA signing and an aggressive move that has turned out very well for our team.

Do we need a solid RB now? Yes we do. Will TT wait and see what the results will be as the RB stable exists? I believe that will be it based on this man's ways. He may tweek the position a wee bit but make an aggressive move soon? Nope he'll stand pat unless he sets up a deal that is only in favor of his ways or personality. This man isw ultra conservative and careful. Obviously his boss (s) are fine with the TT ways.

We ... 'the Packer fans', can go with a wish and a prayer or simply enjoy our team try their best to win the NFCN. That best has to be supported all throughout the Packer Organization and in terms of the karma we as fans may offer.

Y'all may as well relax in terms of wants. Our GM is Ted Thompson. 8-)

GO PACK ! ... GO !![/i]
Woodbuck, your entire post rests on an assumption; that there is a running back worth trading for who is available. All your rhetorical questions about whether Thompson is psychologically capable of making a trade like this are putting the cart before the horse.

Does anyone have any solid info that either Williams or Lynch is actually available?

[Joemailman]

Just got a tweet that the Eagles are after Lynch now that McCoy is hurt.

Watch them get him for like a 5th! :lol: :lol:

If that happens Packer Nation will have a meltdown..

Why? The running game isn't the huge problem people think it is. Packers are 18th in the NFL in YPC. Better than a lot of teams that have Pro Bowl caliber RB's.

[steve823]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

http://www.profootballhof.com/assets/story_image/montana_feature1.gif

Blashphemy! You must use the run to setup the pass. It never works the other way around.

Did I say that it would substitute the running game? NO. Don't put words in my mouth. Obviously we still need a running game, who doesn't ? I was saying that the short passes in the West Coast will help us a little.

[woodbuck27]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. Also add in Rodgers athleticism and we're fine.

With that being said, it would still be nice to get a solid RB ,but at a good price. No reason to give up too much.

TT will NOT give up much at all to improve our team in the RB position.

TT's not the type of GM who'll seize the moment and ' go for the HOME RUN ' move. That's frustrating to some Packer fans. It is what it is with GM Ted Thompson's ways. It may seem to some that this approach will not benefit us with the results we are so close to harvesting or enjoying, but that is moot. I sense that we have to remain patient with Ted Thompson; not be over optimistic this season. TT is certainly patient and believes in his style of managing our team and is in for the long term. To give us a competitive team that will be a consistent playoff contender.

TT has the support of many in Packer Nation. To be there demands TT's patience and a complete acceptance and understanding of TT's style of managing.

Does the debate lie here:

Is it about winning it all or the receipts? When was the last time a Packer game wasn't sold out? I personally hope that Ted Thompson goes for it and takes us deeper in the playoff this season. Will that ' be the case '? I don't know ! I cannot as yet predict that as the enevitable and positive result based on present circumstances. We just came off two stinker games . Losing a stinker of an effort in a penalty filled game and that was inexcusable on behalf of the discipline that MM and his coaching staff is totally responsoble for. Ity's MM and the coach's task to field a disciplined team and for his GM (Ted Thompson) to supply MM and his staff with the players with the correct work ethic, effort, discipline and talent to get it done.

That's all any of us can hope for. A team that wins more than it loses for a start and we have that now. We are 3 and 1 in a crazy start to this NFL season with only one team ' the KC Chiefs ' remaining undefeated, and only after week 4. We can enjoy that fact now . WE are contending for the NFCN Championship and tied with the team that defeated us in week 3 or the Bears in a game that was simply ugly from a standpoint of pathetic team discipline and without that usual ' coup de grace ', we win that game and sit today at FOUR and ZERO.

It takes discipline and alot more to win a Super Bowl. It takes alot to be NFC Champion. It takes alot to get to the NFC Championship game. It takes alot to win an NFCN Championship. It takes alot to make the playoffs 'as a Wild Card'. It takes alot to be a winning team.

You people that will accept nothing but a Super Bowl are sadly setting yourselves up for alot of pain. Those of you that hope that our team can be NFCN Champs are more realisticly balanced.

Personally as a Packer fan. I'd be pleased to see the Green Bay Packers win the NFCN. To be in the NFC Championship game would be a wonderful bonus. To win the NFC Championship and go to a Super Bowl? Let's be realistic Packer fans. WE have Ted Thompson as our GM. This man moves very slow , carefully 'all CAPS'. Any Packer fan certainly has witnessed that as ' a fact for our lives ', as Packer fans. He's generally speaking not willing to take even a calculated risk as I've observed him but he has had his moments of whatb some will deem genious. :D

I hope that he's being fair to himself and still on his learning curve. His prime objective being. To guide our team to a possible Super Bowl win. AS we see our team today. Are we really there yet? I don't see it but we're 3 and 1 and there's time on our side this season as not alot will be determined until we're into the last 40% of our schedule. Just RELAX and enjot the ride Packer fans.

This is what I know. Winning a conference Championship is all about balance, timing and consistency. Confidence inspired in the teams players and coaching staff. Provided in terms of seeing results that have a return in the 'W' column. It's having a HC and staff that takes care of problems as soon as they arise pro actively and not just saying what he knows we want or need to hear. A HC and his staff and his GM that deals with adversity as it arises and 'nips it in the bud '. A Head Coach that has the parts and ensures that the teams GM ' is on task '. The Head Coach is on the firing line as the first man that looks good or bad depended on how much support he gets from the man that must supply him with the talent needed to defeat the opposition. That would be the team we see in Green Bay or HC Michael Murphy ( MM ) and his GM Ted Thompson ( TT ).

A team approach with all hands on board and that, with lofty sights in mind or otherwise. A realistic approach to seeing objectives achieved. All players on that team ( a GM and his choice of HC and his staff and all team players ) working very hard as a collective; acting positively and supportively ' on the same page ' in terms of objectives.

If it's not working a ' fix it now ' approach may come at a huge cost and with all respect for those of you that totally love our GM, that's far and removed or not as I view Ted Thompson.

It's by far generally, just a wait and wait even more to see what TT will or won't do. Personally I've desired TT to be a tad more agressive. That's just my personality coming forward. I"ve long past given up hoping for TT and anything. I predict that it will be as we've always seen for any near future scenario involving team growth or reaction to adversity.

As a Packer fan I must now weigh in with Ted Thompson's personality and be very patient. Enjoy just, all ' he decides ' to give to me. Im right where I need to be or to enjoy the best our team has to offer and not be wildly optimistic.

Specific to the issue and concern regarding of our running game, or a closer examination of what he's already put in place. I believe that TT see's and hopes that a real prospect will presently be coming through in new addition Starks. TT may continue with the dual RB approach as MM and he see best for our West Coast Offense. Eventually adding the talent of Starks (lets be positive) to the production we've enjoyed with Ryan Grant when and hopefully he returns at 100%.

Till then it's just what it is. I know that that MM has to have the parts to ask his GM Ted Thompson for more if he needs more for his offensive game plans. Packer fasns are hungry to see their team get to the upper echelon in the NFL. To not go just so far and flop. On that note I want our GM to be on the job every waking moment of every day. Positive or ' Pro Active '. Always looking to improve our team. I want TT to see only one short or long term objective. To satisfy Packer Nation with a Super Bowl berth before the good parts TT does have in place gather rust.

I know that TT can be aggressive. I loved the move he made to add CB Charles Woodson to our roster. That move gave me real hope that TT was a ' go for it ' GM. Aaron Rodgers fell to us in the draft. TT knew he needed a solid College QB prospect with the tools and winning attitude to eventually replace Brett Favre. The reality of that move was one that set aside the now for the future. I believe the best move I've seen TT make was bringing in Charles Woodson. A solid FA signing and an aggressive move that has turned out very well for our team.

Do we need a solid RB now? Yes we do. Will TT wait and see what the results will be as the RB stable exists? I believe that will be it based on this man's ways. He may tweek the position a wee bit but make an aggressive move soon? Nope he'll stand pat unless he sets up a deal that is only in favor of his ways or personality. This man isw ultra conservative and careful. Obviously his boss (s) are fine with the TT ways.

We ... 'the Packer fans', can go with a wish and a prayer or simply enjoy our team try their best to win the NFCN. That best has to be supported all throughout the Packer Organization and in terms of the karma we as fans may offer.

Y'all may as well relax in terms of wants. Our GM is Ted Thompson. 8-)

GO PACK ! ... GO !![/i]
Woodbuck, your entire post rests on an assumption; that there is a running back worth trading for who is available. All your rhetorical questions about whether Thompson is psychologically capable of making a trade like this are putting the cart before the horse.

Does anyone have any solid info that either Williams or Lynch is actually available?

" Woodbuck, your entire post rests on an assumption; that there is a running back worth trading for who is available. All your rhetorical questions about whether Thompson is psychologically capable of making a trade like this are putting the cart before the horse. " pbmax

Yup your correct pbmax and I'll take that one step forward. I do believer that TT is psychologically capable of acquiring one of these RB's and 'only' if so motivated?

Then there's 'the getting it done' or 'pulling the trigger', if TT is so motivated to acquire Williams (Carolina) or Lynch (Buffalo).

That being that the Panthers (Wiliams) or the Bills (Bills) have something we have and desire to fill certain need. That TT may indeed offer in return correspondingly for that teams need for either of these teams RB's, if indeed, one or the other RB's is 'in fact' available and TT covets either one of them and; or simply, the team that owns that RB's rights that TT likes agrees with TT in terms of 'a fair trade'.

Certainly alot of open questions and/or if's pbmax. Your point is valid.

I see it this way. A team should play their cards close to their chest in terms of getting the most retrurn of any player that may be available. NFL teams are well aware of the difficulties surrounding dealing with the Packers GM. The Silver Fox that he is, or as this Packer fan observes him to be.

With the recent news we're receiving RE: the sudden added adversity on the defensive side of the ball. That 'not good news', leads me to believe that we have to compensate moreso with a more prominant and consistent offense and specifically, keep the other teams defense on the field as long as possible.

We need to best and more realistically do that by improving our running game. We also know that MM likes that approach (to establish a running game), or at least, it seems it's been that way in our most recent past.

If that element of our offense doesn't improve sufficiently for MM and his staff and MM asks for help for his running game? We may then see TT make a serious move or a prominant player trade.

This would be a time related (game success or not related factor). A results related decision. It only remains to be seen what TT may or may not do and as a result our concerns here RE: our running game are moot and a distraction to just enjoying football. :lol:

GO PACK GO!

[Freak Out]

Hell....we need to trade for defense now. :)

[Joemailman]

Anybody still think we should have traded Hawk for Marshawn Lynch? I mean other than Desmond Bishop?

[woodbuck27]

Anybody still think we should have traded Hawk for Marshawn Lynch? I mean other than Desmond Bishop?

Given that TT actually desired or seriously considered RB M. Lynch of ' the Bills ' on our roster:

a) Did ' the Bills ' want or need AJ Hawk?

Fact: Few Bills fans favoured such a move as I observed this rumor going into it's early stages.

b) Would ' the Bill's GM ' or would any NFL Team's GM, buy into picking up a one dimensional LBer as we're now aware that AJ Hawk has shown to be in our latest defensive scheme?

c) Isn't it this?

AJ Hawk's skills would have to be a perfect fit for any NFL franchise given the money he would desire. ' Of course ', AJ Hawk wants to remain a Green Bay Packer. He's going to be paid very handsomely if he remains ' a Packer ' in 2011.

Adding this issue or considering the amount of money TT agreed to pay him in his present contract for 2011.

d) Wasn't that prospect of AJ Hawk to 'the Bills for RB Marshawn Lynch too complicated an issue? (i) Given both the Bills primary needs that arn't at LBer. (ii) Given the prospects in place for their future in that position, weighed against. One more solid LBer doesn't hurt a team except to fill a roster spot and detract from need elsewhere on the teams depth chart.

I do have ** a question.

If the Bills agreed to go for a trade for AJ Hawk straight up for RB Marshawn Lynch and when I did my own investigation into this rumor. I personally felt that unlikely all things considered. So more realistically: (i) AJ Hawk and another player. Say a TE or a secondary position player or (ii) AJ Hawk and a late round draft pick.

** Question **:

Could ' the Bills ', by NFL contract rules, have made a deal, contingent on
'the Packers' agreeing to pick up a large chunk of the salary 'the Packers' agreed to for next season for AJ Hawk?

I believe that this sort of arrrangement goes on in the NHL and MLB.

GO PACK GO!

[pbmax]

Just got a tweet that the Eagles are after Lynch now that McCoy is hurt.
PFT has that Eagle interest (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/10/04/marshawn-lynch-rumors-will-not-die/) and adds this from Schefter:


The Bills let it be known repeatedly they want to keep Lynch. But a report from ESPN's Adam Schefter Sunday makes you wonder.

"At one point last week, league sources said Buffalo seriously contemplated dealing running back Marshawn Lynch, but ultimately decided not to do it," Schefter writes. "For now, the Bills are planning on keeping Lynch past the NFL's Oct. 19 trade deadline."

If the source of Schefter's material is accurate, either the Bills don't have any idea what they are doing (entirely possible) or they are holding an unpublicized auction.

[pbmax]

I do not think NFL rules allow the trading of money, at least in terms of cash. But the Bills could ask Hawk to restructure and its possible the Packers could sign that contract, handle the bonus and then complete the trade.

But that puts all the risk on the Packers and doesn't seem wise. I do not remember a similar transaction taking place elsewhere. Plus, the Hawk rumors are less urgent now because the injured Bills linebacker, Paul Posluszny, is close to returning.

[Patler]

The Bills let it be known repeatedly they want to keep Lynch. But a report from ESPN's Adam Schefter Sunday makes you wonder.

"At one point last week, league sources said Buffalo seriously contemplated dealing running back Marshawn Lynch, but ultimately decided not to do it," Schefter writes. "For now, the Bills are planning on keeping Lynch past the NFL's Oct. 19 trade deadline."

If the source of Schefter's material is accurate, either the Bills don't have any idea what they are doing (entirely possible) or they are holding an unpublicized auction.

In fairness to the Bills, perhaps they decided at some point to keep Lynch before the season, and kept with that, but are reconsidering that decision now. Teams often re-evaluate their rosters after the first 4-6 games, and those that are going no where sometimes shake things up a bit. The Bills could be doing that, just as the Packers did when they released guys like Joey Thomas, Ahmad Carroll and Aaron Rouse who had significant roles on the team at the times of their releases. The Bills may be thinking it is time to move on, get what they can for Lynch and make changes.

They released Jamon Meredith yesterday. At one point they said he was pushing for a starting job. I would not be surprised to see more roster changes from them.