Rumors (PackerChatters)

[justanotherpackfan]

http://www.packerchatters.com/4ums/index.php?showtopic=1549


Ok...I got some whispers/rumors about possible trades......


The Packers are one of 4 teams that are talking to Oakland about Moss...Andrew Walters name also came up if a deal were to include Rodgers (but that scenario is far fetched, but it has been brought up). The Packers are one of the few teams that can obsorb Moss' contract...and he is extreemly receptive of playing for the Packers (since he can play the Queens twice a year, playing with Favre and the success he has had @ Lambeau).

One scenario was the Packers sending A-Rod and a #1 for him (Moss) and Walter, that I heard was rejected before they could finish the question. Thompson is NOT willing to part with a #1 pick for Moss....not when the pick looks to be a top 5 pick in a draft with ALOT of offensive playmkers (Peterson, Johnson, Lynch, Ginn Jr., Rice, Bush, Thomas, Brohm, Smith and Quinn) that the Packers (Thompson) feel they are lacking this year.


Al Harris' name has been rumored to these following teams (who I have been told contacted the Packers as late as last night)...SF, SD, Oak (as part of a Moss deal), MIA, AZ, Sea, NYG, and Dallas. The price would be at least 2nd rounder this year.

Nick Barnett COULD be moved in a Randy Moss deal, or if the deal was right. I also heard that Thompson may start to talk to Nick's people about a new deal before the season ends.

Driver name was brought up in a possible Moss deal, and it wasn't shot down right away, but the Packers would rather keep him and have a threesome of Moss, Driver and Jennings.

One of the packers DT's (Corey Williams, Colin Cole or Cullen Jenkins) could be moved by the trade deadline. They are getting some calls on them as well.

I was told the Packers have a MAJOR intrest in these college players... Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, Marshwn Lynch, Sidney Rice, Troy Smith, Brian Brohm, Dewayne Jarrett, Joe Thomas, and Ted Ginn Jr. Also, keep an eye on Zach Miller (TE, Arizona St.). I find the QB's interesting since the Pack really like Rodgers (if he not dealt, though again that is highley unlikely). It could be a smoke screen incase they have the #1 pick and want to trade out of it.

That is all for now...I should get more later and have more on this weeks War Room (airing this weekend on PC). I'll post as I get them.... (HAPPY MONDAY...blah, blah)

[Fosco33]

Moss for ARod and a #1 :crazy:

So, let's say Favre retires. We either bring in a vet or have the comedian - Martin - or another rook play next year for what? So Brett can win a few more games this year. SO instead of 6 wins - we get 7 or 8.

I'm glad TT had enough sense to stay away from that situation.

[MadtownPacker]

Why would the raiders want an unproven ARod when they havent even gave unproven Walters a chance?

I agree that moss would want to play in GB though. He has had his best games at Lambeau. Maybe he likes the grass, the one on the field. :cool:

[Brando19]

Man...I would LOVEEEE to see Moss in Green Bay! I would rather give a pick than Barnett, Harris, or ESPECIALLY Driver.

[potsdam_11]

So now it's rumors of rumors from another forum passing as news....

That story has the smell of a former JSO poster, who went by the name of Destinos... a very foul and phony smell....

[Fosco33]

I'd give-up Barnett, a 2nd and a 4th. I see NB wanting out of GB and agree that Moss would love to get a crack at the vikes twice a year.

But Pot is right. This is smelly.

[BallHawk]

These rumors are complete BS. Why the hell would the Packers trade their apparent future at QB for an aging, overpaid, and troublesome WR? Oh, wait, their getting Andrew Walter in the deal? Pull the trigger TT, Andrew's a star in the making. :roll:

And why would they trade DD after they just signed him to a new contract in the offseason?

Just complete fantasies.

[HarveyWallbangers]

This is what PackerChatters is good for. Horsecrap rumors that the clowns there just eat up. It's one of the main reasons I didn't stay there. If you question one of their "insiders," then the mob comes after you.

[MadtownPacker]

This is what PackerChatters is good for. Horsecrap rumors that the clowns there just eat up. It's one of the main reasons I didn't stay there. If you question one of their "insiders," then the mob comes after you.How dare you question the rumors on this forum that where rumored on another forum?? :mrgreen:

[cheesner]

This is the same insider who:

Reported we were trading for TO
Is a personal friend of Reggie Bush
Listed 20 names of players the Pack were interested in the 2nd Round. (list did not include Colledge or Jennings)
Listed about 30 players (talk about covering your bases) the Pack were interested in signing as FA. (Pickett and Manual were not on the list)
Reported (several times) that Arrington was about to sign - and likely with the Pack.
Reported that Bates was going to be the next HC.
Reported when MM became HC that Bates was hired but TT made him promise to keep it a secret - (I am not making this up). When Bates called and told Favre, TT got mad and rescinded the offer (SERIOUSLY! - and posters actually BELIEVED this!).
. . . etc.

It's a damn shame there are so many fools who actually listen to what this guy types.

[ND72]

I wouldn't believe a word that says...it sounds like complete BS. I have heard Al Harris has gotten some interest, but is not likely. I'm sorry if you don't like him, but Nick Barnett will not be traded. He has improved every week this year with the defense. We have a lot of new guys, and it'll take some time for them to gel. He leads the team in tackles, and has been a leader on the field and in the locker room. He won't be traded. And until he does something horrible, and Abdul Hodge does somethign spectacular, Abdul will be staying right where he is, and Nick will be staying right where he is.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Plus, trading in the NFL has increased, but there still aren't a whole lot of trades in the NFL. It's not baseball.

[Merlin]

Aaron Rodgers for Randy Moss straight up. Pull in a veteran backup QB in the mold of Doug Pederson. No draft picks, no other players. Rodgers would do well in Oakland, their QB is always a statue who can't throw...

[Zool]

I love the fact that the Packers are interested in the college kids who are all rumored to be first round picks in the upcoming draft. I would also like to point out that the Packers are interested in every defensive player projected to go in the first round of the upcoming draft.

[Sparkey]

Plus, trading in the NFL has increased, but there still aren't a whole lot of trades in the NFL. It's not baseball.

There would be more trading if the cap acceleration wasn't so harsh when you trade a player. Basically a trade is even worse than releasing a guy outright, as ALL of his remaining signing bonus is assigned to the year in which the trade occurs.

IF they would make is a 50/50 assignment of the remaining. 50% in the current year and 50% next year, it would be a bit easier for teams to stomach.

[cheesner]

Plus, trading in the NFL has increased, but there still aren't a whole lot of trades in the NFL. It's not baseball.

There would be more trading if the cap acceleration wasn't so harsh when you trade a player. Basically a trade is even worse than releasing a guy outright, as ALL of his remaining signing bonus is assigned to the year in which the trade occurs.

IF they would make is a 50/50 assignment of the remaining. 50% in the current year and 50% next year, it would be a bit easier for teams to stomach.
I understand the new CBA now allows teams to carry over to the next season a portion of the signing bonus monies at their discretion.

[Sparkey]

Plus, trading in the NFL has increased, but there still aren't a whole lot of trades in the NFL. It's not baseball.

There would be more trading if the cap acceleration wasn't so harsh when you trade a player. Basically a trade is even worse than releasing a guy outright, as ALL of his remaining signing bonus is assigned to the year in which the trade occurs.

IF they would make is a 50/50 assignment of the remaining. 50% in the current year and 50% next year, it would be a bit easier for teams to stomach.
I understand the new CBA now allows teams to carry over to the next season a portion of the signing bonus monies at their discretion.

You are correct.... see http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=cnnsi-dealornodeal&prov=cnnsi&type=lgns
for that very information. Thanks!

[esoxx]

Aaron Rodgers for Randy Moss straight up.


That trade scenario and hell freezing over should occur around the same time.

[PackerPro42]

It's not going to be anyone for anyone anymore. The trading deadline has past.

[Fritz]

I've skimmed over to PackerChatters a few times, and I find a lot of this supposed "insider" stuff - the real deal, really, I know a guy in the front office....and then it turns out, over and over, to be a bunch of crap. Like this stuff. The trade deadline has passed. Rodgers is still here, Harris is still here. Hell, everybody is still here.

I'd like to see the Packers trade Sh_ttenheimer for Leroy Butler, but it looks like that's about as likely as Randy Moss winning a good citizen award in Minneapolis.

[swede]

Plus, trading in the NFL has increased, but there still aren't a whole lot of trades in the NFL. It's not baseball.

There would be more trading if the cap acceleration wasn't so harsh when you trade a player. Basically a trade is even worse than releasing a guy outright, as ALL of his remaining signing bonus is assigned to the year in which the trade occurs.

IF they would make is a 50/50 assignment of the remaining. 50% in the current year and 50% next year, it would be a bit easier for teams to stomach.

One wonders why there is a penalty attached to trading a player anyway. I do not see how league parity or player interests would be harmed by allowing teams to transfer the cap advantages of a player's contact over to the trading partner.

Aren't players allowed to negotiate right-to-refusal clauses or no-trade clauses if they are concerned about such things?

Personally, I think that more trades would be mo' better. One good reason for a team to trade anyway is use the leverage of an area of team strength to fix an area where the team lacks depth or has an outright hole.

Another reason is to trade players is to send lockerroom problems packing, but even in that situation I don't see how trading a griping player is either a problem for the league or for the traded player. Yet the cap rules make it tough to swap players and improve teams.

Come to think of it, even in the old days before capology the NFL was never as trade-happy as baseball. Is it possible that the league keeps prohibitive cap rules in place so that teams have a more stable identity?

[Patler]

I'd like to see the Packers trade Sh_ttenheimer for Leroy Butler, but it looks like that's about as likely as Randy Moss winning a good citizen award in Minneapolis.

All kidding aside, didn't Koran Robinson receive some kind of local "good guy" award last year? Rastak?.....

[Rastak]

I'd like to see the Packers trade Sh_ttenheimer for Leroy Butler, but it looks like that's about as likely as Randy Moss winning a good citizen award in Minneapolis.

All kidding aside, didn't Koran Robinson receive some kind of local "good guy" award last year? Rastak?.....


Yes, he did.....he was voted by his teammates as the most inspirational player of something like that. I'm guessing he'd fall a couple votes short this year after letting his team down like he did. I'm surprised they didn't reposses the award....LOL.....