PDA

View Full Version : Darrell Jackson To GB?



Reggie 92
03-29-2007, 06:02 PM
San Francisco and New Orleans are teams with interest in acquiring WR Darrell Jackson, and there is speculation that a reunion with the former Seattle executive who chose Jackson in the third round of the 2000 draft, Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson, could happen via trade.

Source: Ben Maller, Fox Sports


Not that I follow the NFC West or the Seachickens very intensely but D. Jack has always seemed like a high character, moderate to slightly above average WR. I say bring him in....but any "rumor" linking Thompson and the word "trade" which I will assume means parting with a draft pick generally results in NOTHING..but thought I would share regardless.

MTPackerfan
03-29-2007, 06:09 PM
San Francisco and New Orleans are teams with interest in acquiring WR Darrell Jackson, and there is speculation that a reunion with the former Seattle executive who chose Jackson in the third round of the 2000 draft, Green Bay general manager Ted Thompson, could happen via trade.

Source: Ben Maller, Fox Sports


Not that I follow the NFC West or the Seachickens very intensely but D. Jack has always seemed like a high character, moderate to slightly above average WR. I say bring him in....but any "rumor" linking Thompson and the word "trade" which I will assume means parting with a draft pick generally results in NOTHING..but thought I would share regardless.


The infamous "there is speculation". By whom, the person writing this, by people in the know, by "my sources". Pretty iffy sounding to me.

retailguy
03-29-2007, 10:37 PM
On one hand this makes sense. Jackson is a good receiver, not great, but good. We need a hole filled, and a good receiver does that.

That being said, Thompson wouldn't probably part with a draft choice high enough to obtain him.

I'd support this. He'd be a GREAT complement to Driver and Jennings. Either a #2 or a #3.

So, since I like it, it'll NEVER happen. :roll:

Bretsky
03-29-2007, 10:46 PM
On one hand this makes sense. Jackson is a good receiver, not great, but good. We need a hole filled, and a good receiver does that.

That being said, Thompson wouldn't probably part with a draft choice high enough to obtain him.

I'd support this. He'd be a GREAT complement to Driver and Jennings. Either a #2 or a #3.

So, since I like it, it'll NEVER happen. :roll:


my thoughts exactly; this makes way too much sense :lol:

CaptainKickass
03-30-2007, 11:49 AM
Living in Seattle -I heard this rumor some time ago - but with no reliable sources to confirm, I just said "whatever"

D-Jack is pretty good. I kinda see him as "another" WR like we already have in Jennings, and Driver.

It'd be kinda like having the same receiver at all three positions, just at different points intheir career. D-jack is kinda like Driver when Walker was the "#1" receiver. He just shuts up and plays and scores TD's rather regularly.

Position: WR
Height: 5-11
Weight: 201
Born: 12/06/1978
College: Florida
NFL Experience: 8

Last season was his best yet:
63 receptiaons
956 yards
15.2 yards per catch average
longest catch was 72 yards
AND he had 10 TD's. (his only double digit TD season)

:D

esoxx
03-30-2007, 11:51 AM
Those 10 TD's would look awfully good in one of the Packers greatest areas of need: Red Zone Production.

Never happen.

b bulldog
03-30-2007, 05:31 PM
Drops too many balls for me

woodbuck27
03-31-2007, 01:40 PM
On one hand this makes sense. Jackson is a good receiver, not great, but good. We need a hole filled, and a good receiver does that.

That being said, Thompson wouldn't probably part with a draft choice high enough to obtain him.

I'd support this. He'd be a GREAT complement to Driver and Jennings. Either a #2 or a #3.

So, since I like it, it'll NEVER happen. :roll:

:) Really.

Bretsky
03-31-2007, 05:32 PM
Drops too many balls for me

He does drop a few too many, but IMO beggers can't be choosers when we have the likes of a Fraud, Ruvell Martin, C Hollyday, and some other unknown's fighting for the #3 spot.

Jackson is heads and heels above any of those guys. But does anybody expect TT to give up the draft pick needed to get him ? Maybe it'll happen, but I doubt it.

B

retailguy
03-31-2007, 05:33 PM
Drops too many balls for me

He does drop a few too many, but IMO beggers can't be choosers when we have the likes of a Fraud, Ruvell Martin, C Hollyday, and some other unknown's fighting for the #3 spot.

Jackson is heads and heels above any of those guys. But does anybody expect TT to give up the draft pick needed to get him ? Maybe it'll happen, but I doubt it.

B

Probably more likely than Moss, though. Seattle is more likely to be reasonable about compensation. Plus they know Thompson, and what he'll do and what he won't.

Still not likely to happen though, or it probably would've by now.

Bretsky
03-31-2007, 05:49 PM
Drops too many balls for me

He does drop a few too many, but IMO beggers can't be choosers when we have the likes of a Fraud, Ruvell Martin, C Hollyday, and some other unknown's fighting for the #3 spot.

Jackson is heads and heels above any of those guys. But does anybody expect TT to give up the draft pick needed to get him ? Maybe it'll happen, but I doubt it.

B

Probably more likely than Moss, though. Seattle is more likely to be reasonable about compensation. Plus they know Thompson, and what he'll do and what he won't.

Still not likely to happen though, or it probably would've by now.


I have a feeling IF anything happens it will go down on draft day or the day before.

Gosh, when am I going to be able to get rid of this dam Sig

retailguy
03-31-2007, 05:50 PM
Gosh, when am I going to be able to get rid of this dam Sig

2009? :lol:

Joemailman
03-31-2007, 06:41 PM
I'd give up a 3rd for Jackson, but nothing higher. He's missed 13 games the last 2 years, and this year's draft is loaded with good WR's.

retailguy
03-31-2007, 07:36 PM
I'd give up a 3rd for Jackson, but nothing higher. He's missed 13 games the last 2 years, and this year's draft is loaded with good WR's.

I don't think it'll take a 3rd when all is said and done. Jackson has been in the league for 8 years.

CaptainKickass
04-01-2007, 02:07 PM
Drops too many balls for me

You're thinking of "Bobble Engram" (Bobby Engram) - that guy's the dropping-est mofo on the ChickenHawks.

And talk about alligator arms!

:D

Merlin
04-01-2007, 10:47 PM
Isn't the the guy that couldn't catch a cold in Seattle? How many drops does he have in comparison to the balls he caught? Wasn't he also the guy that dropped balls in the Super Bowl?

Yeah, that's what we need.

The Shadow
04-01-2007, 10:56 PM
Not the type of difference maker that the team needs.

HarveyWallbangers
04-01-2007, 11:31 PM
I don't think Jackson's hands are that bad. Not great, but not horrible. KoRo was the guy who had a bad case of the dropsies up in Seattle.

Bretsky
04-01-2007, 11:53 PM
Not the type of difference maker that the team needs.


Depends if you want to compete now or rebuild slowly through the draft and youthful players. If you want to compete now Jackson is undoubtedly a starting Caliber WR, and in this day and age you certainly need 3 of those. We only have two. He would upgrade the talent at a position; if the price is right I don't see why we would not consider bringing him in unless TT does not like his contract.

CaptainKickass
04-02-2007, 04:03 PM
Lemme clarify -

1. Darrell Jackson = good player, good hands, decent NFL receiver.

2. Bobbie Engram (Or "BOBBLE" as I like to call him) = Drops the ball way more often.

:D

BooHoo
04-02-2007, 06:41 PM
I wouldn't trade a pick to get him, unless it is a 7th rounder.