Packers expected to sign Joique Bell

[Mondio]

There was no reason to keep seven wide receivers on the roster though as the coaching staff mostly used only three over the first few weeks of the season.

why not? not having another RB at this point hurts, but EVERYONE was clamoring about the depth at WR and we'd be losing all these great receivers. Obviously they saw something they liked, and so did the Packers staff. The beginning of the year was more about getting Jordy back going on the field, and getting Cobb and Adams back going off an injured year in which they mostly played. It was about establishing a type off offense they wanted to be able to run when they needed it. I'm not going to argue that they did a very good job with it it, because it mostly stunk, and it's as much on Rodgers' shoulders as anyone. Besides that, it probably had a lot to do with getting younger guys up to speed as well. In a season where Davis, Janis and even now Geronimo Allison are seeing the field fairly regularly, they aren't just sitting on the bench anymore.

You could argue they should have had more RB's in camp, but in the end, would they have been good enough to earn a spot? After Crockett, and even to me he was questionable, I don't think anybody did. SO what if they'd have kept them, we'd be in the same position now, a subpar RB available.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

why not? not having another RB at this point hurts, but EVERYONE was clamoring about the depth at WR and we'd be losing all these great receivers.

Not to toot my own horn, but I wasn't in that group of EVERYONE who thought that our WR group was top notch. That became pretty obvious to me during the course of last season with the way that the entire group played. Our leading receiver, James Jones, was unemployed before and after his stint with the Packers.

Without rehashing the pros and cons of every receiver on the team, I think that quite a bit of their success and apparent potential can be attributed to the stellar play of Aaron Rodgers. One might even say that it has been the lack of quality WR's (and TE's) that has finally led to the demise of Aaron's elite level of play as well as his confidence in himself and his teammates. While I like Cobb and Jordy, the potential of the "other 5", just hasn't been getting the job done consistently enough. Call it a hangover effect from last year, but when the receivers couldn't step up, AR started his slow progression downwards.

Seems like the only way this changes is either the WR's and TE's collectively get better, something I think most of us have been waiting for and may never happen with this current group. Or, that TT finally realizes that the offense is in need of upgrading their WR and TE positions and he does something about it. Aaron's NFL career is past the halfway mark, I hope he can regain his FHOF form, but I'm no longer confident he will be able to do that with the group of receivers he currently has.

 

[Mondio]

You didn't think it was going to be a tough decision to cut Abby, Davis, Allison at the end of training camp?

And until we start making the plays right there to make, and still end up losing consistently, I'm not buying the no talent excuse. Until I stop seeing plays with open receivers that Rodgers passes up for a 40 yard attempt, I'm not buying our receivers can't get open, because they have been. Not every guy is open on every play. But there is usually one or two, problem is, they aren't 40 yards downfield or something.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You didn't think it was going to be a tough decision to cut Abby, Davis, Allison at the end of training camp?

No on Allison or Abby. Allison was cut and then picked up for the PS. Abby was eventually cut and is still unemployed. Davis was a 5th round rookie, he wasn't getting cut. Janis, is still a Packer due to his special teams play....from last year.

Sure it was a tough decision for the Packers to decide which guys to keep, since they all had their pluses and minuses, but don't mistake that for "these guys are all top quality NFL WR's, who do we give up?"

 

[swhitset]

There was no reason to keep seven wide receivers on the roster though as the coaching staff mostly used only three over the first few weeks of.

. I will mildly disagree with this. I think the real mistake was not,and to some degree, still not using these receivers enough. The Packers seem to have a lot more offensive success when Rodgers spreads the ball around with multiple receivers on his the field at once. Unfortunately, he and/ or McCarthy seem to prefer the 3 receiver sets where Rodgers ignores anything underneath and just waits for the deep ball to rarely open up.

 

[Mondio]

No on Allison or Abby. Allison was cut and then picked up for the PS. Abby was eventually cut and is still unemployed. Davis was a 5th round rookie, he wasn't getting cut. Janis, is still a Packer due to his special teams play....from last year.

Sure it was a tough decision for the Packers to decide which guys to keep, since they all had their pluses and minuses, but don't mistake that for "these guys are all top quality NFL WR's, who do we give up?"

abby is still on an injury settlement and I think can come off it this week. I never said they were all top quality NFL WR's. I said they had all earned a spot. Put it this way, tell me what RB other than Lacy or Starks that seemed to earn a Roster spot with you this preseason over those 3 WR's I named? I don't remember any and Crockett was borderline for me. It wasn't just the WR position, it was the defensive backfield too, lots of young guys got fans and coaches and the media excited this preseason.

 

[Arthur Squires]

Unless he can learn the pass blocking scheme and immediately earn Aaron's trust, ain't no rookie back going to make an immediate impact.

Same was said about many others..including david johnson..truth is they are out there.

 

[GBkrzygrl]

It is beyond my comprehension why, after 2 1/2 games running a successful ball control offense, the Packers went back to their old ways as a downfield-first offense until it was too late. And when throwing short early, you'd think R. Rodgers was the only receiver on the field. I mean, how involved do you want to make that guy?

Montgomery's small smattering of snaps out of the backfield, where he's been a valuable component in the ball control passing game was by design and not A. Rodgers going rogue.

This is the first time I have been willing to contemplate McCarthy's departure; I don't think there's a future in banging your head against the wall until either the wall gives or you pass out.

That is the exact same thing I was thinking. "So you have a "RB" and you go back to the old scheme??? When MM had to get creative it worked. by all means, "If it works fix it."

 

[Deleted member 6794]

why not? not having another RB at this point hurts, but EVERYONE was clamoring about the depth at WR and we'd be losing all these great receivers. Obviously they saw something they liked, and so did the Packers staff. The beginning of the year was more about getting Jordy back going on the field, and getting Cobb and Adams back going off an injured year in which they mostly played. It was about establishing a type off offense they wanted to be able to run when they needed it. I'm not going to argue that they did a very good job with it it, because it mostly stunk, and it's as much on Rodgers' shoulders as anyone. Besides that, it probably had a lot to do with getting younger guys up to speed as well. In a season where Davis, Janis and even now Geronimo Allison are seeing the field fairly regularly, they aren't just sitting on the bench anymore.

You could argue they should have had more RB's in camp, but in the end, would they have been good enough to earn a spot? After Crockett, and even to me he was questionable, I don't think anybody did. SO what if they'd have kept them, we'd be in the same position now, a subpar RB available.

It was pretty obvious that the Packers coaching staff tried to establish an offense predominantly using only three wide receivers in Nelson, Cobb and Adams early this season. Therefore there was no reason to keep seven players at the position on the active roster. I'm fine with keeping some young guys to get up to speed but it's not necessary to have four of them on the 53.

I agree that it was tough to find a decent replacement for Crickett once he went down but there were still some decent options available at the point. In addition none of the running backs on the offseason roster being talented enough to play at the pro level is on Thompson as well.

Abby was eventually cut and is still unemployed.

The Packers and Abbrederis reached an injury settlement on October 27 paying him four weeks of his base salary, meaning he most likely won't be healthy for another two weeks.

Put it this way, tell me what RB other than Lacy or Starks that seemed to earn a Roster spot with you this preseason over those 3 WR's I named? I don't remember any and Crockett was borderline for me.

Once again, aside of Lacy and Starks there wasn't any running back on the Packers roster worthy of keeping on the 53. Thompson brought in a free agent in Pressley to address the position but unfortunately the general manager should have gone in a different direction and added another RB once he released the former Viking again.

 

[OCBP]

Janis isn't going anywhere I can assure you that. He's earned his roster spot just from special teams play alone. Someone mentioned getting rid of Barclay which should have happened years ago.

TT isn't the GM some of you guys proclaim him to be. Not only did he wait to late to bring in another RB? They cut the guy less than two games into his tenure they traded for. Last year when the WRs stunk what did TT do to help fix the problem? Absolutely nothing. How about the middle lb situation? They tried to fix it by sticking the best pass rusher o the team there. Some of you guys need to take off the blinders and wake up smh. The management of personnel has been the downfall of this team. You cut future HOF Charles Woodson in favor MD Jennings because you didn't want to pay him? Overpayed and Re signed Brad Jones to be a starter? Overplayed Aj Hawk? Let CullenJenkins walk in his prime? Let Casey Hayward walk? Still overpaying for James Sarks? He makes just as much as half a dozen guys who actually start btw. Took Devante Adams over Allen Robinson? Who most of us never even heard of at the time. Allowed slocum to run the special teams when he should've been gone years ago as well. Then we wonder why we can't get back to the SB?

TT & MM have had the luxury of two HOF QB's in succession. This is why they have been successful. Without #4 and #12, they are average and would have been gone.

 

[Mondio]

why is everyone on Thompson's *** for cutting Kniles Davis 2 weeks after trading for him? You'd rather he kept him and given up a draft pick for a player that they saw quickly offered us nothing? The guy was with like 4 teams in 2 weeks and ended back with the team that got rid of him in the first place after trying out some other guys and having their top 2 running backs go down. Davis isn't anything special, i'd rather line up WR's back there, and it shows the pickings are pretty slim.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

why is everyone on Thompson's *** for cutting Kniles Davis 2 weeks after trading for him? You'd rather he kept him and given up a draft pick for a player that they saw quickly offered us nothing? The guy was with like 4 teams in 2 weeks and ended back with the team that got rid of him in the first place after trying out some other guys and having their top 2 running backs go down. Davis isn't anything special, i'd rather line up WR's back there, and it shows the pickings are pretty slim.

Personally, I wasn't on his *** for cutting Davis. What I had a problem with was how long TT waited to even find someone, that turned out to be nothing, as well as fielding a team back in September with only 2 capable RB's. The way that whole scenario played out of trying to find a 3rd RB, which still has not been accomplished, is right up there with the Sitton move IMO.

 

[Mondio]

Guys in Sittons situation get cut for nothing every single year all across this league. We can talk about what he was worth all we want, but it doesn't mean he could have gotten anything. Considering how he's played this year for the bears, I would t be surprised to see him with a new team next year too. And there is zero team without weakness. When final cuts came I don't remember too many RB worth signing being available

 

[Half Empty]

Guys in Sittons situation get cut for nothing every single year all across this league. We can talk about what he was worth all we want, but it doesn't mean he could have gotten anything. Considering how he's played this year for the bears, I would t be surprised to see him with a new team next year too. And there is zero team without weakness. When final cuts came I don't remember too many RB worth signing being available

Not sure what you mean by 'Sitton's situation', but if that's someone who's been a long-time starter, three time Pro Bowl and three time All Pro second team immediately prior to being cut, can you refresh my memory as to who like that gets cut every single year all across the league?

 

[Mondio]

Not sure what you mean by 'Sitton's situation', but if that's someone who's been a long-time starter, three time Pro Bowl and three time All Pro second team immediately prior to being cut, can you refresh my memory as to who like that gets cut every single year all across the league?

Guys getting long in the tooth, and get axed when the team doesn't think their play is going to match their production. The timing of the cut is all that was "odd@. Apparently you've never heard of a cap causality? Every year, all across the league they happen. I promise Sitton isn't making any probowl this year. You think he is???

 

[Sky King]

Thompson may very well have lost a step or two. If Sitton had been earmarked for release sometime between the end of last season and right up through training camp, surely Thompson should have gotten a little something for him. Considering that the Bears were willing to pay Sitton handsomely; how quickly he was signed; and that he had fielded multiple offers from several teams would seem to indicate that he still had significant value. Yet, Thompson was not even able to secure a conditional draft pick in exchange for Sitton. Hardly a deft move by a well-seasoned GM.

 

[swhitset]

Guys getting long in the tooth, and get axed when the team doesn't think their play is going to match their production. The timing of the cut is all that was "odd@. Apparently you've never heard of a cap causality? Every year, all across the league they happen. I promise Sitton isn't making any probowl this year. You think he is???

Players make the Pro bowl all the time that don't deserve it.... once they get their name known they often keep getting the votes long past the time when they should.

 

[swhitset]

Thompson may very well have lost a step or two. If Sitton had been earmarked for release sometime between the end of last season and right up through training camp, surely Thompson should have gotten a little something for him. Considering that the Bears were willing to pay Sitton handsomely; how quickly he was signed; and that he had fielded multiple offers from several teams would seem to indicate that he still had significant value. Yet, Thompson was not even able to secure a conditional draft pick in exchange for Sitton. Hardly a deft move by a well-seasoned GM.

Which is why I still believe that releasing Sitton was not a serious consideration until it was too late to get a trade. I don't know the details, but I'm convinced more happened than what we know.

 

[PackerDNA]

And now Sitton's overrated a malcontent, blah, blah...
********.
Thompson blew this out his **** from start to finish.

 

[Mondio]

Yeah, it's too bad we don't have him on the bench too and have his salary.

 

[PackerDNA]

Yeah, it's too bad we don't have him on the bench too and have his salary.

Yeahkeeping him ahed of that all time great Lane Taylor was yet another screwup.

 

[Mondio]

Yeahkeeping him ahed of that all time great Lane Taylor was yet another screwup.

Because older guys never fall off and young guys never improve. People can judge the situation all they want back in training camp when it happened. At this point, i can't imagine anyone would want what Sitton is producing at his price over why we have.

Taylor isn't a probowl Sitton, and Sitton isn't playing like one either

 

[swhitset]

Because older guys never fall off and young guys never improve. People can judge the situation all they want back in training camp when it happened. At this point, i can't imagine anyone would want what Sitton is producing at his price over why we have.

Taylor isn't a probowl Sitton, and Sitton isn't playing like one either

Sitton hasn't been playing much at all lately.... I think I heard that he may be healthy again, but has missed a bunch already.

 

[Half Empty]

Players make the Pro bowl all the time that don't deserve it.... once they get their name known they often keep getting the votes long past the time when they should.

That's why I also included the 2nd team All Pro designations.

 

[HardRightEdge]

...but EVERYONE was clamoring about the depth at WR and we'd be losing all these great receivers.

Not everyone. I can't say I ever saw much of a future in Janis or Abbrederis; the flaws were considerable.

I never thought they kept 7 because they believed all of these guys represent valuable talents. It was because Nelson and Montgomery were coming off IR seasons, and if they had somebody else who could play last season Adams might have ended up there himself. Going with 7 represented an insurance policy.

As a result, a roster position at RB was sacrificed, with the thinking that Montgomery could sub in a pinch. They've used Cobb there as well, but I doubt that was the original plan, just something out of necessity.

It was not a bad plan until Montgomery was injured. Still and all, given how frequently RBs get injured, it's imprudent not to carry at least 3. Some teams carry 4, but with Montgomery that would not be a necessity.