Packer Notes: Chillar Still Hurting, Labor Stuff, Just Win Baby, and On Safeties
by Brandon on Oct 5, 2010 7:01 AM CDT
in Green Bay Packers News
Email
Print- The injury news just keeps coming for the Green Bay Packers. The Press-Gazette reports that LB Brandon Chillar's injured shoulder could be very serious. I'm not his biggest fan, but he is a step ahead of LB A.J. Hawk and LB Desmond Bishop in pass coverage. It sure wouldn't have hurt to have had him available last week when the Lions were piling up big yards in the short passing game.
- The Journal-Sentinel reported that QB Aaron Rodgers was approved as the team's player rep. I'm a little surprised, usually the rep is a not the team's franchise player (RT Mark Tauscher just finished a two-year term). They also gave the union the right to decertify, which seems to be the thing the players are doing this year. I plead ignorance to whether that's a good or bad move.
- Mike McCarthy talked about the lack of excitement by the players after beating the Lions and told everyone to get realistic.
You would have thought we lost in the locker room, and I think that is unrealistic and we need to get in touch with reality. We talk about winning and improving, and we won the game and we’ve got a ton of room for improvement.
- With S Morgan Burnett done for the year with a torn ACL, it's time to look around and see who's going to fill his shoes. During his press conference, Mike McCarthy was asked about all the usual suspects: Atari Bigby, Charlie Peprah, Derrick Martin, Anthony Levine (practice squad), and Jarrett Bush. And he didn't rule anyone out.
- One veteran name that just hit the street is former Eagles and 49ers S Michael Lewis. Niners Nation summed up the news as "good riddance." The 49ers secondary has been awful this season, and when it was suggested that Lewis would remain the starter but would share some snaps with rookie S Taylor Mays, he quit on the team. Way to put the I in team. Don't expect the Packers to invite him into Green Bay for a workout anytime soon.
63 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
What does decertification mean?
The JS article didn’t really explain it, just said that it could be used as a bargaining tactic, but what does it actually mean?
It's essentially voting to dissolve the Union
IE, if they get to an impasse and it looks like there’ll be a lock out, the Players Union can cease to exist and the players would be free to form another union.
http://www.unionfacts.com/articles/memberDecertification.cfm
I believe it also allows the players to individually sue the NFL if there is a lockout in the 2011 season too.
Thats the main reason they would de-certify!
But the union has alot of benefits they wouldn’t get, so I don’t know how good an idea it is.
its a very good idea for the players financially
due to antitrust laws protecting the nfl, the union as a body can’t do anything about the new cba, so they breakup unitl the new labor agreement. decertifying is happening all over the nfl right now.
Thome Walks-Off Sox, Twists Knife, Continues To Make Sox Brass Look REALLY Stupid - White Sox Season Recap
de-certifying
Is really good financially RIGHT now… How good will it look in 10 yrs when they have no money and are riddled w/ major health issues cuz the union no longer exists?! Then it doesn’t seem like such a good idea does it?!
Chillar
is supposed to be our coverage specialist, but I can’t help always seeing him getting beat on long pass plays. Happened twice in the Bears game. Good riddance.
I wouldn't say good riddance until you see what the guys behind him do
In this case it’s Hawk who is a liability in coverage and Bishop who’s worse. Trust me, the Packers will miss Chillar dearly.
by PackApologist on Oct 5, 2010 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions
can any of our LB's cover a TE
hawk had an INT on sunday, because he played disciplined and stayed in his zone. CB’s aren’t great tacklers and LB’s can’t cover WR’s or Greg olsen apparently. I expect Woodson to move to strong safety.
by Matthew Grassinger on Oct 5, 2010 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions
Greg Olsen is not the same as Finley
and actually, Philly’s Bradley seemed to be doing a pretty good job before he got concussed in week one.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
Lack of excitement? Well yeah, what did he expect? The team played like shit, and probably knew they played like shit. That is and was the reality.
And MM didn't think he coached like shit
Which is where the disconnect comes into play
+1
That’s NOT a win they can go home and savor. It’s a win and we’ll take it, but to let a team like Detroit stay with us is very unsuperbowl like. And MM thinks they should be proud?
by bigbill992001 on Oct 5, 2010 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, I really don’t understand his quote. Doesn’t make sense.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 8:39 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm happy they weren't excited
Packers fans had to watch the same game twice pretty much, but only this time we won. I know we’re the franchise that has said “Winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing,” but just like we were complaining last week, I would have been a little disappointed if we were gloating this week. Wait to celebrate for a win you can be proud of.
"You just don't know understand how frustrating this is"- Kevin Borseth
MM's coaching and motivational techniques
Often leave a lot to be desired. I’ve never been sold on his coaching ability, and think Rodgers was right when he suggested they spread the field more.
He certainly was. The way he picked apart the Bears defense was a thing of beauty. He’s clearly best when he gets into a rhythm. So let him spread it out, and develop one.
by packallday555 on Oct 7, 2010 9:59 AM CDT up reply actions
we can’t rely on give aways and bad calls all year, MM is out-smarting his google eyed ass again. I like the use of personal variety, but I agree with Rodgers. this is much like the 2008 Det@GB game, almost gave that one away because MM got cute.
by Matthew Grassinger on Oct 5, 2010 11:56 AM CDT reply actions
Yep. Spread the ball out, and let Rodgers pick the defense apart. What didn’t he like about what we did against the Bears (aside from penalties of course)? If Rodgers can develop a rhythm, our offense becomes almost unstoppable.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions
so yeah
RT @Jay_Glazer: I’m reporting seattle has traded for bills rb marshawn lynch for 4th in 2011 and cond pick 2012. Great move for ’hawks
by Nick Barnett's Afro on Oct 5, 2010 1:26 PM CDT reply actions
Wow…we couldn’t match that or do better? Ah well…maybe Starks will be shouldering the load after all if he can stay healthy!
It's likely
that the Bills made us a worse offer than they did the Seahawks considering that we had a definite need whereas the Seahawks probably didn’t as much, with Leon Washington, Justin Forsett, and Julius Jones on their roster.
What I’m interested in is if Seattle wishes to flip him or one of their other backs over to us for cheaper. We all remember the last time we traded with Seattle for a running back…
I’d take Forsett or Washington in a heartbeat.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 4:54 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't think Forsett is really that much different from Jackson
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
We're officially screwed then
I’m not saying there won’t be any action on the RB scene, but a 4th and a conditional… Nobody in the front office should’ve batted an eyelash at that.
The conditional pick is going to be the costly one.
I expect it’ll be a 2nd if Lynch runs for 1000 yds in "11. THe 4th isn’t the costly one, its the conditional pick that will be expensive. Lynch is getting there too late this season to really help much, but will have the ‘11 season to really prove himself. My guess is he’ll put up 1000 and 50 receptions and the conditional pick skyrockets!
If he runs for that many yards is a second a bad thing?
If we have RB who can consistently put up yards, then why blink at a 2? Really we are probably going to be spending a 2 or 3 on a RB in the next year or two anyways.
by PackApologist on Oct 5, 2010 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions
That won't happen this year, when we need it!
He’ll put up the yds in ‘11, not this year, when we would need him too. Seattle can wait, they are in rebuilding and aren’t going anywhere this year. We would need that THIS year, not next!
no way it'd be a 2nd
In fact: In exchange for Lynch, Seattle will send a fourth-round pick in the 2011 NFL Draft, and a conditional sixth-round pick in the 2012 draft that can become a fifth-round pick (according to ESPN’s Adam Schefter).
Seriously? I hope that’s inaccurate or something haha.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 4:55 PM CDT up reply actions
If in fact it was a conditional 6th I think we should have done it...
But remember Seattles 4th is more like our 3rd and the 6th more like a 5th to us. Haven’t heard the conditional part yet. Buffalo was saying a draft pick and a starter. Thats more like a 2nd and a 4th, than a 4th and 5th or 6th.
http://twitter.com/Adam_Schefter
well… thats a semi sorta kinda reliable source. but thats where I got it so…
this is disappointing
It’s hard to say how much ARodg lobbied for Lynch. Or perhaps he learned his lesson from Favre in how to get along – let TT do his thing and keep your mouth shut.
by gern blanston on Oct 5, 2010 3:20 PM CDT up reply actions
We can't we go after Jacobs
Maybe the Giants are willing to listen. They listened for Ryan Grant….=)
I meant why can't we go after Jacobs....
by Rodgers_for_MVP on Oct 5, 2010 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions
I think he's not being used properly in NY
I happen to live here and watch all the NYG games. The Gmen are totally mishandling this guy. He’s still got it, definitely more than Bjax.
If you ask me, he runs just like BJax, except he's 265, not 215!!!
He doesn’t run hard and he doesn’t punish the D for tackling him!!!
He takes to long to accelerate. He was great when the Giants offensive line was arguably the best in the league but their guys have declined, and haven’t been opening up holes like they used too. He’s the kind of runner who needs some space to get going (just like all the guys we have now). He wouldn’t get that here.
by packallday555 on Oct 5, 2010 4:57 PM CDT up reply actions
RBs
Unless someone begs TT to take a quality back off their hands (feel free to offer up McGahee, Baltimore!) for cheap, get used to the current backfield, and hope that Starks emerges as a player when he comes off the PUP list.
Prolly cuz he doesn't know the offense yet!
Just like Lynch would need a minimum of a month to learn the offense! and more likely 6 wks!
Prolly because we signed him for depth!
Just like Grant didn’t get a lot of carries when we signed him initially because we were giving Jackson and Wynn the opportunity to show they could handle the load!
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
.Not many players left from pre-TT,
and, I don’t see any reason to expect any losing seasons in the Pack’s foreseeable future.
Yep. we are screwed as long asTT is around.
TT bashers have been turning my stomach since 2006, at least.
-
The glass is way, way, way more than half-full.
by NorthStarr on Oct 6, 2010 12:56 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
+1
TT is still great. Just cause he doesn’t make a move like this doesn’t change that he has a GREAT eye for young talent!
And, given that, because it is true,
how can anybody fault him for wanting to develope that talent, for the Packers instead of for somebody else (read: re-singing his own), rather than participate in the high-risk, high-priced free agent market?
-
The glass is way more than half-full.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Deep Posts: Winslow not wanted in Tampa Bay?
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Juron Criner, WR, Oakland Raiders
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Gino Gradkowski, C/G, Baltimore Ravens
- Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring sold for $230K; Osi Umenyiora was not the buyer
- Tanier’s Team Reviews: The Kansas City Chiefs, via Todd Haley
