Greg C. Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Joe said: And in the meantime we get to deal with Tra Carson again. This guy must have some dirt on the organization or something. There HAS to be a better back out there... Ah, I see that Carson is back on the roster. All it means is that they still don't trust Dexter Williams. That's a shame. He should be ready for action in a regular season game by now, and apparently he is not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg C. Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 7 hours ago, St Vince said: Barnett wasn't suspended from that game because when they reviewed the tape it wasn't viewed as malicious intent. That hit on Devante looked way worse and dirty by Danny T and it was done out of malice due to frustration. The Barnett fine was justified but I don't think he should have been suspended because I don't think he really tried to maliciously hurt Williams, looked like he was trying to get in on the play. I disagree with you (and the league) about the lack of malicious intent, but going forward, I think the NFL needs to forget about intent anyway, and make players lose time on the field for that kind of play because it is dangerous. The new rule about roughing the passer last season had nothing to do with intent, and as horrible as that rule was at first, the defensive players have adjusted, and the refs have mostly figured it out. Maybe if a star running back gets hurt like Williams did, the league will consider changing the punishment, but it shouldn't have to come to that. The players who make those hits always point out that football is a violent game. Fair enough, but there are rules to limit the violence, and you have to follow the rules, which this player did not do. (He WAS penalized, after all.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 (edited) Indeed, following what @Greg C. said, it is BECAUSE football is a violent, big-collision-based game, that it is especially important the rules are upheld. Edited October 6, 2019 by OneTwoSixFive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 5 hours ago, Greg C. said: Ah, I see that Carson is back on the roster. All it means is that they still don't trust Dexter Williams. That's a shame. He should be ready for action in a regular season game by now, and apparently he is not. either that or they want to split carries between the two. I suspect Carson is RB3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 18 minutes ago, Joe said: either that or they want to split carries between the two. I suspect Carson is RB3. And Vitale? 3RB and 1FB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 Missed it by that much... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 18 minutes ago, packfanfb said: Missed it by that much... Way too early to say if that is a good thing or a bad thing. Mack is a great player, no doubt, but got Gary and Savage. Right now, that looks like a deal we would have wanted to make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgbeethree Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, Golfman said: Way too early to say if that is a good thing or a bad thing. Mack is a great player, no doubt, but got Gary and Savage. Right now, that looks like a deal we would have wanted to make. Don't forget to factor in the contract Mack got. It's pretty much Gary, Savage, Z, and Preston for 4 years versus Mack for 6. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tperk Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 4 minutes ago, wgbeethree said: Don't forget to factor in the contract Mack got. It's pretty much Gary, Savage, Z, and Preston for 4 years versus Mack for 6. But I doubt that we end up with pick #12 if we have Mack last year. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 1 minute ago, Tperk said: But I doubt that we end up with pick #12 if we have Mack last year. Still might have gotten Gary though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopackgonerd Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 11 minutes ago, Tperk said: But I doubt that we end up with pick #12 if we have Mack last year. Because it would be traded away Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 Yeah, Glazer is an idiot there who doesn't understand how draft picks work. Derrrrr, the Jets and Niners and Packers had the 3rd and 2nd and 12th overall picks because they didn't have Mack. Idiot. Niners with Mack probably finish with the 9th overall pick. Jets with Mack probably finish with the 12th overall pick. Packers with Mack probably finish with the 20th overall pick. If the Niners/Jets both offered first round picks, the Raiders certainly would have traded with either of them over the Bears. I'll take 10 years of Gary and Savage and 4 years of P and Z Smith and Amos over Mack. Sorry. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoremore Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 Heard today that Gute did indeed offer up 2 1st rounders to try to land Mack. Oak chose the Bears offer because they though they would yield higher picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted October 7, 2019 Author Share Posted October 7, 2019 Aaron Nagler: Packers win big game, handily, without Davante Adams. Twitter: The Packers should definitely trade for a wide receiver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikebpackfan Posted October 7, 2019 Share Posted October 7, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, Scoremore said: Heard today that Gute did indeed offer up 2 1st rounders to try to land Mack. Oak chose the Bears offer because they though they would yield higher picks. Is this new news? I swear we had heard this as a fairly solid rumor way back when it all went down. Edited October 7, 2019 by mikebpackfan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.