Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, cannondale said:

You don't want me to consider, you want me to say Bak will be in the starting lineup Day 1. I don't believe he will. That's a viewpoint. My viewpoint. There are many that share that viewpoint. Could he possibly be at the top end of recovery time ?? Sure. Is it worth risking Rodgers collarbones ? No. At age 29, and with the Packers conservative medical staff, and to protect the massive monetary investment, could Bak be looking at September - November ?? Absolutely. You don't want to hear that viewpoint. And you continue to ignore that there is a need at RT as well

When did I say there is no need at RT?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, cannondale said:

You don't want me to consider, you want me to say Bak will be in the starting lineup Day 1. I don't believe he will. That's a viewpoint. There are many that share that viewpoint. Could he possibly be at the top end of recovery time ?? Sure. Is it worth risking Rodgers collarbones ? No. At age 29, and with the Packers conservative medical staff, and to protect the massive monetary investment, could Bak be looking at September - November ?? Absolutely. You don't want to hear that viewpoint. And you continue to ignore that there is a need at RT as well

Totally agree Cannon.  Highly doubtful he is back day 1.  Unfortunate the injury happened so late in the season.  Nov timeframe seems realistic.  Yah our OT situation is pretty dire at the moment.  We'll need at least one possibly 2 new guys.  Turner and Jenkins will probably be the starters I'd imagine as of now.  Bak won't be fully 100% recovered until '22.  Too bad we don't have any cash.  Some capable FA's out there.  We'll be drafting some OT's for sure.  Either one up high or  take a couple of middle/late round stabs.  OT IDL CB biggest needs we have currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, packfanfb said:

I'm predicting 3 assuming NFL keeps the new IR rule from last year.

Refresh me on the PUP list.  If he starts on PUP, he has to miss the first 6 weeks, correct? Or am I mistaken, and he can return at anytime before 6 weeks and is on IR if he doesn't?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ThatJerkDave said:

Refresh me on the PUP list.  If he starts on PUP, he has to miss the first 6 weeks, correct? Or am I mistaken, and he can return at anytime before 6 weeks and is on IR if he doesn't?

 

If they keep him on the PUP, yes, 6 games. But assuming he's closer to playing, they could activate him then move him IR before Week 1 for 3 weeks assuming they keep that rule. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Youre the one fighting against an OT

Where did I state i was against an OT?

 

It is interesting that you state that I am for/against something that i never stated.  That seems to be the main tenet of your stance in this discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Where did I state i was against an OT?

 

It is interesting that you state that I am for/against something that i never stated.  That seems to be the main tenet of your stance in this discussion.

""CB is a pretty big need at the moment.  DL needs an addition.  OL is less of a need with 

Bahk - (Jenkins/Runyan) - (Hanson/Jenkins) - Patrick - Turner

Certainly need some depth additions""

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cannondale said:

""CB is a pretty big need at the moment.  DL needs an addition.  OL is less of a need with 

Bahk - (Jenkins/Runyan) - (Hanson/Jenkins) - Patrick - Turner

Certainly need some depth additions""

And where did I state I was against OT?

Thanks for supporting my view that you are fabricating my position based on things I never stated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, cannondale said:

Are you asking if I have a link again ?

I'm asking you to actually quote where I supposedly stated I was against OT.  It appears you can't, so your fabricating of my alleged stance on this topic is interesting.  

 

4 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I think we're done here

Why you want to leave the discussion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, squire12 said:

I'm asking you to actually quote where I supposedly stated I was against OT.  It appears you can't, so your fabricating of my alleged stance on this topic is interesting.  

 

Why you want to leave the discussion?

There's nothing left worth discussing. I gave my football viewpoint pretty clearly.  I'm not big on discussing agendas, fabrications or espionage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, cannondale said:

There's nothing left worth discussing. I gave my football viewpoint pretty clearly.  I'm not big on discussing agendas, fabrications or espionage

You not big on discussing fabrications, yet you were willing to spin the fabrication on my stance being against an OT ....something I didn't state. 

Got it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

You not big on discussing fabrications, yet you were willing to spin the fabrication on my stance being against an OT ....something I didn't state. 

Got it.

I also ripped the tags off my pillows this morning. And used an aerosal can in a way frowned upon by the US Government

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...