Jump to content

Random Packer News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Leader said:

Interesting choice. He's certainly the biggest name of the QB's after Love. You'd think one of the lesser knowns would be the first to go.

They did Bortles a solid by letting him find work elsewhere. This is an example of the front office being human. It marginally hurts the Packers and potentially greatly helps Bortles. A selfless move by Gute.

Edited by incognito_man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Leader said:

Interesting choice. He's certainly the biggest name of the QB's after Love. You'd think one of the lesser knowns would be the first to go.

No need to keep the 'if Rodgers doesn't show' insurance policy when Rodgers in camp. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, R T said:

No need to keep the 'if Rodgers doesn't show' insurance policy when Rodgers in camp. 

True - just saying, there were lesser known / accomplished names on that QB list.  Who knows. I'd read that Benkert was throwing a good ball - perhaps he outshined Bortles.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

Make sense to trade Funchess to Houston as part of the Cobb deal?

IMO yes! He's now at best the 5th WR if he beats out Rodgers otherwise 6th. Either way, no sense in keeping him. Plus we save 1.2 million in cap space. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Old Guy said:

IMO yes! He's now at best the 5th WR if he beats out Rodgers otherwise 6th. Either way, no sense in keeping him. Plus we save 1.2 million in cap space. 

 

We "save" it whether or not he is traded or gets released.

To me, though, it seems like a nice move as part of the package for the Texans.  Here's a WR who doesn't play specials, and will be at best our 6th WR.  We were going to cut him, but now that decision is yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, vegas492 said:

We "save" it whether or not he is traded or gets released.

To me, though, it seems like a nice move as part of the package for the Texans.  Here's a WR who doesn't play specials, and will be at best our 6th WR.  We were going to cut him, but now that decision is yours.

He makes the Texans roster though and probably becomes #2 or #3. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

IMO yes! He's now at best the 5th WR if he beats out Rodgers otherwise 6th. Either way, no sense in keeping him. Plus we save 1.2 million in cap space. 

 

You're sure Funchess at 27 isn't better than Cobb at 31? Hell, are we sure Funchess isn't better than EQ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're sure Funchess at 27 isn't better than Cobb at 31? Hell, are we sure Funchess isn't better than EQ?

This ^

I'd prefer we give Funchess a full TC & PS to show if or what he's still got.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're sure Funchess at 27 isn't better than Cobb at 31? Hell, are we sure Funchess isn't better than EQ?

Nope not at all, in fact, I'd be surprised if he was not, but the Cobb thing seems inevitable! I am sure Funchess is not better than Adams, MVS and Lazard however. Then you throw in Cobb who is going to get reps and targets because 12 said so. Now he's the #5 guy on our roster, if he's better than A. Rodgers. I'd rather have Rodgers getting whatever reps he can get than Funchess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

You're sure Funchess at 27 isn't better than Cobb at 31? Hell, are we sure Funchess isn't better than EQ?

I'm pretty sure he's better than both.  I'd sure like to see him in camp before shipping him off.  Ship off EQ ... you know he will only disappoint in the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I'm pretty sure he's better than both.  I'd sure like to see him in camp before shipping him off.  Ship off EQ ... you know he will only disappoint in the end.

Funchess has disappointed at every stop he has made and is the reason he is in GB on a veterans minimum deal. Let not make him out as some WR he is not, he is nothing more than a glorified camp body. 

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...