Jump to content

NFL News & Notes


Leader

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

Um, yeah, Damarious, about that trade, yeah, um, we're gonna need you to give Outpost a call pronto.  Yeah, that'd be great.

 

When does Randall come out and say he was also one of the worse first rounders Green Bay has taken too?

Kind of need that to happen first before getting traded for Kizer....

Edited by Green19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Green19 said:

When does Randall come out and say he was also one of the worse first rounders Green Bay has taken too?

Kind of need that to happen first before getting traded for Kizer....

This really isn't true though he was not one of the worst 1st rounders or even close. He played ok and had some injuries. None of us know how bad he was in the locker room though. That is the key and is he biggest reason he is gone. too bad really unless he was a cancer he had some ok skills that would have saved us from drafting more DB's in the last 2 drafts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

This really isn't true though he was not one of the worst 1st rounders or even close. He played ok and had some injuries. None of us know how bad he was in the locker room though. That is the key and is he biggest reason he is gone. too bad really unless he was a cancer he had some ok skills that would have saved us from drafting more DB's in the last 2 drafts.

His statement was worse trade in packer history... so I’m looking at it from historical  perspective too.

He may not be the worst, I get that...but he is one of many that are bad. One good/great year and being decent on terrible defense doesn’t save him from being a bad first rounder. At least in my eyes.

History has a way of simplifying things, fairly or unfairly . You’re either good or bad. Randall was “bad” one reason he got traded... wasn’t good enough for the team to put up with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Green19 said:

His statement was worse trade in packer history... so I’m looking at it from historical  perspective too.

He may not be the worst, I get that...but he is one of many that are bad. One good/great year and being decent on terrible defense doesn’t save him from being a bad first rounder. At least in my eyes.

History has a way of simplifying things, fairly or unfairly . You’re either good or bad. Randall was “bad” one reason he got traded... wasn’t good enough for the team to put up with him.

Sorry i just thought you meant he was a real bad first rounder. And well he wasn't close to Ahmad Carrol bad. Kid can play but he's a meat head. It was a bad trade Gute gambled and we lost. Is what it is, I myself cut my loss on this we are past it who cares what the kid thinks and with his response which I get it also affirms why he is not here. If talent outweighed his locker room position he would still be in GB.

Edited by PACKRULE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

what if the alternative was "cut DR and get nothing" - was it still a bad trade?

Edit. Wait I don't wanna go there with some of the people that post here lol

Edited by Norm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

what if the alternative was "cut DR and get nothing" - was it still a bad trade?

Yeah that is true getting something is better than nothing. I would have had to believe we could have gotten back a conditional pick or something though rather than the player. I think the gamble really was that MM could do something with the kid. Challenge was MM was getting a massage hahaha. I get what you are saying though Incog. It's easy to second guess when i have hindsight. Considering our back up woes over the last few years I also get the gamble too.

Edited by PACKRULE
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

Yeah that is true getting something is better than nothing. I would have had to believe we could have gotten heck a conditional pick or something though rather than the player. I think the gamble really was that MM could do something with the kid. Challenge was MM was getting a massage hahaha. I get what you are saying though Incog. It's easy to second guess when i have hindsight. Considering our back up woes over the last few years I also get the gamble too.

It’s also taking a gamble on a high rated QB prospect. The fact is GB isn’t going to get many bites at those types... and hasn’t historically.

They thought they were buying low on a prospect that had the POTENTIAL.

He couldn’t put it together... happens. It’s not a bad trade. They had their report on Kizer they thought he could be something... in two offseasons he didn’t get it done. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Green19 said:

It’s also taking a gamble on a high rated QB prospect. The fact is GB isn’t going to get many bites at those types... and hasn’t historically.

They thought they were buying low on a prospect that had the POTENTIAL.

He couldn’t put it together... happens. It’s not a bad trade. They had their report on Kizer they thought he could be something... in two offseasons he didn’t get it done. 

Yeah, yeah it was. 

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...