Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

UPDATE: Packers Cut Bishop, Signs with Vikings
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 20, 21, 22  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RashaanSalaami


Moderator
Most Valuable Poster
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 29880
Location: Jersey
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

incognito_man wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
I just hope it's the right move. We let Cullen Jenkins go at a time when a lot of us thought it was a good move, but it seemed a large part of our pass rush disappeared without him. And I know he was a freelancer, not assignment sure, but we haven't replaced him until this year with someone like Datone. He turned out to be a big loss that I don't think many of us expected.

(And yes, I know Neal was the successor, but he isn't at that level yet.)


but jenkins didn't do much after he left...

Neal had more sacks than Jenkins did last season in 11 games vs 16 for Jenkins.


His 1st season with Philly was fantastic. Arguably his best season to date.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
wgbeethree


Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 3159
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RashaanSalaami wrote:
incognito_man wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
I just hope it's the right move. We let Cullen Jenkins go at a time when a lot of us thought it was a good move, but it seemed a large part of our pass rush disappeared without him. And I know he was a freelancer, not assignment sure, but we haven't replaced him until this year with someone like Datone. He turned out to be a big loss that I don't think many of us expected.

(And yes, I know Neal was the successor, but he isn't at that level yet.)


but jenkins didn't do much after he left...

Neal had more sacks than Jenkins did last season in 11 games vs 16 for Jenkins.


His 1st season with Philly was fantastic. Arguably his best season to date.


He did what he always did. Started off a beast rushing the passer then disappeared while offering nothing in run support. Five sacks in his first five games that year then only a half in the final eleven. If football season only lasted a month Jenkins would be a HOFer.
_________________

TytybearsFan21 wrote:
Justo knows nothing about sportz

justo wrote:
I would be a terrible coach/anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dijatool


Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Posts: 363
Location: SoCal
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RashaanSalaami wrote:
incognito_man wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
I just hope it's the right move. We let Cullen Jenkins go at a time when a lot of us thought it was a good move, but it seemed a large part of our pass rush disappeared without him. And I know he was a freelancer, not assignment sure, but we haven't replaced him until this year with someone like Datone. He turned out to be a big loss that I don't think many of us expected.

(And yes, I know Neal was the successor, but he isn't at that level yet.)


but jenkins didn't do much after he left...

Neal had more sacks than Jenkins did last season in 11 games vs 16 for Jenkins.


His 1st season with Philly was fantastic. Arguably his best season to date.

Wide 9 effect? That first year the whole Philly DL was on fire.
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GBPACKMAN4LIFE


Joined: 17 Dec 2007
Posts: 18029
Location: Spokane, WA
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 1:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://twitter.com/Vikings/status/350308835119992832

Quote:
View photos of new #Vikings LB @Desbishop55 at http://t.co/HV4GSmDfwd http://t.co/J7xJGMd2xk




The Vikings put up a picture their newly-signed player running back a pick-six against their own team. Hahahaha.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wgbeethree


Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 3159
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GBPACKMAN4LIFE wrote:
https://twitter.com/Vikings/status/350308835119992832

Quote:
View photos of new #Vikings LB @Desbishop55 at http://t.co/HV4GSmDfwd http://t.co/J7xJGMd2xk




The Vikings put up a picture their newly-signed player running back a pick-six against their own team. Hahahaha.


Thought I noticed that. Thought, "No, they wouldn't would they?" Yup. Their new cast off pick sixing their old cast off. Hilarious.
_________________

TytybearsFan21 wrote:
Justo knows nothing about sportz

justo wrote:
I would be a terrible coach/anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McThreadski


Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Posts: 202
Location: On the Gold
PostPosted: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wgbeethree wrote:
RashaanSalaami wrote:
incognito_man wrote:
GoPackGo wrote:
I just hope it's the right move. We let Cullen Jenkins go at a time when a lot of us thought it was a good move, but it seemed a large part of our pass rush disappeared without him. And I know he was a freelancer, not assignment sure, but we haven't replaced him until this year with someone like Datone. He turned out to be a big loss that I don't think many of us expected.

(And yes, I know Neal was the successor, but he isn't at that level yet.)


but jenkins didn't do much after he left...

Neal had more sacks than Jenkins did last season in 11 games vs 16 for Jenkins.




His 1st season with Philly was fantastic. Arguably his best season to date.


He did what he always did. Started off a beast rushing the passer then disappeared while offering nothing in run support. Five sacks in his first five games that year then only a half in the final eleven. If football season only lasted a month Jenkins would be a HOFer.


The Ben Sheets effect. Ben would have been a HOF'er too if he could have just started pitching in July. I often thought they should have given half year deals worth a nice chunk of change vs. full years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blink


Joined: 05 Aug 2011
Posts: 723
Location: Denver, CO
PostPosted: Wed Jul 03, 2013 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've got some mixed feelings about this one, but ultimately I think it's probably for the best going forward. Was looking forward to getting some nasty back in our front seven, but it looks like the medical was just too risky. Leaves us with some suspect ILB depth though.

Hopefully we can get some real production out of that group this year, we desperately could use a few more big plays from that area.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jake1962


Joined: 01 Nov 2011
Posts: 43
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
Pugger wrote:
Pack4life7 wrote:
Our goal was to be more more physical of a team and we cut one of our most physical players Confused

Oh well. In Ted I trust.


He may have been a physical player but I would think speed would be a better goal in 2013. We have to stop the likes of AP, Bush, Megatron, Marshall and those 2 teams out west. Any speed Bishop had may have diminished because of that injury.


Very much this. Being physical doesn't help much if your other attributes aren't good enough to get you on the field.

I wouldn't necessarily characterize Bishop as especially physical, he's fiery and intense, but I wouldn't say he's especially physical.


His [Bishop's] other attribute is he can't get on the field. Because of injuries that is. Plus he really is terrible in coverage. He will be exploited by the Pack.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 9100
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jake1962 wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Pugger wrote:
Pack4life7 wrote:
Our goal was to be more more physical of a team and we cut one of our most physical players Confused

Oh well. In Ted I trust.


He may have been a physical player but I would think speed would be a better goal in 2013. We have to stop the likes of AP, Bush, Megatron, Marshall and those 2 teams out west. Any speed Bishop had may have diminished because of that injury.


Very much this. Being physical doesn't help much if your other attributes aren't good enough to get you on the field.

I wouldn't necessarily characterize Bishop as especially physical, he's fiery and intense, but I wouldn't say he's especially physical.


His [Bishop's] other attribute is he can't get on the field. Because of injuries that is. Plus he really is terrible in coverage. He will be exploited by the Pack.


Mainly because he isn't very fast and this latest injury robbed him of whatever speed he had. We need speedy LBers to get after QBs like CK and RG3 this season.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RashaanSalaami


Moderator
Most Valuable Poster
Joined: 18 Feb 2006
Posts: 29880
Location: Jersey
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bishop is not "terrible in coverage". That's simply just a lie. He's much better than what we expected him to be in those regards. He isn't elite, but pre-injury he was never really exposed. Our staff did put him in a position to succeed, but even when he had to play one on one, he fared pretty well. The concern now obviously is that his injury could have sapped some of his speed. Any loss of speed could be a cause for concern in that area.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
GoPackGo


Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 5252
Location: Sconnie boy
PostPosted: Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RashaanSalaami wrote:
Bishop is not "terrible in coverage". That's simply just a lie. He's much better than what we expected him to be in those regards. He isn't elite, but pre-injury he was never really exposed. Our staff did put him in a position to succeed, but even when he had to play one on one, he fared pretty well. The concern now obviously is that his injury could have sapped some of his speed. Any loss of speed could be a cause for concern in that area.


He was TERRIBLE in the 2011 game against San Diego. Now, I know Antonio Gates is going to the HOF, but my god.. I lost track of how many times he was torched that game.
_________________

R-E-L-A-X
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jake1962


Joined: 01 Nov 2011
Posts: 43
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RashaanSalaami wrote:
Bishop is not "terrible in coverage". That's simply just a lie. He's much better than what we expected him to be in those regards. He isn't elite, but pre-injury he was never really exposed. Our staff did put him in a position to succeed, but even when he had to play one on one, he fared pretty well. The concern now obviously is that his injury could have sapped some of his speed. Any loss of speed could be a cause for concern in that area.


I love his demeanor on the field, but yes he was pretty poor in coverage. Hell, we was the second worst in the whole NFL in 2011 for 3rd down conversions and TDs given up by a LB. That is not good.

All the ranting aside from Packer fans about AJ Hawk, in the two seasons before he was drafted the Packers ranked 32nd and 29th vs. TEs. After drafting him they ranked 2,16,6 & 3 in 2006 through 2009 respectively. In 2010 & 11 when Hawk was removed on passing downs and Bishop was the starter the rankings dropped to 22 & 26. Last year without Bishop - 6th. Stopping the run is great, but it's a passing league.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MNPackfan32


Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 8261
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GoPackGo wrote:
RashaanSalaami wrote:
Bishop is not "terrible in coverage". That's simply just a lie. He's much better than what we expected him to be in those regards. He isn't elite, but pre-injury he was never really exposed. Our staff did put him in a position to succeed, but even when he had to play one on one, he fared pretty well. The concern now obviously is that his injury could have sapped some of his speed. Any loss of speed could be a cause for concern in that area.


He was TERRIBLE in the 2011 game against San Diego. Now, I know Antonio Gates is going to the HOF, but my god.. I lost track of how many times he was torched that game.
Laughing Laughing That is the exact game I always think of too! It was tough to watch. Plus, opposing QB's didn't have to pick on Bishop in 2011, that's what Tramon was for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 12996
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RashaanSalaami wrote:
Bishop is not "terrible in coverage".


In 2010, you are right. But 2011 he wasn't terrible but he was definitely below average. Dom and company put him in position where he wouldn't be exploited that much for a reason. Our defense benefited from having a guy like Jones in there that can play far from the LOS and not be lost.
_________________
@PJHotel_
Uglystik1072<---Gamertag

Sig brought to you by Justo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48556
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ugLymayNe wrote:
RashaanSalaami wrote:
Bishop is not "terrible in coverage".


In 2010, you are right. But 2011 he wasn't terrible but he was definitely below average. Dom and company put him in position where he wouldn't be exploited that much for a reason. Our defense benefited from having a guy like Jones in there that can play far from the LOS and not be lost.


Bishop's strength really seems to be as a run defender, I take it.

Funny how most thought that Jasper Brinkley was a good run defender basically because of his size and how hard he hit people, but that couldnt be further from the truth. He was the worst MLB in football in terms of missed tackles. This is where the Vikings should see improvement.

If Bishop is truly as bad in coverage as being portrayed, he will leave the field in nickel and Erin Henderson will slide into the MLB spot. Henderson has done this before, being a base WLB and a nickel MLB. I would anticipate that the Vikes would prefer Henderson to be a three down player to call defensive signals and wear the head set.

I dont think its an ideal situation for the Vikes, MLB is still a long-term need but I think the benefit of Bishop as a run defender will be important for this defense. The Vikes really have one three down LB (Greenway) and two 2 down LBs.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 20, 21, 22  Next
Page 21 of 22

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group