What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Packers Could Have Had Tony Gonzalez (1 Viewer)

Phurfur said:
Hipple said:
The chiefs are weird. All the early reports with the Giants said they were getting offered a 6th and seeking a 3rd. Can't believe they didn't take a third really.
KC fans should be outraged that they did not take a 3rd but no, it is Packer fans that are upset. I guess you guys are still OK with that John Hadl trade in 1974. Dan Devine was willing to go out and get that impact player, I guess that is the kind of GM you are looking for.
:lmao: Everyone in here criticizing TT doesn't seem to realize that he made the best offer in the whole league to get a player he wanted. That he didn't cave and vastly overpay (to the tune of more than twice what other teams offered) for a player that would have been a help - but not a need - is the mark of a good gm. Would I have liked to see Gonzo on the Packers? Absolutely! But criticism here should be aimed at Carl Peterson, not Ted Thompson.
While TT may come across as an #@$, at least he is moving the team forward.
13-3 last year to 3-3 so far this year :no:
Yeah, and I guess the fact that they stunk the year before they were 13-3 is long forgotten. I am by no means a Packer homer; however, even I can see that the Packers today are better then the team TT took over. They are young and talented and appear to be well coached. TT has them poised to move forward for many years to come. Sure they are banged up this year, but generally they have played well.Guess the TT haters will never see that.
 
A beat writer for the Packers just gave a little inside info on how the deal didn't go down. The Packers sent the official paperwork to the Chiefs, offering a third rounder with the presumption that a deal had been struck. Carl Peterson reportedly changed his demands to a second rounder 10 minutes before the trade deadline.

The radio host doing the interview of the beat writer, suggested that Peterson really didn't want to deal Gonzalez. Why else would he change his demands at the last minute, when his earlier request of a third rounder had been met?

Everybody's favorite source, Pro Football Talk, quoted a source saying this:

“Carl Peterson is a moron,” one source opined in the wake of news that Peterson led Gonzalez to believe that a deal would be done, and that Peterson then insisted on a second-round pick, rejecting one or more offers of a third-round selection.

“He should have found a way to get the deal done,” the source said. “The player is going to cost them $4 million next year. They don’t want that.”

 
Coulda woulda shoulda better luck next year Packers fans. Do you not hate when youR GM is just scared o make a move. I kinda do not think it would have changed the Packers outlook to much though but man would that be a tough offense to stop with TG there. I think the team that made the big blunder on TG was the Giants, they should have made the deal, it would have put them over the top IMO.
He is not afraid to make moves...but better not to make a move like this...then make a move for a WR you don't really need and give up what Jones did in Dallas.Lets see...the last 10 years of Cowboys football...66-68...3 playoff appearances...0 postseason wins.
 
Posted it in the Tony G thread.But here you go. While I would have liked having him in...and a 2nd does not seem that high really. Its telling that no other team was willing to do it...that the article states GBs 3rd round offer was the highest one. That Tony G thought they were asking too much. That he was pissed they did not deal him for a 2nd. In addition...are the problems of the Packers solved right now if they would have traded for a TE? Is Tony going to convert to an Olineman? Is he going to rush the passer? Is he going to plug the holes in the rush defense?Its a nice on paper move for the offense...but really does not do much to help the team right now in where they need help.Oh...and the conflicting side of the report was Mort saying Tony G did not want to go there either. So some sources say he would have...others say no.Im more pissed Thompson was not active trying to find some help on the Dline.
Wow. Homer shonuff blindly supporting his team management. I am shocked. The packers could not have upgraded their OL or D with this move, but that does not mean they could not improve their O. When your D is weak and you cannot run the ball, it might help if you can get more 1st downs and scoring more. And anyone who says TGon would not help over Donald Lee is delusional. But this is shonuff we are talking about here, so not surprising at all. :shrug:
Wow...sweetness calling me a homer without actually reading.How is saying the team has other weakness and me saying Im pissed he did nothing to find help on the Dline just being a blind homer supporting management? :rolleyes: Anyone who thinks TE is such a big problem has no clue.But Im glad you just taking poor potshots at me happens on two boards now.No need to limit your schtick to just one place.
 
This should put to rest the banal comments from the peanut gallery that Thompson doesn't aggressively pursue free agents.
Not sure how. This adds more fuel to the fire that Thompson, unlike his mentor, isn't willing to make that one big aggressive move that could put his team over the top.
A TE would put this team over the top?
How much better was the Packer offense from '95 to '96? What was the biggest difference?
You gotta be kidding? What was the difference on that TEAM? Oh, how about Reggie White, Sean Jones, Leroy Butler. Got anyo of those type of players around here on D? Didn't think so.
Ask Favre how much difference Jackson meant to that 96 team.And the funny thing is the Packers didn't NEED a TE then. They already had a good one in Chmura. But Wolf didn't care. He wanted to give Favre as many weapons as possible. He understood that when an opportunity to be great presents itself, you go for the throat and make the necessary moves to make sure it happens. I just question at times whether Thompson has the same mentality. This is one of those times.
Between this and his refusal to trade his first round pick to the Browns two years ago so he could draft Justin Harrell, well, I think it's safe to say Thompson will never dare to be great. He'll only hope to be great. Which is fine. Just think this is a complete waste of an opportunity.
I think TT should keep the 2nd rounder....he needs to draft more Brandon Jacksons and Brian Brohms with that pick :popcorn:
Or Greg Jennings, or Collins, or Murphy right?You questioning his 2nd rounders make me laugh...as does your continued insistance on calling the picks of Rodgers, Brohm, and Flynn wastes.
 
Kitrick Taylor said:
A beat writer for the Packers just gave a little inside info on how the deal didn't go down. The Packers sent the official paperwork to the Chiefs, offering a third rounder with the presumption that a deal had been struck. Carl Peterson reportedly changed his demands to a second rounder 10 minutes before the trade deadline. The radio host doing the interview of the beat writer, suggested that Peterson really didn't want to deal Gonzalez. Why else would he change his demands at the last minute, when his earlier request of a third rounder had been met? Everybody's favorite source, Pro Football Talk, quoted a source saying this:“Carl Peterson is a moron,” one source opined in the wake of news that Peterson led Gonzalez to believe that a deal would be done, and that Peterson then insisted on a second-round pick, rejecting one or more offers of a third-round selection.“He should have found a way to get the deal done,” the source said. “The player is going to cost them $4 million next year. They don’t want that.”
Article today gave more from Tony G saying similar things that Peterson changed things at the last minute.Will not stop some from just bashing Ted Thompson though for not agreeing to the new deal when he had the chance.Won't stop a certain Bears fan from chiming in with more BS either.
 
Let's all hang TT out to dry. He refused to part with a draft pick to get Tony Gonzalez. What a moron. :kicksrock:

But wait, he met the Chiefs asking price only to have the asking price change at the last minute.

Peterson tells TG he will trade him for a third. He gets plenty of offers for a third; and at the last minute he demands a 2nd. Typical Peterson.

We spend numerous pages trashing TT for really no reason at all. Yet few bash Peterson.

From PFT so take it for what its worth.

PACKERS THOUGHT THEY HAD A DEAL FOR GONZALEZ

Posted by Mike Florio on October 15, 2008, 11:33 p.m.

Wow.

Not only were the Packers serious players for Chiefs tight end Tony Gonzalez, but the Pack also thought they had a deal.

According to Jason Wilde of the Wisconsin State Journal, the Packers drew up the paperwork that would have sent a third-round pick to Kansas City for Gonzalez, only to have the Chiefs back out ten minutes before the 4:00 p.m. EDT trading deadline, and demand a second-round pick.

Per Wilde, the Packers and Eagles offered a third-round selection for Gonzalez, and the Giants tendered a fourth-rounder.

The Falcons and Bills were willing to do more, but Gonzalez wanted to play for neither team.

Currently, the Falcons and the Bills have better records than the Packers and the Eagles. In either Atlanta or Buffalo, Gonzalez would have been greeted as a superhero, and we’re baffled by his reluctance to play for either team.

We’re even more baffled by the misguided decision by Carl Peterson to pull a last-second power play. An unrestrained ego is a dangerous thing, and Peterson now must deal with a locker room full of players who realize that, if King Carl is willing to screw Gonzalez, any of them could get equal or lesser treatment.

 
Let's all hang TT out to dry. He refused to part with a draft pick to get Tony Gonzalez. What a moron. :shrug: But wait, he met the Chiefs asking price only to have the asking price change at the last minute. Peterson tells TG he will trade him for a third. He gets plenty of offers for a third; and at the last minute he demands a 2nd. Typical Peterson.We spend numerous pages trashing TT for really no reason at all. Yet few bash Peterson.From PFT so take it for what its worth.PACKERS THOUGHT THEY HAD A DEAL FOR GONZALEZPosted by Mike Florio on October 15, 2008, 11:33 p.m. Wow.Not only were the Packers serious players for Chiefs tight end Tony Gonzalez, but the Pack also thought they had a deal.According to Jason Wilde of the Wisconsin State Journal, the Packers drew up the paperwork that would have sent a third-round pick to Kansas City for Gonzalez, only to have the Chiefs back out ten minutes before the 4:00 p.m. EDT trading deadline, and demand a second-round pick.Per Wilde, the Packers and Eagles offered a third-round selection for Gonzalez, and the Giants tendered a fourth-rounder.The Falcons and Bills were willing to do more, but Gonzalez wanted to play for neither team.Currently, the Falcons and the Bills have better records than the Packers and the Eagles. In either Atlanta or Buffalo, Gonzalez would have been greeted as a superhero, and we’re baffled by his reluctance to play for either team.We’re even more baffled by the misguided decision by Carl Peterson to pull a last-second power play. An unrestrained ego is a dangerous thing, and Peterson now must deal with a locker room full of players who realize that, if King Carl is willing to screw Gonzalez, any of them could get equal or lesser treatment.
This doesn't surprise me. Like I and many others said earlier, this SNAFU rests on the shoulders of Carl Peterson, not Ted Thompson. Those of you who have a problem with Thompson's decisions should be more selective in your criticisms. You only do yourself a disservice when you overreact, throw logic out the window, and blame Thompson for everything: things that aren't within his control and things that are debateable - but not obviously wrong.Thompson may deserve criticism - heck I'm sure he does: no NFL GM is perfect - but he doesn't deserve criticism for this scenario.
 
This should put to rest the banal comments from the peanut gallery that Thompson doesn't aggressively pursue free agents.
Not sure how. This adds more fuel to the fire that Thompson, unlike his mentor, isn't willing to make that one big aggressive move that could put his team over the top.
A TE would put this team over the top?
:hot: Exactly. More than that, 19 million for a TE on the downhill side of his career?
 
With Millen out of the way, Peterson is now in the running for the worst GM in football. What an absolute joke and a disgace how things were handled with Gonzo.

I'm sorry Chiefs fans.

 
100+ replies and not one mention of the fact Green Bay poisoned their offer with a bunch of contingencies and clawbacks. THAT is why the Chiefs didn't accept the deal. They can get 11 more games out of Gonzalez to help their young QB and deal Gonzalez for a late third-rounder in the offseason, and that's a heck of a lot better than getting nothing more out of Gonzalez and having to worry about the fact that he might not meet certain playing time and/or performance criteria in Green Bay which would result in a lesser pick.

Make no mistake, the Chiefs should've dealt him -- for the right price (an unconditional third-round pick). But the big loser is the team that screwed the pooch in acquiring Gonzalez.

I'm guessing he goes to a legit team in the offseason, they're happy to have him and the Chiefs are happy to get the pick, while Green Bay goes and blunders their precious third-round pick on another Bhawoh Jue/Marques Anderson/Kenny Peterson/Joey Thomas/Donnell Washington.

 
100+ replies and not one mention of the fact Green Bay poisoned their offer with a bunch of contingencies and clawbacks. THAT is why the Chiefs didn't accept the deal. They can get 11 more games out of Gonzalez to help their young QB and deal Gonzalez for a late third-rounder in the offseason, and that's a heck of a lot better than getting nothing more out of Gonzalez and having to worry about the fact that he might not meet certain playing time and/or performance criteria in Green Bay which would result in a lesser pick.Make no mistake, the Chiefs should've dealt him -- for the right price (an unconditional third-round pick). But the big loser is the team that screwed the pooch in acquiring Gonzalez. I'm guessing he goes to a legit team in the offseason, they're happy to have him and the Chiefs are happy to get the pick, while Green Bay goes and blunders their precious third-round pick on another Bhawoh Jue/Marques Anderson/Kenny Peterson/Joey Thomas/Donnell Washington.
I'd like to see a link and the details of the contingencies and clawbacks. I'm not sure if I have seen that reported anywhere.
 
while Green Bay goes and blunders their precious third-round pick on another Bhawoh Jue/Marques Anderson/Kenny Peterson/Joey Thomas/Donnell Washington.
How about you use examples from Thompson's drafts instead of Sherman's? Like say Aaron Rouse, James Jones, and Jason Spitz who are all contributing. BTW, you forgot Sherman's wonderful pick of BJ Sander.
 
while Green Bay goes and blunders their precious third-round pick on another Bhawoh Jue/Marques Anderson/Kenny Peterson/Joey Thomas/Donnell Washington.
How about you use examples from Thompson's drafts instead of Sherman's? Like say Aaron Rouse, James Jones, and Jason Spitz who are all contributing. BTW, you forgot Sherman's wonderful pick of BJ Sander.
Not to mention that moron actually TRADED UP to take Sander. :popcorn:
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!

 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
He is not pro bowl quality anymore. Not worth a 2nd and probley not a 3rd either
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
He is not pro bowl quality anymore. Not worth a 2nd and probley not a 3rd either
:shrug: :lmao: :lmao:
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
He is not pro bowl quality anymore. Not worth a 2nd and probley not a 3rd either
He would be if he had a QB that could throw the ball and not have been Herminated.
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
He is not pro bowl quality anymore. Not worth a 2nd and probley not a 3rd either
:lmao: :lmao: :lmao:
:shrug:
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
Mr. Peterson is that you?
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
On what basis do you say "you just don't" condition a trade in this fashion? Is this comment based on your extensive experience negotiating NFL trades? In my very limited experience (as a fan), player trades always contain various conditions. Certainly nothing has been reported - in the article you linked or elsewhere - that suggests the conditions the Packers requested were in any way extraordinary. If Peterson didn't like the conditions, he could/should have countered the offer without the conditions, or with other, more acceptable conditions. The report is that he changed his demand to a second round pick (very shortly before the trade deadline was expiring), which is a bad faith negotiation tactic - low rent in my opinion.
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
On what basis do you say "you just don't" condition a trade in this fashion? Is this comment based on your extensive experience negotiating NFL trades? In my very limited experience (as a fan), player trades always contain various conditions. Certainly nothing has been reported - in the article you linked or elsewhere - that suggests the conditions the Packers requested were in any way extraordinary. If Peterson didn't like the conditions, he could/should have countered the offer without the conditions, or with other, more acceptable conditions. The report is that he changed his demand to a second round pick (very shortly before the trade deadline was expiring), which is a bad faith negotiation tactic - low rent in my opinion.
:goodposting: He did counter...wanting a 2nd with no conditions.

 
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=807729

Air unclear on blown deal

Posted: Oct. 19, 2008

Three network National Football League reporters on Sunday provided three different versions about what when on behind the scenes when the Green Bay Packers and the Kansas City Chiefs failed to reach a deal for Chiefs tight end Tony Gonzalez.

The differences in the accounts are significant in terms of some details, which apparently stem from the two clubs’ version of what took place and the sources the reporters relied on to craft their accounts.

Last week, after the trade deadline had passed, the story was that the Packers were unwilling to give up a second-round draft pick to get a 32-year-old player.

But Charley Casserly of CBS-TV’s “The NFL Today” chose not to mention anything about a second-rounder demanded by Chiefs general manager Carl Peterson. Casserly told viewers his report was based on what Chiefs executives told him Sunday morning.

“What they told me was this,” Casserly said. “There were two teams at the end that were interested, Buffalo and Green Bay. Buffalo offered a third-round draft choice. Tony Gonzalez declined to go to Buffalo.

“In Green Bay’s case, they offered a third-round draft choice, but there were contingencies on Gonzalez finishing his career. There was some discussion. They couldn’t come to an agreement about how signing-bonus money would be paid and by what team.”

Both ESPN’s Chris Mortensen and the NFL Network’s Adam Schefter said Kansas City’s demand for a second-rounder was a deal-breaker, but both provided other details.

“Gonzalez thought he was being traded to the Green Bay Packers and the Packers thought so, too, so much so that Green Bay actually had the paperwork ready 10 minutes before the trade deadline,” Mortensen said. “But Chiefs general manager Carl Peterson upped the ante in the final minutes by asking for a second-round pick. The teams privately are saying that it was more complicated than that because of other conditions related to the tight end’s guaranteed money.”

On the NFL Network’s “NFL GameDay Morning,” Schefter said the Packers were unwilling to give up a third-rounder to Kansas City until an hour before the trade deadline of 3 p.m. CDT Tuesday.

“In the days leading up to Tuesday’s trade deadline, the Chiefs were asking the Packers for a third-round pick,” Schefter said. “All along, the Packers balked. But then, roughly one hour before the deadline, the Packers called the Chiefs to notify them they would be surrendering what Kansas City had requested.

“Green Bay was convinced Gonzalez would be in its lineup (Sunday) against Indianapolis, and beyond,” Schefter said. “But then, about five minutes before the deadline, a high-ranking Chiefs official called the Packers to notify them that Kansas City president/general manager Carl Peterson now wanted a second-round pick for Gonzalez. Green Bay was, in a word, miffed. Not only could it not alter the paperwork before the deadline, but it wasn’t willing to go to a second-round pick when it had been a concession to go to a third-round pick.”

 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez’s salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers’ offer included conditions the Chiefs weren’t willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn’t play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
He is not pro bowl quality anymore. Not worth a 2nd and probley not a 3rd either
:rolleyes: :lmao: :lmao:
Rinse, repeat. Gonzalez is better than anyone on Green Bay's roster, and easily worth whatever pick Green Bay deemed too awesome to deal.

 
Be careful in here.....the TT supporters are like rabid dogs.
He screwed the pooch. When you have an opportunity to add an elite talent to your team you get the deal done no matter what it takes. I'm guessing Rodgers would've liked to have Gonzalez on his side today.
 
Green Bay offered a third-round pick for Gonzalez and was willing to pay Gonzalez's salary for the remaining 3½ years of his contract. But a league source said Wednesday that the Packers' offer included conditions the Chiefs weren't willing to take on, such as sending future Kansas City draft picks to Green Bay if Gonzalez didn't play out his contract or meet pre-established playing-time expectations.
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/chiefs/story/843198.htmlTT tried to get cute, and it backfired. You don't get a Hall of Famer playing at a Pro Bowl level for a third-round pick AND try to stipulate the conditions. You just don't. Take advantage of the state of the team giving you the guy and be quick about it!
He is not pro bowl quality anymore. Not worth a 2nd and probley not a 3rd either
:jawdrop: :thumbup: :X
Rinse, repeat. Gonzalez is better than anyone on Green Bay's roster, and easily worth whatever pick Green Bay deemed too awesome to deal.
He's certainly a better TE than anyone on GBs roster, but a better player? Cmon. Charles Woodson is a candidate and possibly leader for NFL defensive MVP. Nick Collins should easily go to the probowl this year. Ditto for Greg Jennings. Aaron Rodgers may even be a pro bowler, if he plays more like the first 8 games and less like today for the rest of the season. Unless Gonzo could do something to help tackle Adrian Peterson or Chester Taylor, I don't think he'd have made a difference today. 222 rush yards and 117 receiving from those two guys? Horrible.

 
I assume you're not saying Nick f'ing Collins and Aaron Rodgers are better players than Tony Gonzalez. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt there. Yes, better player - EASILY. At the top of their games, no one on the Packers' roster has anything on Gonzalez.

The funny thing is, he'd be EVEN better in Green Bay, where they love to pass every down.

As for today's game, you lost by one point and that's with two return TDs. I'm thinking 10 catches for 113 yards and two touchdowns might be just a slight upgrade over the 1 catch for 6 yards that your current turd TE got you, and ultimately that's a SIGNIFICANT offensive upgrade. If the Packers had Gonzo, everything changes - drives, third downs, red zone, etc. It wouldn't have been anywhere near as close if the Packers weren't so futile on offense, and having such a stud would go a long way to helping that futility.

 
Yep everything changes. Magically, the Packers would have been able to stop the Vikings pass rush.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep everything changes. Magically, the Packers would have been able to stop the Vikings pass rush.
Having a big-time talent at TE would have cut down on the Vikings' aggressiveness. I can't believe people are so quickly dismissing the impact an elite player could have on Green Bay's offense. The entire team would have benefited.
 
Yep everything changes. Magically, the Packers would have been able to stop the Vikings pass rush.
He might have blocked a lil better than Grant did today.Can you imagine: If the Pack had kept Favre and completed this trade they would be super-undefeated right now, and a sure-fire lock for the SB. Astonishing.
 
Just Win Baby said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
Charles Woodson is a candidate and possibly leader for NFL defensive MVP
:lmao:
Um, no. Really. He is.
Please he is not even the best CB in the league let alone best defensive player.
Not just my opinion on Woodson. National Football Post has him and Finnegan as the top CBs in the league. Interestingly, Gonzo doesn't make the 1st or 2nd team at TE.

Collins is also the 1st team safety, and Kampman is a 2nd teamer at DE.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/1...all-pro-vote-3/

 
Ookie Pringle said:
Packers Could Have Had Tony Gonzalez, 2nd Rounder
Yeah and I could have been born a girl had my dad done my mom doggystyle instead of missionary. The fact remains the Packers met the Chiefs asking price only to have it upped 10 minutes before the deadline.
 
Just Win Baby said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
Charles Woodson is a candidate and possibly leader for NFL defensive MVP
:lmao:
Um, no. Really. He is.
Please he is not even the best CB in the league let alone best defensive player.
Not just my opinion on Woodson. National Football Post has him and Finnegan as the top CBs in the league. Interestingly, Gonzo doesn't make the 1st or 2nd team at TE.

Collins is also the 1st team safety, and Kampman is a 2nd teamer at DE.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/1...all-pro-vote-3/
There is a guy out in Oakland playing CB that is not even mentioned by them so they lose credibility with me.
 
Just Win Baby said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
Charles Woodson is a candidate and possibly leader for NFL defensive MVP
:bag:
Um, no. Really. He is.
Please he is not even the best CB in the league let alone best defensive player.
Not just my opinion on Woodson. National Football Post has him and Finnegan as the top CBs in the league. Interestingly, Gonzo doesn't make the 1st or 2nd team at TE.

Collins is also the 1st team safety, and Kampman is a 2nd teamer at DE.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2008/1...all-pro-vote-3/
There is a guy out in Oakland playing CB that is not even mentioned by them so they lose credibility with me.
First of all the article's author has played in the league for seven years and now covers it for the national football post, pro football weekly, the Chicago Sun Times, The Washington Times among others. So lets just say he knows more about the game than any of us. Secondly, a Raider fan asked him directly about Asomugha. Here's his response.matt Bowen

November 4, 2008

1:41 pm

Raider Fan- I just don’t see it guy…. He doesn’t make any plays in the running game either. I know he can play, but he hasn’t made enough plays to get the vote yet.

 
packersfan said:
Ookie Pringle said:
Be careful in here.....the TT supporters are like rabid dogs.
He screwed the pooch. When you have an opportunity to add an elite talent to your team you get the deal done no matter what it takes. I'm guessing Rodgers would've liked to have Gonzalez on his side today.
To stay in and block?Gonzo is playing well...no doubt...and it looks like a bad non-move...though, not sure how much he would help today. Not receiving anyway.
 
The Jacket said:
I assume you're not saying Nick f'ing Collins and Aaron Rodgers are better players than Tony Gonzalez. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt there. Yes, better player - EASILY. At the top of their games, no one on the Packers' roster has anything on Gonzalez. The funny thing is, he'd be EVEN better in Green Bay, where they love to pass every down. As for today's game, you lost by one point and that's with two return TDs. I'm thinking 10 catches for 113 yards and two touchdowns might be just a slight upgrade over the 1 catch for 6 yards that your current turd TE got you, and ultimately that's a SIGNIFICANT offensive upgrade. If the Packers had Gonzo, everything changes - drives, third downs, red zone, etc. It wouldn't have been anywhere near as close if the Packers weren't so futile on offense, and having such a stud would go a long way to helping that futility.
Why do you think he would have had near those numbers for GB today?Would he have blocked...released just in time to catch the ball?Lack of TE was not GB's issue today.
 
packersfan said:
coyote5 said:
Yep everything changes. Magically, the Packers would have been able to stop the Vikings pass rush.
Having a big-time talent at TE would have cut down on the Vikings' aggressiveness. I can't believe people are so quickly dismissing the impact an elite player could have on Green Bay's offense. The entire team would have benefited.
Im sure he would impact them at times.Today I don't think is one of them.Having big time talent at WR did not stop their aggressiveness...why would a TE?
 
First of all the article's author has played in the league for seven years and now covers it for the national football post, pro football weekly, the Chicago Sun Times, The Washington Times among others. So lets just say he knows more about the game than any of us. Secondly, a Raider fan asked him directly about Asomugha. Here's his response. matt Bowen November 4, 2008 1:41 pm Raider Fan- I just don’t see it guy…. He doesn’t make any plays in the running game either. I know he can play, but he hasn’t made enough plays to get the vote yet.
That's a pretty huge oversight considering Asomugha is a complete defensive game changer...he's one of those rare talents that completely shut down one passing avenue for an entire game. But different strokes for different folks.
 
First of all the article's author has played in the league for seven years and now covers it for the national football post, pro football weekly, the Chicago Sun Times, The Washington Times among others. So lets just say he knows more about the game than any of us. Secondly, a Raider fan asked him directly about Asomugha. Here's his response. matt Bowen November 4, 2008 1:41 pm Raider Fan- I just don’t see it guy…. He doesn’t make any plays in the running game either. I know he can play, but he hasn’t made enough plays to get the vote yet.
That's a pretty huge oversight considering Asomugha is a complete defensive game changer...he's one of those rare talents that completely shut down one passing avenue for an entire game. But different strokes for different folks.
I agree Asomugha should be in the conversation with Finnegan and Woodson...but to dismiss Woodson as a poster did above is a bit out there.
 
First of all the article's author has played in the league for seven years and now covers it for the national football post, pro football weekly, the Chicago Sun Times, The Washington Times among others. So lets just say he knows more about the game than any of us. Secondly, a Raider fan asked him directly about Asomugha. Here's his response. matt Bowen November 4, 2008 1:41 pm Raider Fan- I just don’t see it guy…. He doesn’t make any plays in the running game either. I know he can play, but he hasn’t made enough plays to get the vote yet.
That's a pretty huge oversight considering Asomugha is a complete defensive game changer...he's one of those rare talents that completely shut down one passing avenue for an entire game. But different strokes for different folks.
I agree Asomugha should be in the conversation with Finnegan and Woodson...but to dismiss Woodson as a poster did above is a bit out there.
I dismissed Woodson above... when the poster suggested that he might be a leader for defensive MVP. Let me restate my reaction to that: :lmao:
 
First of all the article's author has played in the league for seven years and now covers it for the national football post, pro football weekly, the Chicago Sun Times, The Washington Times among others. So lets just say he knows more about the game than any of us. Secondly, a Raider fan asked him directly about Asomugha. Here's his response. matt Bowen November 4, 2008 1:41 pm Raider Fan- I just don’t see it guy…. He doesn’t make any plays in the running game either. I know he can play, but he hasn’t made enough plays to get the vote yet.
That's a pretty huge oversight considering Asomugha is a complete defensive game changer...he's one of those rare talents that completely shut down one passing avenue for an entire game. But different strokes for different folks.
I agree Asomugha should be in the conversation with Finnegan and Woodson...but to dismiss Woodson as a poster did above is a bit out there.
The Pack had the most INT's in the league before Frerotte's 3 today... and those came without a lot of pressure from the d-line. They're good. I disagree that Asomugha hasn't made enough plays...nobody is throwing the ball his way, they were making Hall look like an idiot. He was making plays by eliminating options for the QB.
 
Ookie Pringle said:
Packers Could Have Had Tony Gonzalez, 2nd Rounder
The fact remains the Packers met the Chiefs asking price only to have it upped 10 minutes before the deadline.
:unsure: Why do people forget this fact? This is all the fault of the Chiefs. If were offered what they asked for. They then proceeded to change their minds with less than one hour to go before the deadline (rumors say it was much less than that). Even Tony Gonzalez himself called out Kansas City.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top