What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Rumor: Packers Offering Ferguson & Pick For Jerry Porter (1 Viewer)

packersfan

Footballguy
I want to stress that this is a rumor but it's one making the rounds a bit. The rumored offer would be Robert Ferguson and a third- or fourth-round pick in next year's draft for Jerry Porter.

This would be a great trade for the Packers. Ferguson is worthless so really it boils down to the pick for Porter. The Packers obviously need major help at the WR position and while Porter has been inconsistent he would represent a gigantic talent upgrade at WR for Green Bay.

Again, this is just a rumor I'm hearing.

 
So they trade away a headache at WR, only to later, trade for a headache at WR.

Makes sense to me. :loco:
Does to me. Porter is much more talented than Ferguson. And if you trade for Porter, you get him for his base salaries, no pro-rated SB to worry about.
 
So they trade away a headache at WR, only to later, trade for a headache at WR.

Makes sense to me. :loco:
Does to me. Porter is much more talented than Ferguson. And if you trade for Porter, you get him for his base salaries, no pro-rated SB to worry about.
his SB is probably the reason he will be in Oakland all year. I haven't heard anything about him being willing to pay anything back to Oakland and Big Al has said that he isn't going anywhere till he agrees to.GB would be a nice fit. He would be the #2 since Farve is more familiar with Driver.

 
So they trade away a headache at WR, only to later, trade for a headache at WR.

Makes sense to me. :loco:
ReallyGuess it's all about getting Brett "I love throwing picks in the playoffs" Favre another ring. :rolleyes:
Big Score's point is valid; not sure what yours is unless you think attempting to make a major upgrade in talent is a bad idea for a team -- especially at a position of major concern.
 
So they trade away a headache at WR, only to later, trade for a headache at WR.

Makes sense to me. :loco:
Does to me. Porter is much more talented than Ferguson. And if you trade for Porter, you get him for his base salaries, no pro-rated SB to worry about.
Who is saying anything about the talent level between Fergy & Porter?The point was about Porter & Walker.

The common trait between those two, is that they're both WR's & they're both headaches.

So why trade away a WR headache, only to later trade for a lesser WR headache?

Seems to me, that it would have made more sense for the Pack to try and work something out with the better WR headache, as opposed to getting a lesser WR headache and trying to make him happy.

My .02 FWIW :shrug:

 
Now don't get me wrong with my above post.

What's done is done & Porter would certainly be an upgrade for the Pack, over the likes of Fergy, 50/50 & Boerigter.

 
So they trade away a headache at WR, only to later, trade for a headache at WR.

Makes sense to me. :loco:
Well, you need a stronger headache than Ferguson to bookend your other headache Rod Gardner. :thumbup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So they trade away a headache at WR, only to later, trade for a headache at WR.

Makes sense to me. :loco:
Does to me. Porter is much more talented than Ferguson. And if you trade for Porter, you get him for his base salaries, no pro-rated SB to worry about.
Who is saying anything about the talent level between Fergy & Porter?The point was about Porter & Walker.

The common trait between those two, is that they're both WR's & they're both headaches.

So why trade away a WR headache, only to later trade for a lesser WR headache?

Seems to me, that it would have made more sense for the Pack to try and work something out with the better WR headache, as opposed to getting a lesser WR headache and trying to make him happy.

My .02 FWIW :shrug:
I see what you're saying. But the situations aren't equal. You have one guy who is signed, and hasn't blown a knee out. Another one who wasn't signed, and HAD blown a knee out.Walker is the better WR, I agree with that. Or was before the injury. And I don't think GB should trade for Porter anyway, I think he's in that dangerous position of thinking he's better than he is.

 
And I don't think GB should trade for Porter anyway, I think he's in that dangerous position of thinking he's better than he is.
That very well may be true but have you seen Green Bay's WRs other than Driver? To say they royally stink would be a massive understatement. This is easily the weakest that position has been in Favre's tenure. Guys like Anthony Morgan and Mark Ingram would look like Hall of Famers next to guys like Ferguson and Boerigter.
 
Where are you hearing this?
Just from a rumor mill. I'm sorry for being vague but that's the best way I can describe it. Sorry. Again, I am stressing that is just a rumor. But I'm not one who posts made-up s**t here. So just consider all this to be just a rumor and as is the case with any rumor it may not come to fruition.
 
Where are you hearing this?
Just from a rumor mill. I'm sorry for being vague but that's the best way I can describe it. Sorry. Again, I am stressing that is just a rumor. But I'm not one who posts made-up s**t here. So just consider all this to be just a rumor and as is the case with any rumor it may not come to fruition.
fwiw - i've heard the same rumor here in milwaukeei don't see a trade going down because al davis isn't going to give up porter without getting some $ back. that isn't going to happen in porter's case or he would have done so in the offseason (sort of like lavar arrington did)
 
Don't forget Al Davis's history. Ask Marcus Allen how likely it is that Davis lets a player go after pissing off the coach and wanting out of town. Porter may be benched for a year or two until his bonus is low enough to get rid of him.

 
Don't forget Al Davis's history. Ask Marcus Allen how likely it is that Davis lets a player go after pissing off the coach and wanting out of town. Porter may be benched for a year or two until his bonus is low enough to get rid of him.
:goodposting:
 
Link FWIW

Packers need help at position, but cost of trade may be too high

By Pete Dougherty

pdougher@greenbaypressgazette.com

Before the salary cap, the Green Bay Packers might have had a decent chance at upgrading their receiver corps in a meaningful way once training camp opened.

But the chances in today's NFL appear remote.

For several reasons, the cap has made player-for-player deals almost obsolete, and draft picks are more valuable than ever to replenish talent thinned by free agency and provide bargain-priced labor.

So, even though the Oakland Raiders appear willing to trade perpetually disgruntled receiver Jerry Porter, and the Packers need playmakers at that position, a deal appears unlikely unless the Raiders drop their asking price significantly. They reportedly are looking for at least a first-round draft pick, and it's hard to see the Packers giving up more than a fourth-round pick for him, or perhaps a third.

"I don't know what's really on (the Raiders') minds, but I know they want a big-time pick," said Reggie McKenzie, the Packers' director of pro personnel.

The chances of the Packers making a deal during training camp probably are slim because Ted Thompson is more philosophically opposed to trading picks than most general managers in the league.

Thompson has traded a pick straight up for a player in the past as Seattle's vice president of football operations, but only twice in five years. He traded a sixth-round draft pick to New Orleans for defensive tackle Norman Hand, and a seventh-round pick for Oakland receiver Jerry Rice.

More than his mentor, former Packers GM Ron Wolf, Thompson is averse to trading picks.

Wolf made eight trades in which he gave a draft pick straight up for a player in the summer or early in the regular season: He acquired guard Doug Widell for a seventh-round pick in 1993; receiver Charles Jordan for a fifth-rounder in 1994; tackle Lindsay Knapp for a fifth-rounder and tackle Joe Sims for a sixth-rounder in '95; defensive end Paul Frase for a sixth-rounder in '96; running back Darick Holmes for a fourth-rounder in '98; linebacker Nate Wayne for a seventh-rounder in '99; and return man Allen Rossum for a fifth-rounder in 2000.

"Ron wasn't afraid to trade picks for players if he could find the right player, and I'm not either," Thompson said Tuesday. "But I do believe that draft picks, both your ability to draft in the future and the ones you have now, are very valuable to the future of your organization."

Wolf said as his time working with the salary cap went on — the cap started in 1994 — he became more reluctant to trade picks. He considered them necessary to replace departed free agents and as a source of cheap labor to stay under the cap after paying big money to core veterans.

"I don't think he learned that from me," said Wolf of Thompson's aversion to trading picks. "The point is, and I think I mentioned this back in '98 or '99, all of a sudden, draft choices became like gold bars. You have to retain those draft choices and you have to get as many as you possibly can."

Barring an unusual circumstance, such as in the 2003 season when defensive tackle Grady Jackson fell to them like a gift off the waiver wires, the Packers will go into the regular season with the players on their roster. That includes at receiver, where in the offseason Thompson took a calculated risk that some combination of previously disappointing veterans Robert Ferguson and Rod Gardner, as well as second-round draft pick Greg Jennings, would provide enough playmaking for a decent passing game.

Through five days of camp, no receiver has jumped out as a weapon to complement Donald Driver, and the rookie Jennings arguably has been their second-best option. Gardner missed the first two days of camp because of a pulled hamstring and was a non-factor the next two days, though in Tuesday's short, non-padded practice he made a leaping touchdown catch in the corner of the end zone in an 11-on-11 drill.

Regardless, until one or more of those players produces regularly in games, there's reason to question whether the Packers have enough offensive punch to improve on last year's 4-12 record.

"I'm not worried, but I'm anxious to see what our guys can do," McKenzie said. "I'm anxious to see all the running backs, I'm anxious to see all the tight ends, I'm waiting to see the receivers step up. Talent wise — we just don't have the experienced guys that are Pro Bowl receivers. Everybody's looking for these Pro Bowl receivers; we don't have guys that have been to the Pro Bowl (other than Driver). But we still think we're pretty good."

The Packers are one of several teams in the market for a receiver, along with Philadelphia, Atlanta, Chicago, San Francisco and Jacksonville.

Porter, 28, was a second-round pick in 2000 and has 239 receptions and 24 touchdowns in his career, including 76 receptions last season. He's been perpetually unhappy with the Raiders, even after signing a five-year deal worth $15 million in 2005.

As a rookie, he complained publicly that the Raiders selected kicker Sebastian Janikowski instead of him in the first round, then asked for a trade in the offseason. He was upset at various times over the next four years for what he considered a diminished role behind veterans such as Andre Rison, Jerry Rice and Tim Brown, and in '04 said he'd never play for the Raiders again after hearing rumors they had considered trading him.

Then, about a week after he signed the contract extension in '05, the Raiders acquired receiver Randy Moss, again putting Porter in a No. 2 role.

This offseason, he got in an argument with new coach Art Shell about the team's expectation that he work out in Oakland for much of the offseason and again asked for a trade. He reported to training camp but has missed most of the practice time because of a calf injury.

 
redman said:
Good luck with the first rounder for the WR you don't want, Al. :rolleyes:
I do agree that the Raiders won't receive a first round pick for Porter.But I don't remember ever seeing anything about Al every saying that he didn't want Porter. He has said he would listen to trade offers for him, but he hasn't ever said that he wants him out of the Raider organization.
 
The Falcons are exploring trade possibilities for a pair of disgruntled but productive veteran wide receivers: Oakland's Jerry Porter and Denver's Ashley Lelie. Atlanta's personnel department has been doing due diligence on both players but probably will wait at least a week to decide whether to pursue a trade. Whether either of those players would settle for being the No. 3 receiver could be another issue, but Mora said any player the Falcons bring in — if they do bring a player in — would not replace or even compete with Michael Jenkins and Roddy White, the team's starting wide receivers. The agent for 17-year veteran free agent Ricky Proehl said Tuesday that he has spoken with the Falcons about Proehl's services, but the team wanted to wait at least a week before making a decision.

 
I wouldn't think the Packers would give up a first rounder next year for Porter, especially when they will have their pick of Adrian Peterson or Brady Quinn!! :whistle:

 
Hi, I'm Jerry Porter. I may not be the smartest guy around but I can do simple math. You see I ain't paying any money to Geezer Al and his enforcer Arty. One thing I know is that $4,000,000 is more money than any team in this league would even come close to paying me in a Signing Bonus. See you in the Black Hole! Porter out!

 
I wouldn't think the Packers would give up a first rounder next year for Porter, especially when they will have their pick of Adrian Peterson or Brady Quinn!! :whistle:
Yep, hopefully they can find a premier free agent like Brad Johnson to lead them to victory.
 
TT doesn't like trading draft picks. I doubt if this is true. He'll wait for cuts or much lower draft picks. Not a first rounder.

 
What would Oak want with Ferguson?
With Gabriel and Curry they probably don't need him as a WR but for all the knocks against him Ferguson is one heckuva special teams player. I remember reading several times last season about him not getting reps at WR because the Pack wanted to keep him healthy for his special teams duties.Now he isn't worth Porter straight up but if you throw in the right pick and $ along with a solid ST contributor for an overrated, underachieving, disgruntled WR who doesn't contribute on ST and maybe you got something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
walker was a headache that the Packers couldn't do anything about... But there is no indication he is going to be a headache everywhere...

maybe the Packers think Porter is a headache in Oakland, but won't be in Green Bay...

 
walker was a headache that the Packers couldn't do anything about... But there is no indication he is going to be a headache everywhere...maybe the Packers think Porter is a headache in Oakland, but won't be in Green Bay...
Only if the price drops considerably.
 
Ferguson is soft as tissue. The guy is lucky to be in the league.

Oakland would be better off giving Rashaun Woods his 3rd AFC West team in the last week.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top