Packers ready to part ways with ILB Desmond Bishop· Page 3

Laser Gunns
Senior Member

11 years ago

The timing makes no sense...

If his injury was not healing up to par, he would have been cut along with DJ Smith for failing a physical.

If it is money... Why? We are under cap now, there is no reason to make a move for the sake of saving cash at the expense of losing a starting ILB... Unless Ted is making room for an extension on another player.

The extension must already be on the table too, because with Pickett's contract coming off after this season, there would be more room to handle it at the end of the season.

MintBaconDrivel
Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!

play2win
Senior Member

11 years ago

#22

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar

Raji.

beast
Select Member

11 years ago

#23

I think it's simply scheme change and Jones stepping up. Packers changed up their scheme last year asking the ILB to do more sideline to sideline stuff and Bishop lack speed to start with and then injuries... and they like Hawk and Jones a lot more than the public does. And in the old scheme Hawk like Pickett did a lot of dirty work to set up other guys to make plays by taking on blocks and doing other things. Then gets 3 sacks in his first season in the changed scheme.

Also I think it's been said they're trying to get him to take a reduced deal. So maybe he'll stick around if he agrees to a reduced deal like Hawk did.

But they got a number of guys going to be FAs this upcoming FA

Raji, Pickett, Burnett, D-Smith, Shields, Neal, Wilson, Starks, James Jones?

Raji, Burnett, Shields and D-Smith are probably locks to get new deals with the Packers. And maybe Neal too.

DoddPower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#24

If it is money... Why? We are under cap now, there is no reason to make a move for the sake of saving cash at the expense of losing a starting ILB... Unless Ted is making room for an extension on another player.

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar

I'm assuming this is the reason, whether it's for Raji, Sheilds (can he ever be resigned this season?), Burnett, Neal, Bulaga, or some other player that Ted hopes to extend.

DoddPower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#25

Originally Posted by: beast

I really only seem to hear about this change of scheme for the LB's from your posts. Is there some other discussion regarding this that I can read about? I suppose I don't feel as confident about the statements are you do.

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

#26

Maybe they just don't think he's very good.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

steveishere
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#27

It doesn't make much sense for all their talk of wanting to get more physical

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

#28

Maybe they just don't think he's very good.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

wow. is that why? I never would have guessed that they would release a player if they thought he was very good. [grin1]

Obviously it is the amount of money he is being paid verses what they view is his skill level.

nerdmann
Premier Member

11 years ago

#29

Originally Posted by: wpr

Could just be the injury. Could just be a numbers game. Could be an off-field issue.

We don't know.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

#30

Could just be the injury. Could just be a numbers game. Could be an off-field issue.

We don't know.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I was just messing with you.

However:
An injury factor relates directly to the team not thinking he is very good.

If they thought he was very good there would not be a numbers issue nor would they ask for him to redo his pay.

There have been other players with off field issues. They were reported in the media. Nothing on Bishop. Other players off field issues did not merit a request for a reduction in pay nor an out right release. (Even Jolly was not released.)

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (15m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23m) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (35m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (4h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (5h) : Packers will get in

beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS