OlHoss1884
11 years ago
For those that missed the link, it said this: since 1990 there have been 10 cases where it was confirmed that a player suffered a ruptured hammy. Of the 10, only 5 players played more than 1 NFL game following the injury. Regardless of where you stand on the debate about his value when healthy, the likelihood that Bishop was going to recover to be fully productive was pretty slim.

It isn't just the salary, but to pay a salary with such a risk makes this an easy move. To be honest, I am glad they let him go early so, if he IS pretty well ready to play, he has some time to find another team. The fact remains, if he re-injurs it or has another problem with the same leg, the Packers would be on the hook for his salary and that is far more likely than his having a quality year.


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein
DoddPower
11 years ago

For those that missed the link, it said this: since 1990 there have been 10 cases where it was confirmed that a player suffered a ruptured hammy. Of the 10, only 5 players played more than 1 NFL game following the injury. Regardless of where you stand on the debate about his value when healthy, the likelihood that Bishop was going to recover to be fully productive was pretty slim.

It isn't just the salary, but to pay a salary with such a risk makes this an easy move. To be honest, I am glad they let him go early so, if he IS pretty well ready to play, he has some time to find another team. The fact remains, if he re-injurs it or has another problem with the same leg, the Packers would be on the hook for his salary and that is far more likely than his having a quality year.

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 



Yup. Gotta play the odds. It makes the contract they gave Brad Jones make a lot more sense, as well. Plus, releasing him gives Bishop a chance to get a nice salary with another team of his choice. If he can't find work at a reasonable price, perhaps the Packers give him one more chance. Who knows, but at least he has the opportunity to prove to other teams he's fully recovered.
DakotaT
11 years ago

I should smack you.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



[-x , you asked to have it explained to you! I thought I was being a good friend. [grin1]
UserPostedImage
Pack93z
11 years ago
Personally, I think this is a mistake.. for a defense that lacks fire, you have now shipped out one of the few parts that provide a spark.

Bishop's lateral quickness prior to the injury was marginal.. so I get it from that front and the concerns about offenses continuing to stretch defenses.

But somebody better step up and become the juice for this defense.. maybe the rook Jones will become that guy.. maybe lighting will flash and Jolly flips the switch. Sorry, but we need more fire and Bishop was one of the few to provide it.

Color me not a "fan" of the move.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Zero2Cool
11 years ago
When Desmond Bishop took over for Nick Barnett, I had mentioned the defense just "felt" like it was more tough with the change. The Packers won the Super Bowl that season.

I wonder the role hamstring injury history played in his release because it seems like defense that needs to get "bigger, faster" just got less physical.
UserPostedImage
DarkaneRules
11 years ago
Desmond Bishop is awesome and yes very physical. But he just overdoes it. I don't see that going away. The Super Bowl was great, but I don't see him learning from his and slowing down. I think he will get injured again unfortunately. It hurts me to say that because I like him as a player, but that is just what I see happening.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago
Time will tell if he still has anything left after the injury. it is too bad.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
11 years ago
I was surprised at the release of Bishop, according to him, The Packers did not even attempt to negotiate a restructure, that tells me there was a legitimate concern on Bishops recovery status.

I do what I always do, that is list all the lbr's and try to see what Ted & co. are looking at.

Here are the Linebackers currently on the Packers 90 man roster.
I listed them by the year they were drafted or signed.
The Packers will will keep at minimum 8 LBr's, but have kept 9 and I think at 1 point last year there were 10 lbr's on the final 53.
I am betting on 9 for this year.

A.J. Hawk......................................................................2006
Clay Mathews, Robert Francois(FA)...................................2009
Jamari Lattimore(FA)......................................................2011
Nick Perry, Terrel Manning, Dezman Moses(FA)..................2012
Nate Palmer, Sam Barrington,..........................................2013
Jarvis Reed(FA), Donte Savage(FA), Andy Mulumba(FA)......2013

Mathews, Hawk, Jones, and Probably Perry will be the starters.(Base D)

Hawk and Jones both played in all 16 games last year, Hawk started all 16, Jones started the last 10.
They have both proven to be durable,solid players, although not playing up to some on this forums expectations, Ted and Co. know what they can expect from them, with Hawk restructuring and Jones being rewarded for his solid play in 2012 the writing was on the wall for Bishop.

Let's not forget Perry was transitioning from d-lineman to olb in his rookie year and should show that 1st to 2nd year improvement that coaches look for, his injury may slow down that process, but being a 1st rnd pick, he is probably expected to be able to catch up quickly.

Francois and Lattimore have proven in the past they both can be spot starters and contribute on Special Teams.
They are both under contract and I can see why Ted would choose to keep them over Bishop.

That leaves 3 spots left to fill Manning and Moses came in the same draft class as Perry, I see Ted & Co. holding on to both, hoping they also will make that 1st to 2nd year improvement. Both are still working under rookie contract and will also be Special teams players.

Palmer, Barrington, Mulumba, Reed, and Savage will fight it out for the final spot, with probably 2 of the 4 left going to the practice squad.

There really isn't enough information on any of these guys to make that decision until they put on the pads and prove they can play.

Whichever draftees and/or UDFA lbr's make the final 53 and PS. I hope they get a chance to develop and not have to be thrown into the starting lineups because of injury.




I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1m) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (1h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (1h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (2h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (2h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (2h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (2h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (2h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (2h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (2h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (2h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (2h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (2h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (2h) : 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 (2h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (2h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (2h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (2h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (2h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (2h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (2h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (2h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (2h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (3h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (3h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (3h) : Packers will get in
beast (3h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (3h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (3h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (5h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (6h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (6h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (6h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (7h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (16h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (16h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (16h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
buckeyepackfan (20h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks
Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.
Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak
beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other
beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)
Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.
beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs
packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
53m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

1h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.