http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago-bears/post/_/id/4701954/patriots-packers-among-teams-that-could-make-sense-for-matt-forte 

----Hmmm. I'm not sure the writer of this has followed the Packers over the last 10 seasons. Perhaps, he's getting this idea from us nabbing the former Bear, in Peppers? Yes, in fact, he is... Rob Demovsky, c'mon, man!

Why in the world would our GM who rarely dips into FA and rarely pays anywhere near top dollar all of a sudden jump in for a RB with Forte's mileage and recent injury history? He's the wrong side of 30 and we already have one of those guys near 30 who knows our O and helped us to our last Lombardi.

Now, New England, the other team mentioned makes a ton of sense as that has been their MO. If they brought in Jackson to play RB at his grizzled stage then I see no reason for them not to desire Forte who would be great for them in both run and pass.

Of course, I would love a back like Matt Forte. A guy who could be such a great threat in the pass game and on 3rd downs is surely enticing. Plus, sticking it to the Bears never gets old not that I think a Bears fan would give us that satisfaction claiming Jeremy Langford is better, and he might actually be so I don't really think we'd be sticking it to the Bears so scratch that off the list for one of the fun reasons to acquire him.

I think we all know we're going to be looking at Lacy (hopefully less of him), Starks, and John Crockett when camp rolls around and the always fresh crop of UDFA guys. God forbid we actually use a pick on a game changing RB that can help on 3rd down. Sadly, we've been forced to talk about tweeners and dual role players here because we know we aren't getting anything new. It's like being forced to love the crappy toys you had as a kid because you knew your parents weren't going to get you anything new. Lowered expectations might make it easier for you but it's never the right way to look at things. Expectations should always be high. Why get a 3rd down back when we can just use a WR like RC18 or 88 in that role? That is how we're conditioned. I don't know of another fanbase that has to think so ridiculous and low like ours. We want that open roster space for guys like Demetri Goodson whom failed as draft choices but we just can't let go of.

Adding pieces? That's not our organization's forte.

---

Woodson was presumed over the hill, same with Peppers. Pickett wasn't all that young when he signed with us either.

Some reporter out of the Chicago Tribune said that Peppers is already rallying Forte to sign with us. It helps to have that guy around, and I'd embrace the signing especially since Rodgers loves to just dump the ball off now.

---

I see no why we couldn't make this work and work well. A lot of this depends on Starks.

---

Forte is a major upgrade over Starks.

---

At the start, I admit I was dead set against it.
After reading the posts here though, you guys have made me rethink it. Maybe he still has something left.
Being on a new team might give him a desire to really try to play great.
Guess we will see.

---

2 years ago Starks got 1.625 per for 2 years and 725K Guaranteed. In 2015, in under 200 touches Starks had 5 Fumbles...FIVE. And he only went fumble-less in his rookie year. Given that the rest of the league has come to know the diminished value of the RB, I just cant imagine Starks getting 1 cent over the min.

Langford was hailed with immediately giving the Bears running game better pop. Langford's much better burst was reported on through various news sources. It was further reported they split time and let Forte be the nominal starter out of respect for the guy he is and his past performance. So, does Forte still have it? Or...is it a Favre/Rodgers case where one still has it but the other is better and needs to play? Could be.

I would like to see this signing and this would be one of the main reasons why. Do you think we could use another guy like this?...

"Matt's a leader," Bears linebacker Sam Acho said. "He's a guy you hear about when you play in the NFL -- you hear about this guy, this character. I played with a guy like that in (eight-time Pro Bowl pick) Larry Fitzgerald when I was in Arizona.

"As I've gotten a chance to know (Forte) better, his leadership has really stood out. He's a man of character. He's a man of faith, and he's just a passionate man, passionate football player."

----PASSIONATE? Yes, please. Person of character? Yes, please. Good in run and pass game and on 3rd downs? Yes, please. Ted Thompson going to pay a 30 year old running back? I highly doubt it. Why? He likes the guys he's got. We all know it.

EDIT: Peppers lobbying will have zero effect on TT. Aaron desperately wanted Marshawn Lynch. We got to see him go win a SB in Seattle and tear up the league. Well, perhaps, Ted Thompson has learned from that but Marshawn wasn't 30, either, though so I doubt this would ever happen.

---

I'm a finance geek. At the end of the day the question will be how much will it cost? No way I think in my brain how much I want to pay will be how much Forte wants.

I thought I read in the article that Forte mentions he wants to go with a winner and it's not about the money, so with that you look at the top teams and I think he ends up in NE of course. Either them or maybe even a Denver or Seattle, but I think the Packers lost their top teams ranking. Hell he could even end up in Arizona which is higher rated than us.

---

What teams are ahead of the Packers? In NFC I can reason with Seahawks, Panthers and that's about it. Cardinals can't possibly be viewed much better considering during the PLAYOFFS the Packers pushed them into overtime with THREE receivers of the names Jeff Janis, James Jones and Jared Abbrederis. You give me Jordy Nelson and Randall Cobb and Ty Montgomery and I'll give your Cardinals Tyrann Mathieu and my money is on the Packers.

Saying the Packers are not one of the teams just wreaks as "look at me, I think I'm objective!". Hogwash!

But hey, I bet the Lions are JUST AROUND THE CORNER OF DOMINANCE, right?

[whead] 🤣 🤣

---