nerdmann
8 years ago

I don't know why John Crockett isn't in the conversation here. I'd rather the money be spent on defense, even if Forte is an upgrade over Starks.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Crockett could surprise.

Starks will be cheaper and won't cost us a compensatory pick. Then again, if he signs elsewhere we could GET a compensatory pick. Probably not a high one, unless he becomes a starter somewhere.
“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.”
lolleren
8 years ago
If he is willing to do a 2 year deal at 2-3 mill a year, then I'm fine with it.
Much more expensive than that, then it is too rich for my blood, both cap and comp pick wise.

blank
Dulak
8 years ago
I dont like forte and I hope hes not on our team ... IMO hes not that good only average. Keep starks and get lacy to work out and lose some fat.

gbguy20
8 years ago
John Crockett deserves a shot this year. He earned more playing time last year but wasn't given it.
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
steveishere
8 years ago
I've never been a huge Forte fan. He's a good all around (specifically receiving) back but he's always seemed kind of soft to me as a runner and he's really not much of a breakaway threat either. Unless he has a cold market or takes a pretty decent discount I'd rather just roll with Lacy/Crockett or even re sign Starks and use the money elsewhere. In shape healthy Lacy is going to be a better back next year for us than Forte would.
Zero2Cool
8 years ago
I'm not sure I would want Matt Forte even at veteran minimum. I would really like a 3rd down back that has that break away speed to take it to the house via rush or reception. I'm not 100% convinced Matt Forte can be that guy and maybe that makes me crazy.




Excellent point Tom!

UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
8 years ago
Who do people see Forte as competing with. Who is he going to take playing time away from?

Lacy? Doubt it.
Starks? Maybe, but I don't see a substantial improvement at this point in his career.
Kuhn? Maybe, with a small upgrade
Crockett? Probably. I'd rather have the third RB be a developmental "potential" player than a "on the down hill" player.

Don't object to the pickup. But I don't see it as a pickup at the level of Peppers/Pickett/Woodson either.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
nerdmann
8 years ago

I'm not sure I would want Matt Forte even at veteran minimum. I would really like a 3rd down back that has that break away speed to take it to the house via rush or reception. I'm not 100% convinced Matt Forte can be that guy and maybe that makes me crazy.




Excellent point Tom!

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



We have two guys like that.

Randall Cobb and Ty Montgomery.
“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.”
blueleopard
8 years ago
Forte is a proven back. If he can be even remotely close to what Dion Lewis or Shane Vereen were in New England, we'll be fine. We already know he can run the ball when called upon.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Bigbyfan
8 years ago
He'll be the best receiving back the Packers have had in over a decade. The guy still probably has another year in the tank as a three down back. You gotta remember what he has been able to do with a subpar line and the terrible quarterback play. Two years ago, he caught around 100 balls.

I'd take him in a heartbeat. Not like it would cost a fortune.
blank
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (2h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (2h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (2h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (2h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (2h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (2h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (2h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (3h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (3h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (3h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (3h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (4h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (4h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (4h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (4h) : 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 (5h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (5h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (5h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (5h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (5h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (6h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (7h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (7h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (8h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (8h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (8h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (8h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (8h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (8h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (8h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (8h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (8h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (8h) : 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 (8h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (8h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (8h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (8h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (8h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (9h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (9h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (9h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (9h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (9h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (9h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (9h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (9h) : Packers will get in
beast (9h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
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 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7h / Random Babble / 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.