wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

Why would you say it's not possible the Packers keep 7 WR?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



If you read my post you will see that I didn't.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
8 years ago

If you read my post you will see that I didn't.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I just don't understand why you say it's impossible that the Packers keep seven receivers. I'm stunned
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

I just don't understand why you say it's impossible that the Packers keep seven receivers. I'm stunned

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I never said that. What I said was

I can't imagine GB keeping 7 WRs.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Guys I never said it was impossible. I said I can't imagine it happening.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Now a better question from you or anyone else would have been "why?". As several people mentioned there is always an injury factor. There is possibility of a trading excess talent.

Rarely, if ever, does a team keep the absolute best 53. They need the best 53 players who also fill all of their needs. If they kept 7 WRs someone (maybe 2) is going to be inactive every week. They still need to fill ST gunners and other ST positions. It doesn't do them much good to keep the #7 best WR inactive and be short at another position. Yes they do have same flexibility but it is not unlimited. One less QB, TE, DB or whoever will factor in as well. I simply think something will happen between now and the final cut down date that keeps them from carrying 7.

Sorry if disagreeing with the vast majority is a crime.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
8 years ago

I never said that. What I said was





Now a better question from you or anyone else would have been "why?". As several people mentioned there is always an injury factor. There is possibility of a trading excess talent.

Rarely, if ever, does a team keep the absolute best 53. They need the best 53 players who also fill all of their needs. If they kept 7 WRs someone (maybe 2) is going to be inactive every week. They still need to fill ST gunners and other ST positions. It doesn't do them much good to keep the #7 best WR inactive and be short at another position. Yes they do have same flexibility but it is not unlimited. One less QB, TE, DB or whoever will factor in as well. I simply think something will happen between now and the final cut down date that keeps them from carrying 7.

Sorry if disagreeing with the vast majority is a crime.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Okay, but I just don't see why you think it's impossible the Packers would keep 7 receivers. Teams always keep the top 53 players every year, I mean, we know that already and it's really easy to see how 7 receivers would be in that top 53.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

Okay, but I just don't see why you think it's impossible the Packers would keep 7 receivers. Teams always keep the top 53 players every year, I mean, we know that already and it's really easy to see how 7 receivers would be in that top 53.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



And yet again, I will type S L O W E R to help you understand. I did not say it is impossible. Please show me where I said it or move on.

And once again they do not take the 53 best no matter what. Here's another example. The 10th best OL may be a better athlete than the 4th best DL. They are going to keep the DL because they need the depth.

Let's put the two players at the same position. Make them RBs fighting for the 4th and final spot at that position. A 37 yo may be slightly better than a 23 yo street FA. Odds are they keep the younger player in whom they see a chance for growth in a few years. He technically isn't the better player but he is kept anyway.

It is not the 53 best. It is the 53 who best fit the needs for that specific team at that specific time. That's why they release players and add them back on a few weeks later. They didn't get better. The need they fill became more of a factor.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
8 years ago

And yet again, I will type S L O W E R to help you understand. I did not say it is impossible. Please show me where I said it or move on.

And once again they do not take the 53 best no matter what. Here's another example. The 10th best OL may be a better athlete than the 4th best DL. They are going to keep the DL because they need the depth.

Let's put the two players at the same position. Make them RBs fighting for the 4th and final spot at that position. A 37 yo may be slightly better than a 23 yo street FA. Odds are they keep the younger player in whom they see a chance for growth in a few years. He technically isn't the better player but he is kept anyway.

It is not the 53 best. It is the 53 who best fit the needs for that specific team at that specific time. That's why they release players and add them back on a few weeks later. They didn't get better. The need they fill became more of a factor.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



They release players that they feel will slide through the radar of other 31 NFL teams, but that doesn't mean it's impossible for the Packers to keep 7 receivers. I think it's very possible, although maybe not likely.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
8 years ago
If it wasn't for The Packers playing in Jacksonville week1 and the the d-line suspensions the 1st 4 weeks, I can easily see The Packers keeping 7 wr's.

Cobb and Montgomery(when healthy), will be used as rb's.

Only keeping 2qb's and 1FB makes room for the 6th and 7th wr.

The Packers stay injury free in training camp, Ted is going to work some magic to keep all 7 around.

The Packers are going to need more help on the d-line the 1st 4 weeks.

I expect more movement than in the past at the bottom of the 53 man roster the 1st 4 weeks of the season.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

I think it's very possible, although maybe not likely.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



That is what I have been saying.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
8 years ago

That is what I have been saying.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I know you've been saying it is impossible that the Green Bay Packers keep seven wide receivers. I think it is possible and wouldn't be surprised to see it happen. I just don't know how anyone can say a team that kept 5 TE's is impossible to keep 7 WR's especially after what happened last season to the WR group. I think it is a possibility.
UserPostedImage
isocleas2
8 years ago

If it wasn't for The Packers playing in Jacksonville week1 and the the d-line suspensions the 1st 4 weeks, I can easily see The Packers keeping 7 wr's.

Cobb and Montgomery(when healthy), will be used as rb's.

Only keeping 2qb's and 1FB makes room for the 6th and 7th wr.

The Packers stay injury free in training camp, Ted is going to work some magic to keep all 7 around.

The Packers are going to need more help on the d-line the 1st 4 weeks.

I expect more movement than in the past at the bottom of the 53 man roster the 1st 4 weeks of the season.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



I was going to make a post that was eerily similar to this, glad I read yours first. The only difference would be that I think if all WRs stay healthy T.T. will still cut one to get to 6.

I like Abbrederis but imo alot of fans have homer goggles on when viewing him given his history with the state. What I think a lot of GMs see is an extremely injury prone 5th round receiver who's one more concussion away from being out of the league. If everyone stays healthy he's still the odd man out imo, with a small chance that they cut Trevor Davis instead with hopes he can sneak onto the practice squad.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.
Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.
Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Will there be a tracker on the ball or something?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : uh oh
Martha Careful (1-Apr) : Too bad camera's can't spot the ball as well.
Mucky Tundra (1-Apr) : So will the chain gang be gone completely or will they still be around as a backup or whatever?
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : The method for measuring first downs in the NFL will switch from chain gangs to camera-based technology in 2025, the league announced.
Martha Careful (1-Apr) : A big step in the right direction. Just put in the college system is very very good.
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : NFL has passed a rule that allows both teams to possess the ball in OT during the regular season
Zero2Cool (1-Apr) : Touchbacks on kickoffs will now bring the ball to the 35-yard line.
beast (31-Mar) : It might of gotten more popular recently, but braiding hair (even men) in certain cultures goes back for centuries.
Martha Careful (30-Mar) : Is men braiding their hair a new style thing? Watching the NCAA men's tournament many players have done
Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Ha. Well, it'd be nice for folks to reset their own password. Via validated email 😏
beast (29-Mar) : Monopoly was supposed to be an educational game, that show how evil capitalism was and how we should avoid it
beast (29-Mar) : Lol, I was thinking username would be better, as then I wouldn't have to keep an email up to date lol 😂
beast (29-Mar) : Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
wpr (29-Mar) : sure is
Zero2Cool (29-Mar) : Monopoly is a rip off of The Landlord's Game
wpr (27-Mar) : 28 days until the draft
earthquake (27-Mar) : Which seemed strange to my 9 year old self, that you could be a fan for a team other than the one you play for
earthquake (27-Mar) : Nothing eventful happened, other than it being clear that he was a bengals fan
earthquake (27-Mar) : And we went and hung out with him one afternoon, I must have been 9 or so
earthquake (27-Mar) : That’s wild, when I was a kid my friend lived in the same apartment complex in De Pere
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : Only career highspot was a 200 yard rushing game while playing for the Cardinals
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : He is a former Packer. Drafted out of Northern Illinois. Didn't do much in GB.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Despicable
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Former NFL. I think Packers too
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : NFL RB Leshon Johnson has been charged in a massive dog fighting operation, with the FBI seizing over 190 Pit Bulls
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Some real irony of a QB as short as Wilson playing for the Giants
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Giants country, let's be the tall beings of lore!
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : Russell Wilson signs with the Giants.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : I was thinking email because I think it'll make folks keep it up todate lol
wpr (25-Mar) : I don't think there is a significant difference. I use a user name for many. Others email.
Martha Careful (25-Mar) : email
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : would it be better to use EMAIL or USERNAME to log into a site?
wpr (25-Mar) : Thanks Zero
Zero2Cool (24-Mar) : New forum has the ability to Thank a post now.
beast (24-Mar) : And the only time they have won the Championship in an even year, was the first time they did, in 2006.
beast (24-Mar) : Since 2007, there have been 10 odd numbered years, Wisconsin Women have won the Championship in 7 of those 10 odd numbered years.
buckeyepackfan (24-Mar) : Congratulations Lady Badger Hockey Team. NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Zero2Cool (23-Mar) : I don't think it's completed yet. it was just announced last month, right?
dhazer (23-Mar) : did netflix ever release the Packers documentary
Zero2Cool (21-Mar) : And it is glorious!
beast (21-Mar) : Unsigned FA QB Rodgers is supposedly in the Steelers building
Martha Careful (19-Mar) : But I don't own a car! So can I still use it in my apartment?
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : btw, new site auto updates
Zero2Cool (19-Mar) : Woohoo!
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
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

30-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

29-Mar / Random Babble / wpr

28-Mar / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / dfosterf

28-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

26-Mar / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

25-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

24-Mar / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

24-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

21-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.