Packers Trade Jayrone Elliott

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

When you claim Chris Odom, the dominoes fall...

He was traded for a conditional 7th rounder, so he needs to stick with Boys for awhile for us to get anything.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

beast
Select Member

7 years ago

He was traded for a conditional 7th rounder, so he needs to stick with Boys for awhile for us to get anything.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Well that upsets me a bit... as I thought as minimum Elliot was a good last string STs player and had nice speed... I would want at least a sure 7th for him and maybe a conditional pick that could go higher.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

7 years ago

This isn't good, is it?

The Cowboys claimed defensive tackle Brian Price off of waivers from the Packers on Sunday and they also traded for one of his defensive teammates from Green Bay. According to reports in both Dallas and Green Bay, the Cowboys have traded a conditional 2018 seventh-round pick for outside linebacker Jayrone Elliott. Elliott made the Packers [more]

Continue Reading @ Josh Alper

Josh Alper wrote:

beast
Select Member

7 years ago

This isn't good, is it?

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Helping the Cowboys is never good... but overall it depends on what you thought of those players... and how helpful they'll be to the Cowboys. If you think they're wasting their time or making mistakes then it might be good.

But I liked Elliot and at minimum he's a good ST player and has speed off the edge.
Price is a good run stopper.

If we don't get at least a 7th round pick out of it, I'm probably gonna be a little unhappy about it.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

Originally Posted by: beast

Clearly, this means they loved Odom more than a guy they'd seen up close for years. Surprising they didn't burn a late rounder on him. Must've really felt they were going to get him as a UDFA.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

yooperfan
Veteran Member

7 years ago

So did an already thin crop of linebackers just get thinner to the point that it's going to hurt, or we going to be okay.
This trade puzzles me!

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

7 years ago

So did an already thin crop of linebackers just get thinner to the point that it's going to hurt, or we going to be okay.
This trade puzzles me!

Originally Posted by: yooperfan

Odom is supposed to be a better version of Elliott. We claimed Odom and needed a roster spot so instead of just cutting Elliott we got a conditional 7th so we can draft the next Chris Odom instead of having to wait for him to clear someone else's waivers.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

beast
Select Member

7 years ago

Clearly, this means they loved Odom more than a guy they'd seen up close for years. Surprising they didn't burn a late rounder on him. Must've really felt they were going to get him as a UDFA.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

I really think you read too much into things. Don't get me wrong, you could be correct, but you could could be completely wrong. 🤷

I mean ... Must've thought they were gonna sign him ... do we even know they looked at him as an UDFA? They looked at many others by bringing them in for predraft visits.

I'm just trying to say there oftentimes is a much simpler possibilities... and from what I've seen in life, usually it's the simple possibility, more than the complex conspiracy.

Such as, Odom got on everyone radars putting up a lot of sacks in college, most teams thought to keep a tab on the guy, including probably his pro-day and other stuff and then the Packers watched all 32 teams preseason tape and they liked what they saw Odom did in preseason games... and thought he has more pass rush potential.

gbguy20
Veteran Member

7 years ago

Should have kept jayrone. Id rather have him this season than whichever idiot we draft in the 7th next year

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

wpr
Preferred Member

7 years ago

#10

7th round picks are generally players with little chance of making the 53 on a contending team. As was said in another post it beats trying to grab them as an UDFA.

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

beast (6m) : 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 (18m) : 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 (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : 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 (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : 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 (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

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

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : 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 (17h) : 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?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

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