I get what Fischer is trying to say but in the long run most of it doesn't matter.
Originally Posted by: wpr
1. Yeah, an odd list of guys to complain about being released, I think all of them except Newman are available to be put on the PS. And fans were demanding that Newman got released.
And while certain fans absolutely loved Caleb Jones, he's currently not signed to any team, not even on a PS.
2. I have never understood the extra love that WR Toure gets. Nothing wrong with him, and nothing against him, but why fans seem to be extra interested in him, vs WR DeBose?
Heck, #2 is the same as #1, except the writer wanted to have an exclusive number for WR Toure, to break him apart from all the others. Why is Toure special enough to get his own number away from all his teammates?
3. Yeah the QB and K battles were not won... but everyone in them loss.
4. The article falsely claims that the Packers had the option to outright release RB Dillon, that is false. Teams can only out right release injured players during the off-season, and they can not do that during the preseason nor season.
The Packers true options with an injured player that isn't making the 53 man roster as follows.
IR/Keep or IR/Release
If you select the release option, then the injury player (depending on their veterans status) goes on Waivers and if no team claims them, then they revert back to the IR. Where the keep option, sends them straight to the IR. Either way, he ends up on the IR.
So what's the point of kicking Dillon while he's down with a release label that doesn't change anything? There is no upside for that in a player that has been with your team for years! Either way, the Packers and Dillon can either agree to an injury settlement, where Dillon will be released after the settlement, or they can disagree and Dillon can stay on the IR on the entire year.
Unless you want to kick him while he's down, there is no reason to use the IR/release option.I said there was no way the Packers would use all their return from IR before the season.
Though I am surprised they used one on DT Ford, maybe he showed better than I realized, as I thought he was going to be an easy release.
5. Now this is a great point, though it's true every year and for every team. You have to make some tough choices that might not be so clear.
Even teams that aren't considered so good, can have a number player claimed off their releases and the Packers have four released players on other teams 53 man roster now. So apparently other teams thought they were talented enough to make a 53 man roster. Are the Packers just that deep, or did the Packers make an error? Too soon to say, but usually the released players don't make the teams regret it, but once in a while they do.
6. Well, this must of happened after the article, but again the article is mistaken, as the Packers have (assuming he passes his physical and stays healthy), the Packers have rookie UDFA K Brayden Narveson on the roster for week 1.
Though even if they didn't, I would argue with saying the "Tradition in trouble"... as that's wrong, the Packers have the longest streak in the NFL and the consecutive year streak is at risk, but the tradition would still be extremely strong, even if it took only a year off.
I think it does say something that the Packers both do a good job scouting UDFAs and that they give UDFAs a fair shot at making the 53 man roster.
I do find it surprising that the year that the Packers broke their rule about not guaranteeing any part of the contract for UDFA, is the first year in this streak that none of their own UDFAs could make the roster.