Bishop released

by Guest Mon Jun 17, 2013 6:35 pm

Bishop confirmed his first visit will be with the Minnesota Vikings on Tuesday and said several other teams have shown interest.

by Guest Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:25 pm

...so they take a $1.6M cap hit to save $1.8M... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I bet the guy has a rockin' season wherever he goes... I hope he does. They tried to pimp him with no good reason because they thought they could...and he held his ground. Bishop's a class act. No whining...no bitching--he's the type who will let his play on the field speak for him...

Mark my words...another of TT's now patented periodic outright fuck-ups. The old man is slippin' Just a good ol' plain abscess of judgment by the albino squad...

by milani Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:08 pm

You figure this one out. We talked all last season about how we really missed Bishop and now we let him go. Duck must know something we don't. Vikings pick him up and you'd have to favor them as the team to win the division now. The only LB close to being a run stopper now is Hawk and he is not that quick to the ball.
Maybe TT is looking at a free agent LB now. I'd get on the phone and call Urlacher. Who else can step in just like that and fill his shoes? No one.

by Guest Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:47 pm

milani wrote:You figure this one out. We talked all last season about how we really missed Bishop and now we let him go. Duck must know something we don't. Vikings pick him up and you'd have to favor them as the team to win the division now. The only LB close to being a run stopper now is Hawk and he is not that quick to the ball.
Maybe TT is looking at a free agent LB now. I'd get on the phone and call Urlacher. Who else can step in just like that and fill his shoes? No one.

Wrong. They'll never be the favorite to win the division as long as the ponderant experiment continues...

by Guest Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:53 pm

Bishop confirms Vikings visit, says he’s motivated
Posted by Darin Gantt on June 17, 2013, 7:04 PM EDT
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] AP
The Packers apparently lit a fire under [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] with his release.
And they may have to put it out twice a year.
Bishop told ESPNWisconsin.com’s Jason Wilde that being released today will serve as motivation, something a former sixth-rounder who worked his way into a starting job never needed.
“This is definitely a motivating factor. For several reasons, moreso I think than anything in my entire career,” Bishop said. “Just from the standpoint of actually being cut. You figure it’s going to happen to everybody eventually at some point in their career, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
“There’s something about being released that’s definitely going to add another chip to my shoulders. It’s motivation. It’s nothing negative about this whole situation. I think it’s all part of the plan, and I have to keep playing it out. I think it’s going to be good. I think all that is going to help me reach my goal.”
That goal might be sticking it to the Packers, as Bishop confirmed he’s headed to Minnesota tomorrow. Judd Zulgad of 1500ESPN.com in Minneapolis reported that Bishop [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].
Bishop said the Packers told him they would try to trade him, but never offered him the option of a pay cut. He signed a four-year, $19 million contract extension in 2011, and was due to make $3.464 million this year.
Coming off a torn hamstring tendon in the preseason opener last year, Bishop didn’t participate in OTAs or minicamp, though he said he was healthy now.
The Packers also cut [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (who replaced Bishop) after he suffered a torn ACL.
Not getting a chance to come back has clearly made an impression on Bishop, and apparently his choice of visits.
“If you had to go in a dark alley, I’d be one of the guys you’d take with you because you knew what you were going to get,” Bishop said. “At the same time, I feel like I haven’t done enough – as a Packer or as a football player. I feel like I have a lot more potential to fulfill. That’s my next goal, wherever it is. I still feel I can do a lot of great things.”
And while he might draw interest from others, this is where we point out that the Vikings play the Packers on Oct. 27, on NBC’s Sunday Night Football.

Bush fuckin' league...

by MB20 Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:25 pm

_HD_ wrote:...so they take a $1.6M cap hit to save $1.8M... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I bet the guy has a rockin' season wherever he goes... I hope he does. They tried to pimp him with no good reason because they thought they could...and he held his ground. Bishop's a class act. No whining...no bitching--he's the type who will let his play on the field speak for him...

Mark my words...another of TT's now patented periodic outright fuck-ups. The old man is slippin' Just a good ol' plain abscess of judgment by the albino squad...

Just like releasing Collins was.

I really, really doubt that the Packers release the guy if they thought he was anything close to what he was. I doubt he was even going to get medical clearance anytime soon.

And only in Milani's world does an ILB with a rubber-band hamstring and a rubber-armed QB become instant division faves

by duck Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:07 pm

MB20 wrote:
_HD_ wrote:...so they take a $1.6M cap hit to save $1.8M... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I bet the guy has a rockin' season wherever he goes... I hope he does. They tried to pimp him with no good reason because they thought they could...and he held his ground. Bishop's a class act. No whining...no bitching--he's the type who will let his play on the field speak for him...

Mark my words...another of TT's now patented periodic outright fuck-ups. The old man is slippin' Just a good ol' plain abscess of judgment by the albino squad...

Just like releasing Collins was.

I really, really doubt that the Packers release the guy if they thought he was anything close to what he was. I doubt he was even going to get medical clearance anytime soon.

And only in Milani's world does an ILB with a rubber-band hamstring and a rubber-armed QB become instant division faves

It's simple, really. If the Packers are letting go of the 2010 Bishop, it's a fuck up of catastrophic proportions. If he's significantly less than that, it's a business move they had to make.

For the former to be true, as HD is suggesting, that would mean that TT is an absolute total fucking idiot, a doofus of Rooferistic proportions. And that's simply not the case. We all rag on him for some of his decisions, but there's usually some reasoning or rationale behind them, even if we disagree. There's no way he simply cuts a quality player -- arguably a potential core player -- over a relatively insignificant amount of money.

There's got to be a legitimate reason for this move. And I'm betting on the obvious: he's damaged good.

by Guest Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:27 pm

One possibility may be Barnett, 32, who most recently played for the Buffalo Bills and is a free agent. Barnett, a former No. 1 pick of the Packers, has ties to Green Bay and occasionally visits.Barnett’s overall speed and lateral movement remain his strongest attributes and could play into the Packers’ defensive future. Barnett played in 16 games at Buffalo last season. He racked up 112 tackles, two sacks and three forced fumbles for the Bills. He also is familiar with the 3-4 and his leadership could be an asset on a defense that was torched last year.

by Guest Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:11 am

duck wrote:
MB20 wrote:
_HD_ wrote:...so they take a $1.6M cap hit to save $1.8M... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I bet the guy has a rockin' season wherever he goes... I hope he does. They tried to pimp him with no good reason because they thought they could...and he held his ground. Bishop's a class act. No whining...no bitching--he's the type who will let his play on the field speak for him...

Mark my words...another of TT's now patented periodic outright fuck-ups. The old man is slippin' Just a good ol' plain abscess of judgment by the albino squad...

Just like releasing Collins was.

I really, really doubt that the Packers release the guy if they thought he was anything close to what he was. I doubt he was even going to get medical clearance anytime soon.

And only in Milani's world does an ILB with a rubber-band hamstring and a rubber-armed QB become instant division faves

It's simple, really. If the Packers are letting go of the 2010 Bishop, it's a fuck up of catastrophic proportions. If he's significantly less than that, it's a business move they had to make.

For the former to be true, as HD is suggesting, that would mean that TT is an absolute total fucking idiot, a doofus of Rooferistic proportions. And that's simply not the case. We all rag on him for some of his decisions, but there's usually some reasoning or rationale behind them, even if we disagree. There's no way he simply cuts a quality player -- arguably a potential core player -- over a relatively insignificant amount of money.

There's got to be a legitimate reason for this move. And I'm betting on the obvious: he's damaged good.

I guess soon is when we'll find out...for if Bishop passes the physicals on his tour--he'll receive offers. You can bet the offers won't come if there are concerns about the hammy. Even the Pack's inside leak suggested that the move wasn't in any way based on injury concerns and Bishop himself says he's 100% recovered.

No...this was a personnel decision where they essentially value Hawk and Brad Jones more--and that's just plain misguided. Watch it all unfold. I'm saying Bishop has a monster season regardless of where he goes. Why? Because that's the type of man he is and, as usual, you mostly all overestimate the albino--especially now that he continues to clearly reflect that he has departed his prime...

by throttleplate Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:34 am

Yawn,i just woke up from a long snooze on the beach here in the philippines and decided to see what all you states side couch coaches and gms are yappin about.What i take from all the gms here is we are loosin a noodle legged linebacker whom cant cover his grandma but is a nice man and wants to be an allpro and show the world he is and then we have Albino whom is getting a case of Al Davis alztiemers diesease and needs to be wearing depends diapers soon as he is shitting all over himself.I will side with the man whom needs the depends untill bishop plays 16 straight games and if he does then albino may become more al davis like sooner than al davis actually did.

by duck Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:38 pm

_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:
MB20 wrote:
_HD_ wrote:...so they take a $1.6M cap hit to save $1.8M... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I bet the guy has a rockin' season wherever he goes... I hope he does. They tried to pimp him with no good reason because they thought they could...and he held his ground. Bishop's a class act. No whining...no bitching--he's the type who will let his play on the field speak for him...

Mark my words...another of TT's now patented periodic outright fuck-ups. The old man is slippin' Just a good ol' plain abscess of judgment by the albino squad...

Just like releasing Collins was.

I really, really doubt that the Packers release the guy if they thought he was anything close to what he was. I doubt he was even going to get medical clearance anytime soon.

And only in Milani's world does an ILB with a rubber-band hamstring and a rubber-armed QB become instant division faves

It's simple, really. If the Packers are letting go of the 2010 Bishop, it's a fuck up of catastrophic proportions. If he's significantly less than that, it's a business move they had to make.

For the former to be true, as HD is suggesting, that would mean that TT is an absolute total fucking idiot, a doofus of Rooferistic proportions. And that's simply not the case. We all rag on him for some of his decisions, but there's usually some reasoning or rationale behind them, even if we disagree. There's no way he simply cuts a quality player -- arguably a potential core player -- over a relatively insignificant amount of money.

There's got to be a legitimate reason for this move. And I'm betting on the obvious: he's damaged good.

I guess soon is when we'll find out...for if Bishop passes the physicals on his tour--he'll receive offers. You can bet the offers won't come if there are concerns about the hammy. Even the Pack's inside leak suggested that the move wasn't in any way based on injury concerns and Bishop himself says he's 100% recovered.

No...this was a personnel decision where they essentially value Hawk and Brad Jones more--and that's just plain misguided. Watch it all unfold. I'm saying Bishop has a monster season regardless of where he goes. Why? Because that's the type of man he is and, as usual, you mostly all overestimate the albino--especially now that he continues to clearly reflect that he has departed his prime...

There will be TWO checkpoints regarding Bishop. The first, as you say, will be whether he passes his physical and receives offers. How could a player of his calibre who, on the surface, appears to be healthy, not attract offers??

The second, and more important, checkpoint will be when Bishop gets on the field and plays for a new team (if indeed that happens). Just because he passes a physical does not mean he can play at the same level he once did. Maybe the Packers know something that the other teams don't. Will Bishop be the same player he was in 2010? That's the real question.

If it all goes down the way you call it, HD, I will tip my hat to you.

I don't think it's a matter of my "overestimating" the albino. i just don't think he's as abysmally stupid as he would have to be to fit your scenario.

by duck Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:39 pm

NJPackfan wrote:One possibility may be Barnett, 32, who most recently played for the Buffalo Bills and is a free agent. Barnett, a former No. 1 pick of the Packers, has ties to Green Bay and occasionally visits.Barnett’s overall speed and lateral movement remain his strongest attributes and could play into the Packers’ defensive future. Barnett played in 16 games at Buffalo last season. He racked up 112 tackles, two sacks and three forced fumbles for the Bills. He also is familiar with the 3-4 and his leadership could be an asset on a defense that was torched last year.

No... Barnett's not the answer. We don't need another aging LB with injury issues. We need an emerging young guy with talent.

by Guest Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:54 pm

The flaccid albino would show up at the party looking like George Hamilton with a cock ring before Barnett would ever be brought back... Cool

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:22 pm

Chiefs, Jaguars in the mix for Desmond Bishop, too
Posted by Mike Florio on June 18, 2013, 12:39 PM EDT
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] AP
The Vikings get the first crack at former Packers linebacker [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. But Bishop is making other plans for his NFL future.
Next up on the docket, PFT has confirmed, is a visit with the Chiefs on Thursday. (Ian Rapoport of NFL Network first reported the looming Chiefs visit.) A source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that the Jaguars also are in play for Bishop.
Whoever offers Bishop the kind of contract he’s seeking will have to feel very good about his hamstring, which was seriously injured during the 2012 season. Bishop ultimately may have to accept a deal that is tied to playing time and/or ability to suit up on game days.
If he’s healthy, the 28-year-old Bishop has plenty of football left in him. That’s why physicals, workouts, and ultimately a leap of faith will be critical to determining the next step in his career.

Imagine that... According to some--the Pack has such injury concerns over Bishop that they took a good-sized dead-money cap hit to dump him, but yet--TT's former right-hand man John Dorsey in KC (who can/undoubtedly did make one phone call to find out what's up) is trying to bring him there... Hmmmmmm... I wanna be just like you guys... LOL [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by Guest Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:49 pm

duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:
MB20 wrote:
_HD_ wrote:...so they take a $1.6M cap hit to save $1.8M... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I bet the guy has a rockin' season wherever he goes... I hope he does. They tried to pimp him with no good reason because they thought they could...and he held his ground. Bishop's a class act. No whining...no bitching--he's the type who will let his play on the field speak for him...

Mark my words...another of TT's now patented periodic outright fuck-ups. The old man is slippin' Just a good ol' plain abscess of judgment by the albino squad...

Just like releasing Collins was.

I really, really doubt that the Packers release the guy if they thought he was anything close to what he was. I doubt he was even going to get medical clearance anytime soon.

And only in Milani's world does an ILB with a rubber-band hamstring and a rubber-armed QB become instant division faves

It's simple, really. If the Packers are letting go of the 2010 Bishop, it's a fuck up of catastrophic proportions. If he's significantly less than that, it's a business move they had to make.

For the former to be true, as HD is suggesting, that would mean that TT is an absolute total fucking idiot, a doofus of Rooferistic proportions. And that's simply not the case. We all rag on him for some of his decisions, but there's usually some reasoning or rationale behind them, even if we disagree. There's no way he simply cuts a quality player -- arguably a potential core player -- over a relatively insignificant amount of money.

There's got to be a legitimate reason for this move. And I'm betting on the obvious: he's damaged good.

I guess soon is when we'll find out...for if Bishop passes the physicals on his tour--he'll receive offers. You can bet the offers won't come if there are concerns about the hammy. Even the Pack's inside leak suggested that the move wasn't in any way based on injury concerns and Bishop himself says he's 100% recovered.

No...this was a personnel decision where they essentially value Hawk and Brad Jones more--and that's just plain misguided. Watch it all unfold. I'm saying Bishop has a monster season regardless of where he goes. Why? Because that's the type of man he is and, as usual, you mostly all overestimate the albino--especially now that he continues to clearly reflect that he has departed his prime...

There will be TWO checkpoints regarding Bishop. The first, as you say, will be whether he passes his physical and receives offers. How could a player of his calibre who, on the surface, appears to be healthy, not attract offers??

The second, and more important, checkpoint will be when Bishop gets on the field and plays for a new team (if indeed that happens). Just because he passes a physical does not mean he can play at the same level he once did. Maybe the Packers know something that the other teams don't. Will Bishop be the same player he was in 2010? That's the real question.

If it all goes down the way you call it, HD, I will tip my hat to you.

I don't think it's a matter of my "overestimating" the albino. i just don't think he's as abysmally stupid as he would have to be to fit your scenario.

It's not a question of being abysmally stupid, Duck... It's a question of value judgment, needs assessment and risk aversion. You either have it or you don't. Given that the albino starts out with a peak intellect no greater than the *B* range that impact the first two--it really starts to hurt that his aging brings the conservatism of #3 clearly into repeated foregone opportunity land. True opportunities for performers are hard enough to encounter--but when you're lucky/fortunate enough to already have one and you discard it under the auspices of improvement...well, I take back what I said earlier--that's just plain abysmally fucking stupid...

by milani Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:19 pm

10 wins last season??? 3 first rounders with Jennings and Bishop added to their numbers.
I'd say the Vikings win the division this year. They still have motor man Allen rushing the passer and a pretty decent RB that can go for another 1700 yards. They have a top notch kicker and an upcoming TE. All Ponder has to do is manage the game instead of trying to win it.
The Packers lose 2 of their top 3 defensive players in one season. Matthews cannot carry the load himself. Youth is great but it will be several seasons before it comes to fruition.

by duck Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:37 pm

_HD_ wrote:The flaccid albino would show up at the party looking like George Hamilton with a cock ring before Barnett would ever be brought back...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

LOL! Except that picture of George looks like he's got more than a cock ring wrapped around his unit.

by duck Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:49 pm

8 )milani wrote:10 wins last season??? 3 first rounders with Jennings and Bishop added to their numbers.
I'd say the Vikings win the division this year. They still have motor man Allen rushing the passer and a pretty decent RB that can go for another 1700 yards. They have a top notch kicker and an upcoming TE. All Ponder has to do is manage the game instead of trying to win it.
The Packers lose 2 of their top 3 defensive players in one season. Matthews cannot carry the load himself. Youth is great but it will be several seasons before it comes to fruition.

1) 10 wins last season? Sure, but as bottom feeders the year before, they snuck up on a lot of teams. Won't happen in 2013.

2) Three first rounders? Sounds good on paper. Let's see how they develop. You've already expressed your disdain for youth.

3) Jennings and Bishop? What good is Jennings without a quality QB? How do we even know they'll get Bishop and, if so, how good will he be?

4) Allen and AP? Great players but both are getting old.

5) Top notch kicker and emerging TE? Big deal.

6) Packers losing Woodson? With all due respect to Charles, he should have been gone a year ago. That won't hurt Green Bay at all and it might even help.

7) Matthews doing it alone? We drafted Jones, Perry should return, and we have a very strong secondary.

8 ) Takes a while for youth to mature? Excellent. Then the 2010 Super Bowl champion Packers, the youngest team in the league at that time, should be ready.

by RingoCStarrQB Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:43 pm

Yeah.......why didn't TT just bring Bishop in to training camp to see how he looked. If he was damaged goods, couldn't play, etc........then just let him go and call it a career. Bishop deserves better treatment........his 2010 season was awesome. GO PACK GO

by Guest Tue Jun 18, 2013 10:41 pm

RingoCStarrQB wrote:Yeah.......why didn't TT just bring Bishop in to training camp to see how he looked. If he was damaged goods, couldn't play, etc........then just let him go and call it a career. Bishop deserves better treatment........his 2010 season was awesome. GO PACK GO

Exactly, Ringo #4. Here's the answer to your question, my friend... TT was afraid Bishop would kick ass--thus making his pre-ordained investment/assessment into Jones/Hawk starting at ILB look ill-conceived. You see--I'm betting they made a commitment to Hawk that he wouldn't have to worry about his starting role as long as he played ball on the pimp-slap he took to the purse...

by Guest Wed Jun 19, 2013 11:23 am

Do you agree with the Packers' decision to release Desmond Bishop?
Yes (22%)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
No (78%)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Total Responses: 2013

by duck Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:13 pm

_HD_ wrote:Do you agree with the Packers' decision to release Desmond Bishop?
Yes (22%)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
No (78%)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Total Responses: 2013

I wonder how this would compare to "Do you agree with the Packers' decision to trade Brett Favre" in 2008.

by Guest Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:15 pm

duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:Do you agree with the Packers' decision to release Desmond Bishop?
Yes (22%)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
No (78%)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Total Responses: 2013

I wonder how this would compare to "Do you agree with the Packers' decision to trade Brett Favre" in 2008.

You're really whiffin' on the clue capture with respect to this one, Duc... Therefore, I've had to remove your *k* until further notice...

by duck Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:42 pm

Okay HD, you're right. Let the people decide!! Just to skew the votes properly, every Packer fan gets an extra vote for each can of paint thinner consumed.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by milani Wed Jun 19, 2013 5:10 pm

Lots of teams learn the hard way. Like when we failed to sign Bryce Paup in the 90's or when the 9ers let Ricky Waters go.
Except for 2010 we have been a team that wins with offense and that will have to be our identity for a few more generations.

by Sponsored content

Bishop released

Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Barnett ?

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released

Re: Bishop released