Bishop to be cut (Release official 6/17)

quote:

Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Bishop was not an indispensable cog and he wasn't Ray Lewis. And I really doubt Ted Thompson made a decision like this without consulting Winston Moss, Dom Capers, and Mike McCarthy. He says we can't afford all 3 ILBs, and asks which 2 do we keep? Clearly they all agreed Bishop was the odd man out. 4 professional talent evaluators all agreed, that's good enough for me.

Two points on this:

1) TT is clearly an excellent GM and talent evaluator. But nobody's perfect, and his track record at LB is especially alarming. He deserves a ton of credit for the homerun of Matthews. But I can't think of another LB move that has paid off other than that one. He overpaid for Poppinga, Chillar, and Hawk. They clearly didn't appreciate what they initially had in Bishop, as he only got his opportunity when they had no choice but to play him. I'm hopeful on Perry, but the jury is still out. Bottom line -- TT has certainly earned his credibility, but most of that trust hasn't been earned with decisions at the LB position.

2) Not to pick on you in particular (I enjoy your posts), but this is quite an about face from some of your posted comments right after the 49er loss in the "coaching vs. talent" debate on the defense. I won't link to those posts (they are back on page 11 of the Packer forum), but there was a steady theme of how big the talent drop-off was from Bishop to Jones and how having a thumper like Bishop at the ILB position would have made a dramatic difference. But now that they have apparently decided to move on, he's become just another replaceable part on the defense.

quote:

Originally posted by PackerRuss:
Is this the classic case that a Hawk with 2 legs is better than Bishop with 1 leg?

I think it's more the case that Jones with two legs is better than Bishop with one. I think it's all about the injury- if the Packers believed the post-injury Bishop was going to be close to the same player as the pre-injury one I doubt they make this move.

I've always wondered why I felt offended after watching the ESPN bit "Come on Man!"

Fair points Robin.

1) I think there's more to the story about why Bishop didn't play for a couple years. On the surface you would think it was for financial reasons, i.e. they're paying Barnett and Hawk a lot of money so they're going to play them. However, as the move we're currently discussion proves, they're not afraid to move on from higher priced veterans if a solid, cheaper option is available. I think Bishop struggled with something early on in his career and may still be struggling with it...like grasping the playbook or making the right calls or whatever. He was forced into action in 2010 and played with a ton of effort and energy and earned more playing time. Had there been a better option I'm not convinced a move like this wouldn't have been made sooner. Now they have Jones who they seem to think is a better option.

And yes Thompson has overpaid for LBs in the past, but like I said it's not JUST Ted Thompson deciding these things. Ultimately yes it is his decision, but he takes input from the LB coach, the DCoordinator, and the Head Coach. I doubt he overrules all of them and makes a decision they don't fully support. No they probably don't give input on the financials specifically, but they give their input on if Player X is worth keeping around for a long time. To me those mistakes shouldn't be pinned solely on Thompson, it was a miss for the entire chain of command.

2) Yeah I did say that. Opinions change, views evolve. At the time we watched the 49ers play hard and physical like Bishop while the Packers ILBs were running around lost, so I think it was a natural reaction to say that physical player like Bishop would have made the difference. He may not have. I blamed half of the disaster on the lack of film available to create a truly solid gameplan and the other half on the players not playing smart. Having that stew for 5 months and watching the game again a couple times, I don't necessarily think a more physical player like Bishop would have made that big a difference. It was a lack of discipline that allowed that game to get out of control and Bishop doesn't necessarily play disciplined football anyway, he is an instinctual player who either makes the big play or misses big. Jones and Hawk are either in the right spot and make the stop or they miss by a inch. Playing this offense that forces the defense to play smart, disciplined football I don't want the guy who doesn't always do either of those things.

It would have been nice if we could have gotten something for him.


Jersey Al's take...

Why Releasing Desmond Bishop Makes Sense For The Packers

It seems pretty simple. They hesitated playing Bishop because he had often been out of position (at least that's what I recall) and now he's leaving earlier than expected. The thinking part apparently wasn't there. And Hawk has stuck around because the thinking part is there, despite only average physical talent. So it appears they prefer brain over brawn. Go figure with people like TT, McCarthy, and Capers in charge.

I think how Bishop comes back from the injury and if there might be long term damage from the injury are big factors.

quote:

Originally posted by GBFanForLife:
I hope Ted doesn't have a dog.

He does or at least did, got his Lab from moonlighterlabs.com, per their website, same place my daughter & SIL got their Lab from.

My kudo's also to Doc for the scoop

I hope TT can work out a trade for something, anything, if a re-structured deal does not happen.

At this point I'm thinking the reasons for this are more along the lines of too much cash tied up in the LB position and the log jam of bodies already there, vs it being due to health or inadequate recovery from the injury. JMHO.

Can't teach that.

Rock on, Doc. Your "good authority" is good enough for me any day.

I suspect that most Packer fans who watched the team in 08 and 09 remember 55 as a big hitter but who was "often" (subjective phrase) out of position. The Barnett injury permitted GB to see the best of Desmond and I had huge hopes for his return. Teams like the 49ers were built for Bishop in that he could stuff the inside run game and they wouldn't challenge his pass defense skills too often. The negative of this is that teams like Det Chicago et all that throw the ball 45 times will expose this limitation in his game.

I won't forget his contributions to the Championship team of 2010, the game saving tackle of Desean Jackson and of course the fumble recovery in the SuperBowl. BTW for all the Bishop critics, watch that play again (I have about 75 times) how is it possible if Bishop is slow for an ILB to run around the line and swoop up that fumble and advance the ball 5 more yards before being tackled
Pack88

well this ****ing sucks.

Point worth remembering:

@KCousineau09: Packers have let Harris, Wells, Kampman, Barnett, Colledge, and Grant walk. None of those moves have backfired.

quote:

Originally posted by GPack88:
BTW for all the Bishop critics, watch that play again (I have about 75 times) how is it possible if Bishop is slow for an ILB to run around the line and swoop up that fumble and advance the ball 5 more yards before being tackled
Pack88

I'm not being critical of him at all. I love the way he plays football, he's a good ILB. I was just throwing out some possible explanations as to why they would cut him...not a fit for what they want to do schematically, injured, etc. And I don't think he's slow, but I wouldn't call him a speedy or fast LB...his 4.8 40 yard dash at the combine reflects that. That doesn't mean he's a bad LB or isn't athletic, as you say he has shown some ability in the past.

quote:

Originally posted by cuqui:
Point worth remembering:

@KCousineau09: Packers have let Harris, Wells, Kampman, Barnett, Colledge, and Grant walk. None of those moves have backfired.

Exactly. TT may not always make the right move, but letting aging players go has rarely backfired for him. Even Mike Wahle didn't light up the world when he went to Carolina (made a pro bowl, likely based on his play with the Packers, then was released after 3 years).

I'm guessing TT is letting Bishop go b/c he's not going to be ready for training camp. You can't pay a guy $4m a year to HOPE he can come back and be what he was in 2010. This move actually gives me hope for Sherrod, as TT clearly doesn't like keeping players that aren't recovering well from injury (see Smith and Bishop).

Also makes you wonder about Manning. I read a lot of good things last year about him, but it was all derailed by a parasite he got in training camp. I think he lost a ton of weight and probably took him most of the season to get it back. Gotta wonder if they really really like him, making Bishop expendable.

quote:

Originally posted by GPack88:
I suspect that most Packer fans who watched the team in 08 and 09 remember 55 as a big hitter but who was "often" (subjective phrase) out of position. The Barnett injury permitted GB to see the best of Desmond and I had huge hopes for his return. Teams like the 49ers were built for Bishop in that he could stuff the inside run game and they wouldn't challenge his pass defense skills too often. The negative of this is that teams like Det Chicago et all that throw the ball 45 times will expose this limitation in his game.

I won't forget his contributions to the Championship team of 2010, the game saving tackle of Desean Jackson and of course the fumble recovery in the SuperBowl. BTW for all the Bishop critics, watch that play again (I have about 75 times) how is it possible if Bishop is slow for an ILB to run around the line and scoop up that fumble and advance the ball 5 more yards before being tackled
Pack88

Niners apparently had interest in Manning and were visibly upset(in their war room cam) when the Pack traded up to get him

quote:

Originally posted by Packy:


Jersey Al's take...

ftfy

I'm not worrying about Bishop leaving and finding success elsewhere. I'm worried about what's left behind. Hawk and Jones have to be among the weakest pair of starting 3-4 ILBs in the league.

quote:

Hawk and Jones have to be among the weakest pair of starting 3-4 ILBs in the league.

Who says they're going to be on the field at the same time, a majority of the time?

quote:

Originally posted by heyward:
I'm not worrying about Bishop leaving and finding success elsewhere. I'm worried about what's left behind. Hawk and Jones have to be among the weakest pair of starting 3-4 ILBs in the league.

Maybe the assumption is that opposing OL's are going to have to worry about CM3, Neal and Perry so much, that the ILB's, will have a better chance at making plays.

Pressure the outside, and the inside collapses.

I find Satori's take more plausible, Dom and team are coming up with packages that will only have 1 ILB on the field.

what's the plan if jones tears his acl in pre-season and manning blows a hammy in practice?

quote:

Originally posted by johnnie gray:
what's the plan if jones tears his acl in pre-season and manning blows a hammy in practice?

How many ILB's do you want to carry on the team? Not saying I wouldn't prefer Bishop, just that you can only carry so many ILB's on the roster.

you don't have to make the final cut downs until after training camp. today is june 12.

unless they need the cap space right now (which they don't), why not wait and see who's heatlhy and available at the end of august belfore cutting bishop? there's a good channce one or more of the ilbs on the team right now could be on ir or nursing nagging injuries before the season starts.

Has he even been cut yet?

They've got Lattimore, Francois and Manning behind Jones and Hawk. I'm guessing they would rather gamble/depend on the development of that trio than gamble/depend on Bishop's hamstring returning to normal.

Don't forget about Barrington. It wouldn't surprise me if he winds up being the best of the bunch.

quote:

Originally posted by Iowacheese:

quote:

Originally posted by Packy:


Jersey Al's take...

ftfy

Hateful.

quote:

Originally posted by Satori:
If you're going to sling arrows in areas where you don't know jack-diddly squat, you've got to do a much better job of eating the never-ending crow buffet that's on your plate

In other words, if you're going to post like an ass, be prepared to be treated like one

signed,

Your all-time favorite poster at X4 ( aka the putz who pwned you)

The only part you got right is the "putz". Please spare me your pathetic representation of x4 virtue. I said it was a stupid idea to cut him. No apology needed for that. And being skeptical of a x4 poster and their "sources" and inside scoops is hardly unprecedented. Doc got his props, and he/she hardly needs your dumb ass "standing up" for them.

This just another weak attempt by you to pick a fight where there was none. Shove the rest directly up your ass... pwned.

IC, who is that in your avatar, Ryan Braun or Edgar Allen Poe?

Sartori getting powned as usual! Burn city!

Gebins to you Doc! Good job on the inside info!

As bad as our LB's (except C3) were last year, I was really hoping to having Bishop back and at 100%. I sure hope this really is a health concern, because I don't think Hawk and company are going to cut it.

Maybe MM and Mad Dom are going with a new 5-0-6 defense. 2 outside stand up pass rushers, 3 DL type with anywhere from 0 to 3 guys in a 3 point stance depending on down, distance and opposing personnel and 6 DBs. Getting the 11 best defensive players on the field.

quote:

Originally posted by heyward:
Don't forget about Barrington. It wouldn't surprise me if he winds up being the best of the bunch.

Im expecting big things from Manning and Barrington over the next 2 seasons

quote:

Originally posted by Music City:
Doc got his props, and he/she

pretty sure there are no women doctors out there.

Ameyeright?

Obviously the Packers see something in A.J. Hawk that a lot of us can't. Hawks contract #'s went from ludicrous to a more cap friendly ridiculous. But still, based on his production, ridiculous. Trying to get Bishop to restructure I can understand. If they were convinced Bishop was permanently damaged I could see but he should not have been able to get through his physical if that were the sole case.

But neither Hawk or Brad Jones are anything other than ordinary.

quote:

pretty sure there are no women doctors out there.