Packers should try to acquire Vernon Davis

The bold text is nice, but I think you are supposed to use all caps when you yell on the innerwebs.

You mean the same way Keith Jackson said he'd never play in Green Bay, held out for 5-6 games in 1995 and then was a key guy in the 1996 Super Bowl run?

Good point. History always repeats itself.

I agree on this 100%. Now if they didn't trade for him because they were worried he'd be a locker room cancer that's one thing (but Aaron Rodgers supposedly wanted him and knew him from Cal).

 

If Ted didn't make the trade because he didn't want to give up a 3rd round pick, then it was a bad move.

 

 

Originally Posted by chickenboy:

That wasn't the starting lineup that Starks had. He had Clifton and Bulaga at Tackle with Wells at Center. Makes a big difference. 

 

As I said, TT has stated that they explore every option. I'm sure they spoke with SF and probably Davis' agent to gauge interest. "Anything serious" is a relative phrase, Davis was had for a 6th and 7th, I'm not sure what you would consider a "serious" offer. He covets mid-round picks so I am positive he wasn't going to offer more than a 6th, if that much. In the end I would speculate that they probably didn't make a serious offer because they knew Davis didn't want to be in GB. I don't think TT passes on trades for no reason. 

Originally Posted by MichiganPacker:

Keith Jackson was still a Pro Bowl player in '96. Davis is not a Pro Bowler right now. Big difference in terms of hassle. 

That's a good point. Jordy is out and the WR corps are a bit banged up. Might as well skip on improving a position of weakness then. 

 

However, I do realize your main point is you believe TT made a nice serious effort on vetting VD and/or offering or not offering something for him. Personally I don't. Maybe the media can ask him at the press conference this week and we can all get the 'real' truth.

 

Yeah, that defense didn't have anything to do with it.  Vernon Davis is Keith Jackson, the ****ing lynchpin.  

 

Tag this one for stupid post of the year.

Loaded guns, arrests and piles of coke appear to be worth the hassle.

I'm all for trading for a LT instead. Count me in ChiliJon. That, or a DL who can sack a ****ing QB.

  are there any more old dead horses we can dredge up to speculate about? cuz it's all so meaningful and fascinating that I'm in awe and can't wait to read the next nugget of gold.

Brent wanted Randy Moss. 

 

Players should stay in their ****ing lane. 

I didn't say he was the lynchpin, I was saying that not trading for guys because they don't want to Green Bay is a poor excuse. Of course the defense was the key. They had a front four that could put pressure on the opposing QB without having to blitz. Interestingly enough, not a single one of those guys was drafted by the Packers (White, Dotson, Jones, and Brown). That's the same reason the Giants beat the Packers in the playoffs twice recently and why Denver's defense is good. Rush 4 and get pressure consistently and you make even great QBs look mortal.

 

I agree with a lot of stuff you post and you have some great insights, but you seem to enjoy trying to pick fights instead of have a discussion.

Or they could have won several in a row. 

 

I don't know if Ted called about Vernon Davis, but I do know that our TE situation is dreadful. Richard Rodgers is a liability and Quarles is nothing special, and apparently a moron.

 

Rumor has it the Browns are taking calls on Joe Thomas, Mack ,etc... or as mentioned, Joe Staley ( 9ers) might be available. Vernon Davis - interesting.  Joe Thomas or Staley  ? - Boooyah !!! (David Bakteria was last seen still reeling backwards somewhere in Colorado)  

I like Bak. Try hard guy with a lot of fight. IMO the guy has given 100% of what he's got to the offense.

 

But stick a Joe Staley or Joe Thomas next to Sitton and Linsley. I'm doing that in a split second if it presents itself. Do whatever you can to assemble the best offensive line possible before anything else.  

Scolari will let the brain trust know all they need to know about Joe Staley.

Sounds like the Rams might be willing to part with TE Jared Cook.  Not sure what the price would be though.

Word on Thomas is the price presently is two firsts. Interest in moving him right now is apparently only if someone's willing to overpay.

And gladly giving up a 1st round pick or two. Gladly two, if it is Thomas. I would make that trade lightning fast.

He's worth one 1st, with maybe a 5th. No way I'd give two 1st's for him.

Why not trade our next 3 first rounders for JJ Watt and our next 3 second rounders for an ILB. Why even bother with draft picks when you can just acquire veteran stopgaps to fill holes.

Aaron Rodgers needs to throw more INTs.

Trade our 1st rounder for Joe Staley.

Vernon Davis is our Keith Jackson

The dum is strong in this thread!

The Browns would F:ck up those 2 picks anyway. 

Poking around on trade deadline day, was told the #Packers DID NOT inquire about TE Vernon Davis, who went from SF to Denver yesterday.

— Rob Demovsky (@RobDemovsky) November 3, 2015

Shocked doesn't even begin to express my reaction. Thompson bamboozzeled again.

I have no idea whether TT does or does not explore every option, but for those who are convinced the Packers' front office does indeed seriously explore trades with other teams, how do you explain the fact that TT has not made a single trade involving a player in what more than 6 years, while Belichek and the Patriots seem to make multiple trades every year? We just witnessed the Broncos make a trade, the Seahawks have made trades, why do other elite teams make trades but not the Pack? I think it is a subject worthy of discussion.

 

 

I also tend to believe that actions speaks louder than words, and the action, or inaction, on the trade front suggests the Packer front office is not very interested in acquiring players from other teams.

I wouldn't give up a 1st for Staley. He's 31. Price for Joe would be more reasonable than that. Maybe mid to later. 

The questions about whether Ted explores every option are funny.

 

They guy probably inspects the tread depth on his tires after every drive to work to make sure the next rotation is on schedule. 

I'd give up a 3rd for Staley. That is pretty expensive & about right. 

 

If someone else wants to give up more, let 'em.

 

To give up (2) 6th's (1 pick certainly later in the round) & get Vernon Davis plus a HIGH 7th back.....Nothing wrong with that deal at all.

 

At best, Niners get a high 6th in 2017 (if the Broncos suck in 2016)

X4 never fails. This thread is comedy gold.

After calling around, Demovsky tweeted that Pack didn't even inquire.

 

I remain neither all that surprised nor upset.

For fun, I checked this out. After a quick review, one trade in his entire tenure. Guess who?

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/tr...gb/green-bay-packers

If the 49ers keep going with the fire sale, maybe TT should check out Anquan Boldin.  He's not going to stretch the field, but he does know how to get open - much more than the current group -  and he's sure handed.  Even if it's a half season rental, like Andre Rison, it would be interesting.

Only Ted trade involving an active player that I can remember off the top of my head was for Ryan Grant. Worked out pretty damn well.

 

Ted's not averse to trading during his wheelhouse, namely during the draft. Done pretty well there too. Just ask Belichick.

HEY!  Joseph Randle is available.  We should get him!!!!!

Two I can think of: What's his name, the crap DB from Baltimore he gave a half-eaten ham sandwich for and Ryan Grant, whom he gave up a ham sandwich for but withheld the cheese.

 

Neither in-season to fill a gaping hole on the roster.

I think Belichick doesn't give a ****. He'll make the moves it takes for championships rather than settling for playoffs.

I know they explore every option out there because he's said that they look at everything and leave no stone unturned. I believe him because 1) that's their job and 2) that's a dumb thing to lie about. So I'm sure they considered Davis, maybe even made some informal calls, and then realized it wasn't a good option.

I don't get the fascination with other teams cast offs, especially bad teams. Teams are willing to trade players for a reason, not just because they're sick of seeing them. Usually I think it's a combination of age and contract status...why does GB want to take on a player who is 30+ and has 1 year on his contract? Renting a player for 9-13 games for a draft pick that could be your next Donald Driver. Odds are against that happening, but odds are better that 6th round pick with contribute more of multiple years than some washed up vet will contribute over half a season. If they're not a washed up vet with a year on his contract then they're probably an underwhelming young player that the team doesn't want to deal with any longer. Why exactly do we want to take on someone else's problem? Sure there are examples of cast offs doing well elsewhere, Jerry Hughes comes to mind, but more often than not those players fail for a reason. Again I'd rather gamble on that 6th round pick being the next Donald Driver. Cast offs are cast offs for a reason, rarely does a player go on to make his original team sorry they sent him packing...Marshawn Lynch is the exception to that rule.

Will Davis be to 2015, as Lynch was to 2010?

 

 

 

From what I have read on the innerwebs, that appears to be the case.

I'll play the role of Chickenboy to make it happen