Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Desmond Bishop Joins Vikings
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Vikefan79


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 29761
Location: Atlanta
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tom cody wrote:
Decent pickup for Minnesota. You have to wonder if former Packer, Greg Jennings lured Bishop to Minnesota.


I'm sure that helped.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 12548
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="spilltray"]
vikingsrule wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if Bishop as a starter in Minnesota ended up looking similar.



All they're going to say is "and I wouldn't be surprised if he regained his 2010 form."

It's like talking to a brick wall. Like I said in the old thread, this signing will be more than likely like signing Robert Ferguson than Darren Sharper.
_________________
@PJHotel_
Uglystik1072<---Gamertag

Sig brought to you by Justo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DT58_lives_on


Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 5789
Location: St. Cloud, MN
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As a Chiefs fan I can maybe add some unbiased opinion here. Though, the Packers are my number 2 team (I'm from WI).

I think this move makes sense for the Vikings, very little risk for a guy who could and if healthy should improve a position that we heard for an ENTIRE off-season needed an upgrade.

Packers fans are quick to say there is a reason they cut him, which is obviously true as they did. Mostly I think it comes back to not wanting to pay a guy starter money to be a back-up. Jones and Hawk will start, Bishop was the odd man out.

Comparing this to any other player that swapped teams, or any other moves is silly in my opinion because each player brings a different scenario. Would Kansas City not have signed Wes Welker this off-season (if the Denver Mannings didn't steal him) simply because Matt Cassel was crap-tastic? No.

And Packer fans like to act like no good players leave GB and do well in other places in particular the Vikes. Yeah Furgeson was a flop. Favre took them to the NFC Championship game. Longwell was a legitimate kicker for a long time, Sharper played very well long after leaving GB.

Bottom line is, I think Thompson thought Jones/Hawk would be better than Jones/Bishop or Bishop/Hawk, and when Bishop wouldn't take less money, they cut him. Plain and simple.
_________________
[image]http://i1240.photobucket.com/albums/gg481/jesse_fritsch1/DEEFORD2_zpsef1ad50c.jpg[image]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8472
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 12:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DT58_lives_on wrote:
As a Chiefs fan I can maybe add some unbiased opinion here. Though, the Packers are my number 2 team (I'm from WI).

I think this move makes sense for the Vikings, very little risk for a guy who could and if healthy should improve a position that we heard for an ENTIRE off-season needed an upgrade.

Packers fans are quick to say there is a reason they cut him, which is obviously true as they did. Mostly I think it comes back to not wanting to pay a guy starter money to be a back-up. Jones and Hawk will start, Bishop was the odd man out.

Comparing this to any other player that swapped teams, or any other moves is silly in my opinion because each player brings a different scenario. Would Kansas City not have signed Wes Welker this off-season (if the Denver Mannings didn't steal him) simply because Matt Cassel was crap-tastic? No.

And Packer fans like to act like no good players leave GB and do well in other places in particular the Vikes. Yeah Furgeson was a flop. Favre took them to the NFC Championship game. Longwell was a legitimate kicker for a long time, Sharper played very well long after leaving GB.

Bottom line is, I think Thompson thought Jones/Hawk would be better than Jones/Bishop or Bishop/Hawk, and when Bishop wouldn't take less money, they cut him. Plain and simple.


We don't have a boatload of ILBers so there is more to this than just Jones/Hawk being better than Bishop. Bishop is going to make less in MN than he did in GB so money wasn't it either. I'd wager management felt the risk of re-injury and the fact this injury may have made him even slower than he was is the real reason why we let him walk. It is a shame too. He has that edge and attitude you want in a LBer and we fans were really hoping he'd return and bolster the middle. But after having players like AP and Kaepernick run wild on our D last season, speed might be a bigger priority over attitude these days at 1265 Lombardi Avenue.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 14363
Location: Gibsonia, Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 1:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tom cody wrote:
Decent pickup for Minnesota. You have to wonder if former Packer, Greg Jennings lured Bishop to Minnesota.


Brett Favre played a nice role in Greg Jennings coming to Minnesota.

Perhaps both Jennings and Favre helped Bishop's decision as well.
_________________

Not your typical Vikings anymore.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Nzd07


Joined: 13 Nov 2010
Posts: 2405
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="ugLymayNe"]
spilltray wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if Bishop as a starter in Minnesota ended up looking similar.



All they're going to say is "and I wouldn't be surprised if he regained his 2010 form."

It's like talking to a brick wall. Like I said in the old thread, this signing will be more than likely like signing Robert Ferguson than Darren Sharper.


And all you're going to say is "he signed with the Vikings... well he sucks now"
_________________

Pull your 84 jerseys out
Jay-Z wrote:
I'm not a businessman. I'm a business, man!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10403
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

People keep saying "Well Favre, and Sharper, and Longwell all worked out", but those were all very different situations. Sharper and Longwell were financial losses from the cap hell Mike Sherman put the Packers in. Yes they let good players go because the money was so messed up they had no choice. Favre waffled on retirement for years, then quit, then threw a hissy fit and forced his way out of GB, to NY and then out of NY so he could get to MN. That's a pretty different scenario too. None of these 3 were let go because the Packers had any doubt about their ability to play or contribute.

Bishop on the other hand, isn't going to start if he's lost a step, and he isn't going to play ST. That makes his former contract with the Packers a bad deal and cutting him was a good move. That is one MAJOR injury that has bad odds for full recovery. Is there a chance he's at least serviceable enough to be an upgrade? Sure there is a chance. I personally don't think it's a very good one though. I'm not too huge on the 40 the way people normally use it, but it is a decent rough barometer. Bishop was a 4.8 guy coming out of college. If he's lost a step or even more from that, it's really getting iffy.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
PackerFanDan


Joined: 06 Mar 2008
Posts: 14736
Location: UW-Parkside
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CWood21 wrote:
No surprise there. They love our castoffs.

Getting kind of pathetic/weird at this point tbh.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bristow


Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 385
PostPosted: Wed Jun 26, 2013 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya'll are making a pretty big deal out of a 1 year 1.5 mil deal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Vikefan79


Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 29761
Location: Atlanta
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PackerFanDan wrote:
CWood21 wrote:
No surprise there. They love our castoffs.

Getting kind of pathetic/weird at this point tbh.


It's not like you're releasing bad players. They all really like what's going on from the front office to the field and want to be a part of it. Speilman has modeled himself a little after Ted by building through the draft and spending wisely on free agents or not at all. Vikings are currently 7th in the NFL with the most draft picks still on the roster. Packers are number 1. When you have those kinds of numbers on the roster the Packers are going to be forced to let good players go as younger guys come in to replace them. A good mojority of those players go to the Vikings because they are familiar with the area, franchise, and players.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kellerman


Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3596
PostPosted: Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

^^^

It's think it's more coincidence than anything. Bishop and Jennings are both playing a position that was a top-5 need for the Vikings this off-season. The Vikings wouldn't sign Scott Wells, they have John Sullivan after all. Linebacker was the one position that wasn't really adressed this off-season (apart from a 4th round pick), it was the #1 remaining need, Packers release a decent linebacker, 1+1=2. I'm sure the familiarity helps as well.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Uncle Buck


Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 15042
Location: Viking Country
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MNPackfan32 wrote:
Can't wait to see him attempt to bring down guys like Cobb, Franklin and Finley in space with his reduced speed Laughing

For that to happen, Finley would first have to hold onto one.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Uncle Buck


Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 15042
Location: Viking Country
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
I don't know if I'd use the word 'angry" when describing how some fans feel. Disappointed might be more apropos. The thing a lot of Packer fans liked about Bishop is he is fierce and has the kind of attitude folks like in a ILBer. He was good against the run. But he isn't speedy so he had issues in pass coverage. His injury most likely has affected whatever speed he has left. This and the chance he could re-injure it were probably the reasons we let him walk.


That makes sense Pugger. The Vikings probably had similar worries because we aren't paying him too much. It seems kind of like a gamble they are taking with a low cost and a higher potential payoff. He plays a position of need, so I don't have a problem with the signing since it's a small salary.

At the same time, it would be nice to see the Vikings finally get a MLB who has some decent coverage skills when you consider the 3 QB's we have to deal with in the division. Oh well. Maybe next year.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Ketchup


Joined: 13 May 2009
Posts: 13917
Location: Milwaukee, WI
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uncle Buck wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Can't wait to see him attempt to bring down guys like Cobb, Franklin and Finley in space with his reduced speed Laughing

For that to happen, Finley would first have to hold onto one.
You got a chuckle out of me on that one UB.

And I agree with what Kellerman said a couple posts up. WR was a huge need for the Vikings and Jennings was a top FA at that position. Had little to do with taking our leftovers. Same with Bish. MLB and the LB corp outside of Greenway is pretty weak. Why wouldn't they take a chance at Bish and hope he can regain some form of his previous play. Me personally, I think if the Packers thought he had a good shot at regaining that form, he'd still be in GB.

Just my two cents.
_________________

Kempes on the custom sig!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 47914
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ketchup wrote:
Uncle Buck wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Can't wait to see him attempt to bring down guys like Cobb, Franklin and Finley in space with his reduced speed Laughing

For that to happen, Finley would first have to hold onto one.
You got a chuckle out of me on that one UB.

And I agree with what Kellerman said a couple posts up. WR was a huge need for the Vikings and Jennings was a top FA at that position. Had little to do with taking our leftovers. Same with Bish. MLB and the LB corp outside of Greenway is pretty weak. Why wouldn't they take a chance at Bish and hope he can regain some form of his previous play. Me personally, I think if the Packers thought he had a good shot at regaining that form, he'd still be in GB.

Just my two cents.


According to Erin Henderson, it appears that the coaches are going to give him a shot at MLB. Henderson very well could beat out Bishop for the job, which would allow for Bishop to play WLB. Or perhaps, the rookie Gerald Hodges could compete for a starting spot at WLB.

Given Bishop's short term, minimal deal, he is no sure thing at this point.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group