Should the Packers trade for Bell?
Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25, humanrefutation
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 16,668
- And1: 8,094
- Joined: Feb 06, 2006
-
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
I'd do a third. He's got 2-3 years of dominance left in him.
Do it for Chuck
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 35,280
- And1: 7,927
- Joined: Feb 16, 2006
- Location: Flickin' It
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
MickeyDavis wrote:A big Detroit weakness for years (since Sanders retired) has been RB. I would hate it they got Bell. But they might feel the need to make a move given their waxing Monday nikght.
Apparently a lot of the players dislike Patricia. Tate is on the last year of his deal. Outside of Slay and Ansah, their defense is meh. Rodgers and The Viking D are in their division. The Bears are rising.
They should just blow it up. Maybe even see what they could get for Stafford from someone like the Giants or Jags.
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
- LikeABosh
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,080
- And1: 8,821
- Joined: Jun 15, 2011
-
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
No **** way. He's an awesome player, but I don't want the headache or gigantic cap hit he brings.
If we're using either of those 1st round picks in a trade, it better be for a real game changer. That would most likely be an OLB or some form of an elite pass rusher. But unless a miracle happens and Bosa or Von Miller are put on the trade block, I think it's best to keep those picks.
If we're using either of those 1st round picks in a trade, it better be for a real game changer. That would most likely be an OLB or some form of an elite pass rusher. But unless a miracle happens and Bosa or Von Miller are put on the trade block, I think it's best to keep those picks.
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
- MickeyDavis
- Global Mod
- Posts: 101,643
- And1: 54,861
- Joined: May 02, 2002
- Location: The Craps Table
-
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
Mags FTW wrote:MickeyDavis wrote:A big Detroit weakness for years (since Sanders retired) has been RB. I would hate it they got Bell. But they might feel the need to make a move given their waxing Monday nikght.
Apparently a lot of the players dislike Patricia. Tate is on the last year of his deal. Outside of Slay and Ansah, their defense is meh. Rodgers and The Viking D are in their division. The Bears are rising.
They should just blow it up. Maybe even see what they could get for Stafford from someone like the Giants or Jags.
Yeah, the hard ass approach (Lombardi, Belichick) works when you're winning regularly. Caldwell was laid back but he did have 3 winning seasons out of 4 and 2 playoff appearances. I could see the Lions season getting ugly if they don't win in SF this week. They have New England, at Dallas and Green Bay following.
I'm against picketing but I don't know how to show it.
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
- humanrefutation
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 32,760
- And1: 16,438
- Joined: Jun 05, 2006
-
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
Mags FTW wrote:MickeyDavis wrote:A big Detroit weakness for years (since Sanders retired) has been RB. I would hate it they got Bell. But they might feel the need to make a move given their waxing Monday nikght.
Apparently a lot of the players dislike Patricia. Tate is on the last year of his deal. Outside of Slay and Ansah, their defense is meh. Rodgers and The Viking D are in their division. The Bears are rising.
They should just blow it up. Maybe even see what they could get for Stafford from someone like the Giants or Jags.
There's always going to be pushback when you go from a player's coach to a disciplinarian-type, especially from veterans who liked to play for Caldwell. They just didn't have a high ceiling with him at HC.
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
- humanrefutation
- Forum Mod
- Posts: 32,760
- And1: 16,438
- Joined: Jun 05, 2006
-
Re: Should the Packers trade for Bell?
And yes, I'd definitely target Bell, but I wouldn't surrender top picks for him even if he was willing to re-sign.