Seahawks sign Mike Wahle

Scott H · Joined: 18 Nov 2007 Posts: 16

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/02/14/the-mailbag-the-wahle-edition.aspx

Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>gb-packers

JK · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 103

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:14:52 -0600, Scott H
wrote:

>
>
>http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/02/14/the-mailbag-the-wahle-edition.aspx

I didn't think FA started until Feb 29.

John Dresko · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 11

On 2/15/08 1:18 AM, in article fkbar3d9abfvh7u2nmtfqsapjdf2l1pi3h@4ax.com,
"JK" wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:14:52 -0600, Scott H
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/02/14/the-mailbag-the-wahle-ed
>> ition.aspx
>
> I didn't think FA started until Feb 29.

Wahle was released - he was eligible to sign the moment that happened.

mtfester · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 429

JK wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 19:14:52 -0600, Scott H
> wrote:

> >
> >
> >http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/02/14/the-mailbag-the-wahle-edition.aspx

> I didn't think FA started until Feb 29.

He was cut, as was Morgan.

Mike

iarwain · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 68

The offseason has barely begun and already TT scores his first free
agent non-signing to disappoint Packer fans! You have to be
impressed. Anyway, TT doesn't care about guards. Someone else can
open the holes for the running backs.

Seriously, I'm sure Wahle probably wanted too much money. And at this
point I'm willing to admit TT knows more about running the team than I
do (as hard as that may be to believe). I don't care who he signs, or
doesn't sign, I just want results.

mtfester · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 429

iarwain wrote:
> The offseason has barely begun and already TT scores his first free
> agent non-signing to disappoint Packer fans! You have to be
> impressed. Anyway, TT doesn't care about guards. Someone else can
> open the holes for the running backs.

If there weren't holes for the running game, then Ryan Grant is the
greatest RB in the NFL.

> Seriously, I'm sure Wahle probably wanted too much money. And at this
> point I'm willing to admit TT knows more about running the team than I
> do (as hard as that may be to believe). I don't care who he signs, or
> doesn't sign, I just want results.

Well, maybe this year, we'll go deep in the playoffs; maybe even host
the NFCCG.

Mike

iarwain · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 68

> Well, maybe this year, we'll go deep in the playoffs; maybe even host the NFCCG.

It was a good year, but you know how I feel. We exceeded early
expectations, but the goal is not to host the NFCCG, it's to win the
Super Bowl. Look at the Patriots, they hosted the AFCCG and won their
first 18 games. It was all for naught. You think they're not
disappointed? The team that really exceeded expectations was the
Giants.

BigK · Joined: 28 Jan 2008 Posts: 3

"iarwain" wrote in message @s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> The offseason has barely begun and already TT scores his first free
> agent non-signing to disappoint Packer fans!

I'm a fan and not disappointed. Wahle is not what he was when he was with
GB the first time. I've had a front row seat living in NC and he definitely
tapered off this year. He would have been worth a vet minimum to add depth
but I would not have spent much more.

mtfester · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 429

iarwain wrote:
> > Well, maybe this year, we'll go deep in the playoffs; maybe even host the NFCCG.

> It was a good year, but you know how I feel. We exceeded early
> expectations, but the goal is not to host the NFCCG, it's to win the

That's the ultimate goal on a yearly basis. However, it's not something

> Super Bowl. Look at the Patriots, they hosted the AFCCG and won their
> first 18 games. It was all for naught.

No, it wasn't. The team played well, the team is young, and will likely
be a force for some years. This is not a standard meaning of "all for
naught". Or did you forget what Lombardi said after the loss to Philly?
Was that season "all for naught"?

> You think they're not disappointed?

Sorry, how does having a successful season preclude being disappointed
that it wasn't even more successful? Or are you claiming there is no
difference between our season and, say, Chicago's?

> The team that really exceeded expectations was the
> Giants.

As did the Packers; last I checked, the Giants had been a playoff team
for each of the past 3 seasons.

Mike

Wayne Crannell · Joined: 22 Aug 2007 Posts: 1

In article
,
iarwain wrote:

> > Well, maybe this year, we'll go deep in the playoffs; maybe even host the
> > NFCCG.
>
> It was a good year, but you know how I feel. We exceeded early
> expectations, but the goal is not to host the NFCCG, it's to win the
> Super Bowl. Look at the Patriots, they hosted the AFCCG and won their
> first 18 games. It was all for naught. You think they're not
> disappointed? The team that really exceeded expectations was the
> Giants.

Uh...and the Packers.

Anyone who said they predicted the Packers in the NFCCG is lying.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

iarwain · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 68

> Was that season "all for naught"?

You realize I was talking about the Patriots here, right? I have to
think they were disappointed in their season, despite setting several
offensive records and winning their first 18 games.

> are you claiming there is no difference between our season and, say, Chicago's?

We had a good season, I'm not saying otherwise. If we don't win a
Super Bowl in the next 20 years however, it doesn't really mean much.
It's nice that we got back to the NFCCG, we haven't been there since
98. As for the Bears, they did beat us twice, and they went to the
Super Bowl the year before. None of which gives them the NFL
Championship either. Hopefully we won't have the type of letdown next
season that they did this season.

> As did the Packers

The Packers were expected to win that NFCCG - they were favored.

mtfester · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 429

iarwain wrote:
> > Was that season "all for naught"?

> You realize I was talking about the Patriots here, right? I have to

No, but that makes more sense.

Yeah, that was funny.

> think they were disappointed in their season, despite setting several
> offensive records and winning their first 18 games.

You know, no matter how many times you write that, I won't get tired
of reading it.

> > are you claiming there is no difference between our season and, say, Chicago's?

> We had a good season, I'm not saying otherwise. If we don't win a
> Super Bowl in the next 20 years however, it doesn't really mean much.

I'd say 2-3 years.

> It's nice that we got back to the NFCCG, we haven't been there since
> 98. As for the Bears, they did beat us twice, and they went to the
> Super Bowl the year before. None of which gives them the NFL
> Championship either. Hopefully we won't have the type of letdown next
> season that they did this season.

I think we're built differently.

> > As did the Packers

> The Packers were expected to win that NFCCG - they were favored.

Yeah, but the Giants were on a roll; not much you can do. They won't
do it next year. Hopefully, we will.

Mike

Cory · Joined: 17 Oct 2007 Posts: 12

On Feb 18, 12:39 pm, iarwain wrote:

> The Packers were expected to win that NFCCG - they were favored.

Maybe so, but the mere fact that they even MADE IT as far the NFCCG is
not what prognosticators were thinking before the season started.
IIRC, it was predicted that the Packers would finish 2nd-3rd in the
NFCN.

--- Cory

Wahle cut Only 30, Not sure what was behind this. I thought he was doing well for the Panthers. TT gets a chance to amend his biggest misstep.

Wahle If Jennings got 7 years/36 million from San Francisco, how much will Wahle get from the Panthers?? Roll up the armored truck.

Will you Green Bay Slacker fans be here when the Seahawks wi I know I will be. I will call every single one of you out that doubted the Seahawks. It will be grand.

Mike Sherman vs John Fox Now that we've got the Sherman vs Green thing settled, what about Sherman vs Fox? Fox took a 1-15 team to the SB in 2 years. But I don't think it's obvious that the Panthers are better than the Packers. And although Fox has turned the Panthers around real

Mike Sherman vs. Denny Green Since Mike Sherman is bound and determined to transform my beloved Packers into a clone of the Denny Green era Vikings, I though I would compare their regular season and playoff winning percentages. Keep in mind that Minnesota had Denny for TEN YEARS and