Green Bay Packers News 2022

[APB]

In 15 snaps WAlker had 5 tackles and a PD, yet APB doesn't think the defense missed him...

Where did I ever say that?? Please quote my statement. Otherwise, peddle your nonsense somewhere else.

[go pak go]

Rules are rules.

You shove a person without pads during a game, you are ejected. It's not a hard rule to deter away from being black and white. Just like if you throw any variation of a punch, you are ejected from the game. Doesn't matter if the person you hit has a helmet and it didn't do any harm.

They are good rules for obvious reasons. I don't see much else to debate here.

so then it's OK to push a reporter.

rules are up to interpretation all the time, nothing is cut and dried, black and white, your right there is nothing else to debate here, it was a BS ejection, most of the time players are not ejected for a simple push, this is the nfl making a example and taking talent from our team, and Walker was having a great game, we needed him in center field.

You have this population of examples of players pushing someone that is not suited up and continued to play the game?

[Yoop]

I'm only gonna say this because I've seen you retreat to this "rigged" narrative a couple times now: the Packers beat the spread. Ejecting Walker did not have the effect you've been claiming it had.

we had about 50 snaps on defense, Walker was absent for 2/3 rds of those snaps, during the 15 snaps he did play he had 5 tackles a nd a PD, of course not having Walker affected the defense we got gut punched as the Bills ran the ball down our throat, and it would have been 10 times as bad, but for some unknown reason the Bills quit running as much in the second half, for Christ sakes do you just argue to argue

[Pckfn23]

Where do you see that Walker had a PD?

[Yoop]

Rules are rules.

You shove a person without pads during a game, you are ejected. It's not a hard rule to deter away from being black and white. Just like if you throw any variation of a punch, you are ejected from the game. Doesn't matter if the person you hit has a helmet and it didn't do any harm.

They are good rules for obvious reasons. I don't see much else to debate here.

so then it's OK to push a reporter.

rules are up to interpretation all the time, nothing is cut and dried, black and white, your right there is nothing else to debate here, it was a BS ejection, most of the time players are not ejected for a simple push, this is the nfl making a example and taking talent from our team, and Walker was having a great game, we needed him in center field.

You have this population of examples of players pushing someone that is not suited up and continued to play the game?

I'am done arguing with you about something you know that I'am right about, when was the last time you saw someone ejected for that bull &%$@ call against Walker, I can't ever remember something so blatently idiotic.

[Yoop]

Where do you see that Walker had a PD?

not sure, but I think it was a PFF reference, opps read the column wrong, he had a PD against Washington.

he has 57 tackles in 7 games, which projects to 144 plus for the season. to think we didn't miss Walker against the Bills doesn't even make sense.

[APB]

I'm only gonna say this because I've seen you retreat to this "rigged" narrative a couple times now: the Packers beat the spread. Ejecting Walker did not have the effect you've been claiming it had.

we had about 50 snaps on defense, Walker was absent for 2/3 rds of those snaps, during the 15 snaps he did play he had 5 tackles a nd a PD, of course not having Walker affected the defense we got gut punched as the Bills ran the ball down our throat, and it would have been 10 times as bad, but for some unknown reason the Bills quit running as much in the second half, for Christ sakes do you just argue to argue

Again, where did I say anything about the Packer defense not missing Quay Walker? I simply said ejecting Walker did not have the NFL's supposed desired effect on the Packers of not covering the spread. I even emphasized my statement with THAT IS ALL. For those lacking reading comprehension, that means nothing else follows or inferred.

Jesus.

And I'm the one looking for an argument??

[Pckfn23]

to think we didn't miss Walker against the Bills doesn't even make sense.

No one thinks that or even inferred that.

[Yoop]

I'm only gonna say this because I've seen you retreat to this "rigged" narrative a couple times now: the Packers beat the spread. Ejecting Walker did not have the effect you've been claiming it had.

we had about 50 snaps on defense, Walker was absent for 2/3 rds of those snaps, during the 15 snaps he did play he had 5 tackles a nd a PD, of course not having Walker affected the defense we got gut punched as the Bills ran the ball down our throat, and it would have been 10 times as bad, but for some unknown reason the Bills quit running as much in the second half, for Christ sakes do you just argue to argue

Again, where did I say anything about the Packer defense not missing Quay Walker? I simply said ejecting Walker did not have the NFL's supposed desired effect on the Packers of not covering the spread. I even emphasized my statement with THAT IS ALL. For those lacking reading comprehension, that means nothing else follows or inferred.

Jesus.

And I'm the one looking for an argument??

now a insult to my reading comprehension, the point is ejecting Walker made our defense WEAKER, hence the greater possibility of Vegas beating the spread, that our offense didn't allow that to happen is BESIDES the point, you seem to have some of these reading comprehension issues as well smart ass

[Pckfn23]

[Pckfn23]

[NCF]

[APB]

we had about 50 snaps on defense, Walker was absent for 2/3 rds of those snaps, during the 15 snaps he did play he had 5 tackles a nd a PD, of course not having Walker affected the defense we got gut punched as the Bills ran the ball down our throat, and it would have been 10 times as bad, but for some unknown reason the Bills quit running as much in the second half, for Christ sakes do you just argue to argue

Again, where did I say anything about the Packer defense not missing Quay Walker? I simply said ejecting Walker did not have the NFL's supposed desired effect on the Packers of not covering the spread. I even emphasized my statement with THAT IS ALL. For those lacking reading comprehension, that means nothing else follows or inferred.

Jesus.

And I'm the one looking for an argument??

now a insult to my reading comprehension, the point is ejecting Walker made our defense WEAKER, hence the greater possibility of Vegas beating the spread, that our offense didn't allow that to happen is BESIDES the point, you seem to have some of these reading comprehension issues as well smart ass

You're on an insufferable roll today, yoop...

[Pugger]

Rules are rules.

You shove a person without pads during a game, you are ejected. It's not a hard rule to deter away from being black and white. Just like if you throw any variation of a punch, you are ejected from the game. Doesn't matter if the person you hit has a helmet and it didn't do any harm.

They are good rules for obvious reasons. I don't see much else to debate here.

I didn't know about that rule about ejection if you shove someone without pads. I guess we learn something new every day.

[go pak go]

Rules are rules.

You shove a person without pads during a game, you are ejected. It's not a hard rule to deter away from being black and white. Just like if you throw any variation of a punch, you are ejected from the game. Doesn't matter if the person you hit has a helmet and it didn't do any harm.

They are good rules for obvious reasons. I don't see much else to debate here.

I didn't know about that rule about ejection if you shove someone without pads. I guess we learn something new every day.

The NFL rulebook is big. Normally it occurs when attacking a ref but a dressed person on the sideline also counts.

Most ejections are for throwing a punch or multiple unsportsmanlike conduct penalties.

[Pckfn23]

Rules are rules.

You shove a person without pads during a game, you are ejected. It's not a hard rule to deter away from being black and white. Just like if you throw any variation of a punch, you are ejected from the game. Doesn't matter if the person you hit has a helmet and it didn't do any harm.

They are good rules for obvious reasons. I don't see much else to debate here.

I didn't know about that rule about ejection if you shove someone without pads. I guess we learn something new every day.

The NFL rulebook is big. Normally it occurs when attacking a ref but a dressed person on the sideline also counts.

Most ejections are for throwing a punch or multiple unsportsmanlike conduct penalties.

If it's in the rule book why was it not an immediate ejection? I have my doubts that there is anything in the rule book concerning shoving a non-playing player.

[Scott4Pack]

Any rumors rumbling today about trading for a WR?

I’d be stunned if we did, let alone a good WR like Cooks. I just don’t think we have the cap space to do it and we won’t give up the draft picks for one season of gain. But part of me hopes that I’m wrong.
Lol

[Drj820]

Rules are rules.

You shove a person without pads during a game, you are ejected. It's not a hard rule to deter away from being black and white. Just like if you throw any variation of a punch, you are ejected from the game. Doesn't matter if the person you hit has a helmet and it didn't do any harm.

They are good rules for obvious reasons. I don't see much else to debate here.

I didn't know about that rule about ejection if you shove someone without pads. I guess we learn something new every day.

The NFL rulebook is big. Normally it occurs when attacking a ref but a dressed person on the sideline also counts.

Most ejections are for throwing a punch or multiple unsportsmanlike conduct penalties.

the thug that put his hands of quay should keep his hands to himself from now on. Quay didnt know if he was helping or an enemy combatant.

[NCF]

Sometimes you don't know what you had until it's gone.

[Yoop]

Again, where did I say anything about the Packer defense not missing Quay Walker? I simply said ejecting Walker did not have the NFL's supposed desired effect on the Packers of not covering the spread. I even emphasized my statement with THAT IS ALL. For those lacking reading comprehension, that means nothing else follows or inferred.

Jesus.

And I'm the one looking for an argument??

now a insult to my reading comprehension, the point is ejecting Walker made our defense WEAKER, hence the greater possibility of Vegas beating the spread, that our offense didn't allow that to happen is BESIDES the point, you seem to have some of these reading comprehension issues as well smart ass

You're on an insufferable roll today, yoop...

Wahaaaaaa, I luvs ya to stick jockey