Dirk Diggler Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 From ESPN Insider... All in all, the Terry Glenn trade turned out to be an absolute failure. The Green Bay Packers acquired Glenn from the Patriots last March for what amounted to two fourth-round picks, but it appears coach and GM Mike Sherman is leaning toward releasing the seven-year veteran. The move wouldn't be financial, as his salary cap number for 2003 is a reasonable $2.2 million. The Packers will owe Glenn a roster bonus of $500,000 this spring and a base salary of $1.5 million during the season. Rather, if the Packers decide to part ways with Glenn it would simply be to give the team's young wideouts a chance to blossom. "To be honest with you, that's something that I'll look at this off-season," Sherman told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "I have not made any decisions in regard to who's on, who's not just yet. And we'll look at that. But I think he's a big-time receiver." Leaving the team's receiving fortunes in the hands of Donald Driver, Robert Ferguson and Javon Walker could turn out to be a huge mistake. Glenn wasn't exactly a stud in 2002, catching 56 passes for 817 yards and two touchdowns, but with 14 career 100-yard receiving games, he is the only proven pass-catching commodity the Pack has. Driver received a new long-term contract in November and will remain the No. 1 receiver, but 2002 was his first year as a starter and he has yet to prove himself over the long haul. But even if he can match his 2002 numbers, the rest of the receiving corps would suffer next year with Ferguson and Walker rounding out the three-receiver sets. Green Bay traded a second-round pick in the draft to move up eight spots and grab Walker with the 20th overall pick, figuring his size (6-foot-3, 215 pounds) and speed (4.4 in the 40-yard dash) made him a perfect fit for the West Coast offense. But Walker had only 23 catches in his rookie season and dropped nine balls -- 39 percent of the catchable balls thrown in his direction. Those definitely aren't the numbers the Packers expected from the first wide receiver they'd selected in the first round since Sterling Sharpe in 1988. Walker did show flashes with his five-catch, 104-yard playoff performance against the Falcons, but there has to be some concern about how long it's taking him to grasp the offense. Those fears are backlit by the fact that Walker scored 7 and 9 on the 50-question Wonderlic test before the draft. Ferguson, in his second year, showed flashes of promise as well near the end of the year, but with only 17 catches he's far from a sure thing. At this point, it seems bringing back Glenn as an insurance policy would be a wise decision, even if it costs $2.2 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thito_da_skins_fan Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 same way i feel about cancer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I don't know that Glenn was a problem with the Packers. I'd certainly look at him if he's released. To me, he's got the physical tools you would think would do well in this offense. He has the flat speed and the quickness. I don't know if he'll be a 90-catch guy ever again, but, I'd certainly give this type of move a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thito_da_skins_fan Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 in NE he was a cancer in GB he was injured and really didn't perform that well i don't want him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I know I'm going to get blasted for saying this, but............................... Joey Galloway might be released by the pukes because of his limited production and hight salary numbers. Besides, Parcells and he may not get along (remember Holmgren in Seatlle???). He's certainly got the speed and the hands. He may sign for a big bonus with friendly annual numbers along with incentives. He could be a dangerous addition to this offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirk Diggler Posted January 9, 2003 Author Share Posted January 9, 2003 Where did you hear that Galloway might be released? That would go down as the all time worst transaction in the history of the league for Dallas...12 mill SB, 2 #1's, a season and one half of good play in 3 years. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I heard it on the Mike and Mike show on ESPN radio a few days ago when Parcells was hired. One of the questions was which players may be gone after Parcells was hired and Mike Golic brought up Galloway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 forget Galloway, he's still living off of 1997. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thito_da_skins_fan Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Originally posted by Bufford forget Galloway, he's still living off of 1997. amen to that and how could any Redskin fan want that piece of trash after his strut into the endzone on Turkey Day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I'm not saying I'm a fan of his. All I'm saying is that if he is a piece of a puzzle that will make this team successful, then I'm all for it. For that matter, if we can upgrade this team with any player, I say do it! For the record (I know someone will bring this up) I never thought Deion was an upgrade and I was shattered when the Skins signed him. This is a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Glann would make sense in Dullass now - despite the "she" thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Originally posted by Dirk Diggler Green Bay traded a second-round pick in the draft to move up eight spots and grab Walker with the 20th overall pick, figuring his size (6-foot-3, 215 pounds) and speed (4.4 in the 40-yard dash) made him a perfect fit for the West Coast offense. But Walker had only 23 catches in his rookie season and dropped nine balls -- 39 percent of the catchable balls thrown in his direction. Those definitely aren't the numbers the Packers expected from the first wide receiver they'd selected in the first round since Sterling Sharpe in 1988. Walker did show flashes with his five-catch, 104-yard playoff performance against the Falcons, but there has to be some concern about how long it's taking him to grasp the offense. Those fears are backlit by the fact that Walker scored 7 and 9 on the 50-question Wonderlic test before the draft. Walker may turn out to be a great NFL player, but he's a poster child for the kind of dumb thinking around here proposing to draft a WR #1 in 2003. Probably only QBs develop more slowly than WRs. To get major production from a rookie WR is exceedingly rare. Meanwhile, Portis got 1,500 yards at RB, and he didn't even start in the beginning of the year. We've already got FOUR young WRs in various stages of development. Gardner surprised me and has looked very good in his second year. Thompson surprised everyone and had a very good "first" year of real action. McCants has loads of talent but is green, so should only get better. Russell has super speed but hasn't played a down, so he's all potential at this point. We had pretty good performance from our WRs last year, and ALL FOUR of our projected top 4 are at points in their careers where ALL FOUR should continue to get markedly better. Why on earth should we blow the top of the draft on more potential that won't subtantially change 2003 production? I don't think we need to add any WRs, but if one needs to be added, it certainly should not be a rookie. Get someone with reliable hands or someone with speed (ideally both), but make it a veteran. Glenn certainly has talent. If he's not playing at least at the #3 WR, his "cancer" personality will probably become an issue. Worth a look if he can be had without a large signing bonus, to minimize our risk and free us to cut him at will. I'd sign him to a low SB, low minimum salary, high-incentive contract -- if he's the best candidate to be signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Gotta agree w/ ASF on this one. I don't wanna break the bank on a name WR, and the Galloway, Glenn, Willie Jackson fiascos (not to mention Westbroken and Connell) should be prime examples of how guys can have a great season, then drag down their new teams with wasted $$$. I think Thompson and McCants will jump far ahead in '03, much like Thrash did in '00. A moderately priced vet WR as insurance would make me feel better, but I don't wanna cough up cap money for Peerless or Boston. And if we draft a guy, don't look for him to do much until '04. Man, how could the Pack trade up for a guy who got a 7 on the Wunderlic?:dunce: :dunce: :dunce: The guy must be as dumb as Westbroken! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Sisko Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Sorry, but I've never liked "her". Let's not and say we did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posse81 Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 I wouldn't even give the minimum for Galloway and Glenn. They would be a poor fit here and stunt the growth of guys like McCants and Thompson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighthawk Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Riggo, let's be fair, the guy got a 9 on the Wonderlic Test.:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 9, 2003 Share Posted January 9, 2003 Glenn's best days at 30 are behind him. He, like Kennison, has been a distraction in the past although he does have better skills obviously. Right now, with the young qb, rbs and other wrs I would be leery about bringing any veterans that are not standup guys in terms of work ethic and discipline. That FA we bring in at WR is likely going to be counted on to provide some leadership on the field in 2003 and the idea of asking Glenn or Kennison for it is enough to make you want to close your eyes :doh: The Galloway deal is what ended up pushing Jones to cede some power and hire Parcells. It was the move after Deion that cost the Cowboys the chance to cash in on their 8-8 and 5-11 seasons by robbing them of two picks in the top 20. The $12 million bonus was a joke considering Galloway had never made a pro bowl team up to that point in his career. As a $2 million player for 2 years I would not necessarily have a problem with him here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.