Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 37
  1. #11
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969


    First off I am glad they traded him because the Packers are now a worse team because of it. That being said, it had to be done, especially with the way he was acting.

    Personally I think they could have gotten a better deal than what they got if they traded him sooner (the offseason).

    Anyway, the PAckers are on a three game losing streak and I am happy enough as it is.

    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

  2. #12
    Del Rio Guest


    I think it becomes a matter of "get this dumb ass off the team,"
    It's not like they didn't try to get more then he was worth for a while. But if you are trying to sell damaged goods it has to go on clearence.

    People can go down in value if they have attitude problems too. Or if they are percieved to cause problems. Look at the draft, look at how cheap we got C. Carter.

    I honestly don't see anyone giving them any better for this guy. Just because he was the best on their team doesn't make him one of the best in the league. And due to his recent lapse in honor I suspect his value went down.

  3. #13
    Kleinsasser40 is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Dec 1969


    "Del Rio" wrote:
    I'm serious this was a good trade for the pack.

    He was cancer to their team. He has taken 9 snaps since his return and they have paid him over 450,000 for doing nothing. He doesn't even stand on the sideline with the team, and the other injured pack do.

    Hell if Randy Moss did that to us I'd be begging to dump his butt off on some one else too. It doesn't matter how good he is or isn't if he refuses to play.

    He says he's hurt, and yet he still demands a trade? He is obviously drawing this "injury" out. Hell if they traded him for a waterboy who at least showed up the games it was worth it. I don't see how this makes their team worse.

    I agree Del Rio, he was a cancer to the team. But the trade was not a good one. It was a bad situation in Green Bay, they did need to get rid of him. It was good for their franchise to part with him, but in reality they got crap for a good probowl calibur CB. Because of what happened they now have a weaker defense. What I am saying is that they did need to get rid of him, but it sucks for the organization that they could only get a backup QB and swap picks for one of the better CBs in the league. I think they handled the trade, and McKenzie over the off season pretty badly.

  4. #14
    SKOL's Avatar
    SKOL is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2004


    It's only good for the Pack if they can lay off from picking the Punter in the 2nd round

    The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good -Samuel Johnson - lexicographer
    The word genius isn t applicable in football. A genius is a guy like Norman Einstein - Joe Theisman

  5. #15
    whackthepack is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969


    I agree GB should have traded him in the off season, and I think this was handled very poorly. I think Sherman should decide if he is the GM or the Headcoach, I do not remember any time that it worked out well having 1 person do both jobs.
    What we've got here is failure to communicate.

  6. #16
    Del Rio Guest


    Well the same can be said for Gruden, he let Meshawn and Sapp and Lynch go I don't think Lynch falls into this category but the other two do. And his team is definately hurting so i can see your point.

    I guess it becomes a matter of waiting too long and not being able to stand paying cancer any longer for doing nothing but bringing your team down.

    If a guy doesn't want to play for you he isn't going to be pro-bowl bound he will do more damage then he is worth keeping around and I guess these poor trades are a result of not standing for the Bulls**t any longer and in a strange way I admire that.

    It may not be a smart move but I think it was the right one considering the circumstances. the coach is wise to show who is boss and rid his team of cancer.

    What do the Packer fans think of this move??

  7. #17
    poult is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Dec 1969


    "whackthepack" wrote:
    I agree GB should have traded him in the off season, and I think this was handled very poorly. I think Sherman should decide if he is the GM or the Headcoach, I do not remember any time that it worked out well having 1 person do both jobs.
    funny ya should say that. all the packer after game shows here were screaming the samething yesterday. they all want him to drop the GM part.
    "the only diffrence between suicide and martyrdom is the press coverage"
    Tender Branson

  8. #18
    snowinapril's Avatar
    snowinapril is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969


    Holmgren couldn't do it in Seattle, why do Sher think he can do it in GB.

    The sad part about the whole situation for the Pack, is that the Pack could still have Holmie if they would have given him the GM title and they would probably be better off than they are now.

  9. #19
    cajunvike's Avatar
    cajunvike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2004


    Packers trade McKenzie to Saints
    GREEN BAY, Wis. (AP) — Mike McKenzie got his wish Monday when he was traded to the New Orleans Saints for a second-round pick in 2005 and a backup quarterback. "It's time to move on," Packers coach-general manager Mike Sherman said.

    Mike McKenzie is recovering from a hamstring injury but will be a welcome addition to a porous New Orleans defense.
    By Morry Gash, AP

    Since ending his holdout without retracting his trade request three weeks ago, McKenzie has been paid more than $485,000, but played just nine snaps, all against Chicago. That led fans and teammates to wonder whether he was still holding out, but getting paid anyway.

    The recalcitrant cornerback sat out the last two games with a mysterious hamstring injury. He was left home when the Packers traveled to Indianapolis two weeks ago and wasn't on the sideline Sunday when the Packers lost to the New York Giants at home.

    McKenzie's agent, Drew Rosenhaus, didn't return a phone message from The AP seeking comment.

    The Packers acquired quarterback J.T. O'Sullivan, 25, and the second-round selection in the 2005 draft in return for McKenzie, 28, and a future conditional draft choice. The Packers have been interested in O'Sullivan since the Saints took him in the sixth round of the 2002 draft out of Cal-Davis.

    Their interest was heightened when Brett Favre and backup Doug Pederson were injured Sunday. Favre has a mild concussion and is expected to practice this week and extend his record starting streak to 213 games, counting playoffs, against Tennessee next week. But Pederson was undergoing further tests Monday on his ribs and kidneys.

    The deal is the Packers' first midseason trade in 23 years involving active players from both teams.

    McKenzie, who is earning $2.75 million this year in the middle season of a five-year, $17.1 million deal he signed in January 2002, became upset when several cornerbacks of lesser talent surpassed him in compensation this offseason.

    McKenzie instructed agent Brian Parker to seek a contract renegotiation in February, converting a $200,000 workout bonus into two $100,000 roster bonuses due in April and June and removing a de-escalator clause from the contract he signed in 2002.

    As the Packers worked to comply with the request, McKenzie said he wanted to be traded instead. Green Bay denied his plea on April 6 and two weeks later drafted cornerbacks Ahmad Carroll and Joey Thomas with their first two selections.

    Parker terminated his working relationship with McKenzie in May and the sixth-year cornerback hired Rosenhaus, his fifth representative in his six-year NFL career.

    McKenzie, a starter for Green Bay since his rookie year, has 15 career interceptions. He comes off one of his most productive seasons with four interceptions, 58 tackles (55 solo) and 20 passes broken up.

    He was Green Bay's best defender last year and Sherman could have kept him beyond the Oct. 19 trade deadline to get one more year out of him. But McKenzie had become even more of a loner in the locker room and Sherman decided to cut ties now.

    How are the Packers (1-3) better off without their best cover cornerback?

    "Well, I just think from having things cleaned up," Sherman said. "As I said, from the outside in, the focus that's been put on that, everything that Mike did or didn't do was well-documented every day. And we don't have to deal with that anymore."

    Copyright 2004 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Thought that I would post this even though it is already old news.

  10. #20
    Sprewell27 is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969


    "what is it with good or decent players getting traded for nothing? are teams just stupid? The TO trade got the niners what a second rounder,"

    T.O. was going to become an Unrestricted Free Agent when free agency would begin (can't remember the date), so it was either the 49ers let him walk free or they trade him to a team and get a draft pick. Take your pick.

    As for Mackenzie, I think the Pack was hoping they could get him to stay in GB if they kept him when the season started, but it just didn't work out for them because he didn't give in.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Saints cut Mike McKenzie
    By Vikes in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-03-2010, 11:03 AM
  2. Mike McKenzie to start at left cornerback for the Saints
    By RandyMoss8404 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-14-2004, 07:03 PM
  3. the saints are now trying trade for McKenzie again
    By pudgesoprano in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-24-2004, 08:49 AM
  4. McKenzie Still Holding Out!
    By Big Daddy in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-09-2004, 03:24 AM
  5. So is McKenzie OFFICIALLY gone?
    By RandyMoss8404 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-11-2004, 08:23 AM

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts