P.J. Pope a Packer

Globetrotter · Post by **Globetrotter** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:14 am

Dayons_Den wrote:
Redwingtom wrote:Uhmmm, the newscast last night on Toledo TV said he was signed to the practice squad. Is he on the actual roster or the PS?????
Any NFL guru will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe in order to be signed away from another team's practice squad the player must be put on the active roster.

You are correct.

Peregrinner · Post by **Peregrinner** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:16 am

Awesome! I'm so happy to hear he's joined the Packers! GO PACK GO!
(and you Bears fans... you've beaten us soundly a few times recently, that should cool the shame of being owned for so many years by Favre and the Pack.

)

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 pm

MatelaAntwerp wrote:
Dayons_Den wrote:
Redwingtom wrote:Uhmmm, the newscast last night on Toledo TV said he was signed to the practice squad. Is he on the actual roster or the PS?????
Any NFL guru will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe in order to be signed away from another team's practice squad the player must be put on the active roster.
You are correct.

He must be put on the 53 man active roster. It does not guarantee he will dress for games (which is actually only 48, I believe). If he is taken off GB's active roster, I believe Chicago would get first dibs back on him for the practice squad, but I'm not positive.

San Diego Falcon · Post by **San Diego Falcon** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:13 pm

at worst he gets a higher paycheck this week

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:52 pm

hammb wrote:
MatelaAntwerp wrote:
Dayons_Den wrote:
Redwingtom wrote:Uhmmm, the newscast last night on Toledo TV said he was signed to the practice squad. Is he on the actual roster or the PS?????
Any NFL guru will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe in order to be signed away from another team's practice squad the player must be put on the active roster.
You are correct.
He must be put on the 53 man active roster. It does not guarantee he will dress for games (which is actually only 48, I believe). If he is taken off GB's active roster, I believe Chicago would get first dibs back on him for the practice squad, but I'm not positive.

With all the injuries to the Packers running backs, PJ will defintely suit-up Sunday and is listed as third on the current depth chart behind Green and Herron.

MACMAN · Post by **MACMAN** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:58 pm

it would not hurt the packers to pick up two former BGSU WR's either.

fredthefalcon · Post by **fredthefalcon** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 5:45 pm

UK Peregrine wrote:The Pack did a similar thing last year when they signed Samkon Gado off of K.C's practice squad. And Gado played quite a bit for the Packers before they traded him to the Texans this year. Hopefully a similar thing will occur for PJ and he can get some decent playing time.

You mean all except the trading to the Texans part, right

.

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:03 pm

BGSU33 wrote:As a Bears fan, it makes me, one, cringe to have seen the Bears let him go back when they did, and two, see him go to the Packers. But I am very happy to see him land somewhere and wish a bunch of luck.

Yeah , you and me both. Of all the teams to pick PJ up it had to be the Packers, but oh well at least he's getting more of a chance to play in games now. Bears , your missing out.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 6:27 pm

Rollo83 wrote:
hammb wrote:
MatelaAntwerp wrote:
Dayons_Den wrote:
Redwingtom wrote:Uhmmm, the newscast last night on Toledo TV said he was signed to the practice squad. Is he on the actual roster or the PS?????
Any NFL guru will correct me if I am wrong, but I believe in order to be signed away from another team's practice squad the player must be put on the active roster.
You are correct.
He must be put on the 53 man active roster. It does not guarantee he will dress for games (which is actually only 48, I believe). If he is taken off GB's active roster, I believe Chicago would get first dibs back on him for the practice squad, but I'm not positive.
With all the injuries to the Packers running backs, PJ will defintely suit-up Sunday and is listed as third on the current depth chart behind Green and Herron.

It is not uncommon for a team to only "dress" 2 RBs, even if they have 3 on the active roster. NFL teams won't dress anyone that they don't think will be playing some sort of a role. Given that he's unlikely to know most of the offense/protection schemes after being on the team a week, his best bet to be active this week is special teams duty.

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:13 pm

The Packers have dressed at least three running backs all year. I don't think they'll change that strategy because of the fragile Amhad Green has been the last few years. He's one hit away from leaving you with Noah Herron as your only true running back if you go with two RBs active.

I like PJ's chances of dressing.

Globetrotter · Post by **Globetrotter** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:17 pm

Rollo83 wrote:The Packers have dressed at least three running backs all year. I don't think they'll change that strategy because of the fragile Amhad Green has been the last few years. He's one hit away from leaving you with Noah Herron as your only true running back if you go with two RBs active.

I like PJ's chances of dressing.

What can PJ give you if he had to play? He doesn't know the plays. Hammb is right his best bet here is STs returning kicks where much is similar. Any running situation they would be likely to just give Henderson a carry or two. I would bet they take the risk this week and he is inactive but then active downt he road.

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:27 pm

Luckily, running back is one of the easiest positions for a young player to come in and learn. Granted he needs to get up to speed on the terminology the Packers use, but PJ should be able to pick that up pretty quickly. Then, it just run to the right hole and look for daylight.

Plus, the Bears played the Packers opening weekend and PJ had to simulate the Packer offense as part of his practice squad duties leading up to that game. And, the toughest part to learn for a young running back is blocking protection packages. By all accounts of what I read on the Bears sites, this is what the Bears loved about him. He was the best back they had at picking up the blitz and protecting the QB.

Now I am not saying he'll get 25 carries this week, but I do think he'll dress and play on special teams. And, the Packers probably wouldn't hesitate to use him a couple of plays to see what they got.

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:28 pm

Luckily, running back is one of the easiest positions for a young player to come in and learn. Granted he needs to get up to speed on the terminology the Packers use, but PJ should be able to pick that up pretty quickly. Then, it just run to the right hole and look for daylight.

Plus, the Bears played the Packers opening weekend and PJ had to simulate the Packer offense as part of his practice squad duties leading up to that game. And, the toughest part to learn for a young running back is blocking protection packages. By all accounts of what I read on the Bears sites, this is what the Bears loved about him. He was the best back they had at picking up the blitz and protecting the QB.

Now I am not saying he'll get 25 carries this week, but I do think he'll dress and play on special teams. And, the Packers probably wouldn't hesitate to use him a couple of plays to see what they got.

BGSUVA · Post by **BGSUVA** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 10:28 pm

Da Bears are just shooting themselves in the foot right now. Sure, we will not be talking about this ins February in after Da Bears win the Super Bowl, but the next season, after they trade Thomas Jones, and are stuck with Benson, they are gonna miss PJ

Redwingtom · Post by **Redwingtom** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 6:59 am

The pack will also be dressing their full back and they are famous for playing their FB's as RB's so I don't like his chance to dress either.