Cullen Jenkins to Meet with Giants Friday
By Zach Kruse
Free agent defensive lineman Cullen Jenkins will make his first official visit Friday, but it won't be to Green Bay.
According to Mike Garafolo of USA Today, Jenkins is scheduled to meet with the New York Giants.
Actually, Cullen Jenkins will meet with the Giants tomorrow, source says.
— Mike Garafolo (@MikeGarafolo) February 28, 2013
Unlike traditional free agents, who must wait until March 12 for their current contracts to expire, Jenkins is free to sign a new deal immediately. The Philadelphia Eagles terminated Jenkins' contract on Monday.
The Packers are rumored to have interest in Jenkins, who played in Green Bay from 2003 to 2010. As of Thursday, no official visit between the two sides has been reported.
#PACKERSmicroblog
Comments (29)
February 28, 2013 at 07:36 pm
Ya he wants to go to the Giants to kick the packs arses
February 28, 2013 at 07:45 pm
come on Ted get your head out of your ares
February 28, 2013 at 09:34 pm
the giants want jenkins over canty.
what does that say about canty?
March 01, 2013 at 03:27 am
that he was making too much money and wouldn't restructure?
March 01, 2013 at 12:17 pm
or...
that they think jenkins (who's garbage) is better than canty (who's garbage).
March 01, 2013 at 02:52 pm
You sound like garbage to me!
February 28, 2013 at 09:37 pm
I'm not certain Thompson has much interest in Jenkins. If he does its probably nominal and he'll wait to see what kinda market there is for him. If its a soft market and Jenkins isn't getting any attractive offers Thompson might step in and offer something a little over league min for a vet. Even if Worthy misses a good part of next year, he's got Neal, Daniels, Raji as rotational players on pass rush downs. I think Thompson is far more interested in a tough run stuffing 34 DE that has length and will add a physical element to the Defense. Jenkins is a good pass rusher, but he's not a very good run stuffing 34 DE.
March 01, 2013 at 03:55 am
+1 year after year TT doing due dilligence gets overinterpreted. I am sure TT is looking at Jenkins. I am sure TT regretted seeing him go to the Eagles for a mid level deal. None of that means that Jenkins is what the Packers need today. Different question. The Packers are different, the NFL is different, and Jenkins is two years older.
March 02, 2013 at 11:50 am
If T.T. waits 3 weeks into the FA period again like he did last year and try a bunch of scrubs out, the Packers have no chance to improve. Look at teams like the 49ers, Seahawks, Giants, even the Vikings, all teams with winning records, all teams that punched the Packers in the mouth, they all bring in players who they think could improve the team. I'm not so sure the Packers would have beat the Vikings had they had Ponder in the playoffs, did you see Webb throw? Peterson still gained 99 yards!! Anyways do they sign them all, hell no but at least they look at TRYING to improve. Thompson and M.M. will field that same weak ass team in 2013 that got beat down by physical teams and expect to win. Unless T.T. changes his thinking Packs going 7-9 this year. To bad too, a tweak here and a tweak there and they can compete but we all know T.T. won't. This team has had a huge turnover from 2010. Problem is other teams identified what they needed to do to stop the Packers. Big physical punch you in the mouth types players who do just that can not only beat the Packers, you'll make them quit (See Giants Games). Your going in the wrong direction Ted. Charles and Pickett were great FA pick-ups. It's been 7 or 8 years since then, time to grab two more that will make a difference!!!
March 02, 2013 at 01:57 pm
Woodson, Collins, Barnett, Wells, Jenkins, even Jolly, B. Jackson, M. Flynn & C. Clifton & soon to be Greg Jennings.--- None are on the 53.
TT has yet to successfully find viable replacements (in 3 years) to any of these players. (Although Cobb & Hayward fit in somewhere)
7-9 might just be kind in 2013.
March 02, 2013 at 03:51 pm
7-9? YOur dellusional! Packers are still the best team in the NFCN. Sorry you don't like the fact that the Packers stick to the pay as you go, instead of "going all in", but its how you stay competitive and a winner consistently. Teams that are rebuilding have the cap room to go make moves in FA that can turn the team around quickly. We had Woodson and Pickett, and they helped take the Pack from 5-11 to a 13 win team in a matter of 2 years. Once your a contender you simply can't and don't go all out to turn the program around.
SF, Sea, Minn what were they a cpouple years ago? They had a total of 19 wins among them.
March 02, 2013 at 08:55 pm
Really?? Who did they beat this year? Any decent team with the exception of Houston whipped the Packers. Then it turned out any team that could pass the ball could beat Houston. The Pack got to play NFL powerhouses like the Rams, Jags, Cards, Titans, Lions twice. Look at the schedule next year pal and tell me where you see more than 7 wins. Being the best team in the NFC North really isn't a big deal is it? Especially when you get WHOOPED like that defense has in 3 of the last 4 years.
PackerAaron
March 02, 2013 at 09:31 pm
The Packers lost to the Dolphins and Lions the year they won the Super Bowl. None of that means much of anything.
PackerAaron
March 02, 2013 at 09:33 pm
Also <em>Being the best team in the NFC North really isn’t a big deal is it?</em>
You do realize the NFC North had more winning teams than any other division in football, right? Of course you do.
March 03, 2013 at 10:20 am
The NFC North was the best division in the NFL. They had 2 playoff teams, 3 teams w/ double digit wins and the most win in any division in football. And the team w/ the worst record in the NFCN was a playoff teams last year, a QB most teams would love to have, and the best WR in the NFL. Packers were 5-1 vs the other NFCN teams. I can see how you think they walked into the playoffs.
March 03, 2013 at 11:12 am
Were on the same page. I think talent wise this is a 6-10 or 7-9 team next year without acquiring needed free agents and a good draft to shore up problems.
Team's will run run run against the Pack next year to keep Rogers off the field. Until they can shore up the middle and Raji has had his best days already, Pickett is tired, and get speed on the outside, this team is in trouble.
PackerAaron
March 03, 2013 at 12:08 pm
<em> I think talent wise this is a 6-10 or 7-9 team next year without acquiring needed free agents and a good draft to shore up problems.</em>
Every year, Packers fans say this. Every year, they win more than ten games.
It's not that I don't think the Packers don't have issues and personnel needs. Of course they do. But it boggles my mind that every offseason, fans act as if the end is neigh. Yes, windows close quickly in the NFL. But if you look around the league, the Packers are one of the best run, best positioned franchises in the NFL. Yet every year, fans portend the end.
As long as Ted, Mike and Rodgers are in town, this is a ten win team. Do they need to improve? No question. But I completely disagree that they're set to turn into the Lions or Jets.
PackerAaron
March 02, 2013 at 07:05 pm
<em>If T.T. waits 3 weeks into the FA period again like he did last year and try a bunch of scrubs out, the Packers have no chance to improve. </em>
Except for that whole draft and develop thing that won them a Super Bowl.
Of course they did have two big free agent pick-ups on that team in Charles Woodson and Ryan Pickett - who he didn't sign right at the opening of free agency.
He waited.
Weeks for the market to settle on Woodson and for Pickett to visit other teams.
Making headlines in March means very little come December and January.
March 03, 2013 at 08:47 am
I get it, your one of those guys that's in love with Ted T. You ever for a second stop and think what this team would be if Rodgers hadn't fallen in Ted's lap? Of coarse you did.
March 03, 2013 at 10:05 am
Rodgers could have fallen into the laps of ALOT of other GM's. He was there for the taking for over 20 other teams/GM's. Yet Thompson was the only one SMART enough to take him! Some call that foresight!
PackerAaron
March 03, 2013 at 10:34 am
Fantastic strawman.
March 02, 2013 at 04:54 pm
@ Stroh
Sorry, but, the last time the Pack went 5-11 was 1979. --- You need to work on your facts & spelling. --- Try this: Read more & post less.
March 02, 2013 at 06:01 pm
Whatever it was in Shermans last year! Big deal if I was off by one game! and the fact I was off on the positive side, kinda furthers my point.
PackerAaron
March 02, 2013 at 07:08 pm
How about Stroh worries about facts and spelling if you worry about making a cogent argument. Just once.
March 02, 2013 at 07:21 pm
I've already forgotten more about football than you'll ever know. ---- Easy to prove but you just aren't worth the time & effort. -- Sorry.
PackerAaron
March 02, 2013 at 09:32 pm
So easy to prove, yet you can't do it. Because, as usual, you're out of your element.
March 03, 2013 at 12:24 pm
I think you forgot too much and don't know much anymore! LOL
March 03, 2013 at 11:18 am
This is a very problematic draft for the Pack this year having a good handful of players with serious injuries and not knowing what to expect come the start of the season. Sherod will come back but in what shape and what can you expect from him.
Benson has been injury prone the past five years. Seine, will he ever play? Perry, who knows if this guy is any good at all. Yes he got hurt but wasn't lighting it up before he got hurt and Worthy will be the bust I thought he would be.
Plus we have a host of linebackers who are coming off big time injuries, guys that seem to be injury prone as well.
Seems that Ted has been picking a bunch of late rounders who can't stand up to the physicallity of pro ball, guys other teams passed on for a reason.
March 03, 2013 at 12:37 pm
Ican see how you think Benson has been injury prone for 5 years. I mean he's rushed for over 1000 yds for 3 straight in a division where he had to play Pitts and Balt 2x's a year. LOL
Its Saine and that guy has done nothing in his 2 year NFL career, I don't see any reason to think thats about to change.
Perry has some questions in regards to coverage, but he's a damn good run D player and is known for being a pass rusher, just what the Packers need him to be. No reason to think he can't be a very good or maybe impact player.
Once you get out of the top 10 in almost any draft, the players have some weaknesses. The Packers put alot into the development of their players and work w/ them to make them better. Perry is likely to be one of them. Shields, Burnett, Bishop, hell even Rodgers had questions, but the Packers worked w/ him to develop his skills to make him great. Thats not going to change while Thompson is the GM and why should it? He's been voted by his PEERS, not sportswriters as the best GM in football 2x's in 5 years. I'll be waiting for you to tell me how many GM's have a better track record over the same timeframe.