No Tony G

  The Packers will not be getting tight-end Tony Gonzalez.

p1_gonzalez

p1_gonzalez

 

The Packers will not be getting tight-end Tony Gonzalez.

 

 

 

 

 

Even after expressing all that interest last year. According to the NFL, he is now a Falcon.

I think we totally dropped the ball on this one. Sorry, that's just what I think. Sigh.

 

(Stay Tuned)

0 points
 

Comments (11)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Dale Z's picture

April 23, 2009 at 01:35 pm

I knew before I clicked on this there would be crying.

0 points
0
0
Alex Tallitsch's picture

April 23, 2009 at 01:41 pm

There should be crying. It's a 2nd for next year. By your reasoning, that would be a 2/32 so it should have been done.

0 points
0
0
MrBacon's picture

April 23, 2009 at 01:52 pm

Well Matt Ryan has a 2-3 Year Backup Valve, but then again who knows if Ryan is really that good or it was just a prelude to a sophmore slump. So in terms for our Pack, it either means that Ted is content with Lee, Humprey, and Finley or he is looking into the 2nd day for a possible 4th (dunno if we have Haynos) TE to fight for 3 availible spots.

Either way you look at it, Jay Cutler still sucks.

0 points
0
0
Alex Tallitsch's picture

April 23, 2009 at 02:00 pm

Quote: MrBacon<blockquote cite="comment-3129">

<strong><a href="#comment-3129" rel="nofollow">MrBacon</a></strong>:<P>Either way you look at it, Jay Cutler still sucks.</P>
</blockquote>

+1

0 points
0
0
Andyman's picture

April 23, 2009 at 02:07 pm

I think KC came out on top of this deal. Plus TT values his draft picks WAY too much to give up a 2nd for a guy that has at the very best 3 years left, more likely 1 or 2.

0 points
0
0
Pack93z's picture

April 23, 2009 at 03:04 pm

Would have been a nice addition, but did we really need him?

Nope.

I have faith in the combination of Lee, Finley and probably a new face at TE...

Aaron and MM need first learn how to utilize the TE before we spend 5 million plus on one.

IMO.. not that big of a non move.

0 points
0
0
Erik's picture

April 23, 2009 at 03:24 pm

Gotta agree with Pack93z. We don't even have a starting nose tackle that can play three downs in a row, outside linebacker is still iffy, cornerbacks are getting older every day. My sister has a shot at starter at offensive tackle.

And everyone wants a TE?

0 points
0
0
Graham's picture

April 23, 2009 at 03:24 pm

I'm glad I want to see if finley is a beast or not!!

0 points
0
0
PackersRS's picture

April 23, 2009 at 07:07 pm

Quote: Alex

<blockquote cite="comment-3126">

<strong><a href="#comment-3126" rel="nofollow">Alex</a></strong>: There should be crying. It’s a 2nd for next year. By your reasoning, that would be a 2/32 so it should have been done.

</blockquote>

Wow. Didn't thought about that. 2nd round for a TE that only has 2 years left is too much, but your point makes so much sense. We should've made this trade.

0 points
0
0
packnut's picture

April 24, 2009 at 09:48 am

Sob....

0 points
0
0
Greg C.'s picture

April 24, 2009 at 03:58 pm

It would've been cool if Ted had pulled the trigger on that deal. Gonzalez, Jennings, and Driver. But a second rounder is a high price for a player near the end of his career, so I can't say I blame Ted for refusing the deal.

0 points
0
0