Packers release Anthony Hargrove

Packers release Anthony Hargrove

There are 16 comments on the WUSA-TV Washington story from Aug 24, 2012, titled Packers release Anthony Hargrove. In it, WUSA-TV Washington reports that:

Hargrove, who recorded 18 tackles and three sacks over 15 games for the Seattle Seahawks last season, was one of the individuals receiving a suspension for his part in the New Orleans Saints' bounty scandal.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WUSA-TV Washington.

GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#1 Aug 24, 2012
Remember what I told the morons that assumed Hargrove would make the team? I hope they do.

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#2 Aug 25, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
Remember what I told the morons that assumed Hargrove would make the team? I hope they do.
I told you he sucked.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#4 Aug 25, 2012
packluv1 wrote:
<quoted text> I told you he sucked.
Yeah, but do you remember what I told you?

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#5 Aug 25, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, but do you remember what I told you?
Yeah, a bunch of crap. You and the players that were involved in the bounty program believe that Rodger Goodell has to much power. Thats kinda of funny because the players and their union agreed that he should have that power. They signed and voted on a contract that details the discipline procedures that R. Goodell used in this case. He is following the procedures that the players and union voted yes too.
eric

Arpin, WI

#6 Aug 25, 2012
Hargrove didnt get much playing time because he is suspended for the first 8 games,so, playing time went to guys who will start the season on the roster or playing for the roster.
IN short,i wouldnt be surprised if GB resigned Hargrove after the 8th game when his suspension is up.He didnt get cut because he sucks,he didnt get much playing time as others needed the snaps to play in game 1 and on moving forward
eric

Arpin, WI

#8 Aug 25, 2012
I read where the Bears are interested in signing Charlie Pepprah.Which one will they get?
The C.P. who played like a probowl safety in the last few games and the playoff run leading up to the Super Bowl win in 2010? or the C.P. who replaced Nick Collins last year and struggled?
eric

Arpin, WI

#9 Aug 25, 2012
5 released,7 or so need to be by or on Sunday getting the Packers down to 72 or so,THEN, they need to get down to 53 by next Friday,so a busy week indeed
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#10 Aug 25, 2012
eric wrote:
Hargrove didnt get much playing time because he is suspended for the first 8 games,so, playing time went to guys who will start the season on the roster or playing for the roster.
IN short,i wouldnt be surprised if GB resigned Hargrove after the 8th game when his suspension is up.He didnt get cut because he sucks,he didnt get much playing time as others needed the snaps to play in game 1 and on moving forward
I agree that the suspension played a role in the lack of playing time. However, if the Packers wanted him after the first 8 games they wouldn't have cut him. He wouldn't have used a roster spot until then and he was already signed at the minimum. They obviously don't think he's going to play so they cut him lose to possibly sign with some other team. The only way he might return IMO is if the Packers have a bunch of injuries at the position and he is still available and no better options are out there.
eric

Arpin, WI

#11 Aug 26, 2012
Im not sure though,Its been written through the whole time,Hargrove wont get much playing time as the priority is to get guys ready for week 1 and obviously A.H. wont be around for 8 games,so, theres the lack of snaps.I read where Mc. has been clear and open about it and Hargrove was getting a bit upset about the lack of snaps,so i wonder if thats what got him cut.
IMO coach Mc was right,why give Hargrove snaps over a player who will be there week 1,game 1
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#12 Aug 26, 2012
I know. I saw what McCarthy said. He stated that Hargrove and Neal would see fewer snaps because their suspensions meant they wouldn't be playing for a while and the priority was getting ready for week 1. However, Neal hasn't been cut. I'm sure the lack of snaps with the first team defense didn't help, but it wasn't the reason he got cut. He obviously didn't perform very well. If he had it would have been a no brainer to keep him.
eric

Arpin, WI

#13 Aug 26, 2012
well,In any case,hes done in GB for now.Maybe he comes back if injuries occur ( like you said earlier) OR someone will sign him up at some point.Look at Chicago,maybe signing Pepprah because they lost 2 safties.I just wonder which Pepprah they get.The SS Pepprah who played tremendously during the playoff run in 2010 or the FS Pepprah who took over for Collins and played poorly last year,but, Pepprah would seem to be a nice option for Chicago anyway.Hes familiar with both teams,now,its just a matter of if he passes a physical which he failed in GB which is why he was cut but hes has had an extra few weeks ect,so maybe he signs and plays well,who knows.
We do know GB has to cut at least 7 more players by some point today to get down the the 72 player limit and cut the rest by next Friday to hit the 52 man limit by then.
Any predictions on your end?
I wonder if Graham Harrell will actually make the roster come game 1? He has disappointed me but again,is there a better option out there now? Prob not or they would have done something.Will a better qb be cut or available for trade where GB can sign him? That remains to be seem.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#14 Aug 26, 2012
I think the Bears know what Charlie Pepprah they are getting. The one that got signed only because they are desperate.

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#15 Aug 26, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
I think the Bears know what Charlie Pepprah they are getting. The one that got signed only because they are desperate.
Yeah , we are hurting and that position due to injuries, it must be desperate. I don't know much about him, so he sucks sometimes?
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#16 Aug 26, 2012
packluv1 wrote:
<quoted text> Yeah , we are hurting and that position due to injuries, it must be desperate. I don't know much about him, so he sucks sometimes?
The Packers have their own safety issues. They didn't think Peprah was the answer. I know there aren't many Packer fans that wanted to see Peprah as a starter. The coaching staff must have agreed. They decided to use rookies and first year players instead. What does that tell you?

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#17 Aug 26, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
The Packers have their own safety issues. They didn't think Peprah was the answer. I know there aren't many Packer fans that wanted to see Peprah as a starter. The coaching staff must have agreed. They decided to use rookies and first year players instead. What does that tell you?
Well Bears have't signed him yet but we did put a safety on IR today. I hope they don't need him that bad. If he's not good enough to play on the 32 ranked Defense then I don't want him on the Bears!
eric

Arpin, WI

#18 Aug 26, 2012
He was cut because he failed a physical but he was pretty bad last year.10 he played very well though.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Seattle Seahawks Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News QB Jay Cutler has only taken the Bears to posts... Aug 15 Laughing Bear Fan 1
News Seahawks top Chiefs 17-16 in preseason opener Aug 15 Laughing Bear Fan 1
News Michael Bennett: NFL stars must support social ... Aug 1 Go Blue Forever 1
Interesting read - Seattle Seahawks Place Marsh... May '16 seattlebound 1
Anybody know the Music that Seahawks played at ... (Feb '06) Mar '16 Fart news 46
News Selfish Fans Who Booed MVPs At Super Bowl Cerem... (Feb '16) Feb '16 Fart news 8
News Tweet from Lynch indicates retirement (Feb '16) Feb '16 Fart news 5
More from around the web