Packers sign Charles Woodson

LOL......as a Redskins fan, you're not allowed to say that. :cheeky-sm

I'm just glad the Pack decided to actually spend some of their salary cap.

He is saying that bc Woodson is ancient

All I have to say about this:

Better them than us! :D

He is saying that bc Woodson is ancient

First off, I know why he's saying it.

Second, 29 isn't ancient.

Third, can we all say Mark Brunell, Deon Sanders, Bruce Smith, etc. ?

Fourth, it was a joke.

First off, I know why he's saying it.

Second, 29 isn't ancient.

Third, can we all say Mark Brunell, Deon Sanders, Bruce Smith, etc. ?

Fourth, it was a joke.I think we have to wait until after this year to say if we paid to much for Brunell. If we make a good push into the playoffs I would say the money was well spent . We may have paid a little to much for him but with his restructure its not as bad.

the last few years woodson body has started to break down.he is far from the cover corner that he once was,but still will be the best corner on the packers roster.this is a sorry move by green bays front office to show favre they are trying to improve.they should sign walker,also.as quick as favre was to jump on walker last year,he should speak up now to the front office in walkers behalf

I think we have to wait until after this year to say if we paid to much for Brunell. If we make a good push into the playoffs I would say the money was well spent . We may have paid a little to much for him but with his restructure its not as bad.

I'm not passing judgment on whether it was a good deal or not, but if you're talking about a parallel situation: we gave Brunell (who is quite a bit more "ancient" than Woodson) a long term, high-priced deal too. I'm just saying I think a fan of any other team would say the Skins are the last ones who could pass judgment on Woodson's deal. Not saying they're right, just that most other people would find it ironic.