Ahmad Bradshaw Released

gbguy20
Veteran Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

Bradshaw, a seventh-round draft pick in 2007, was a member of two Super Bowl championship teams. He rushed for 1,050 yards in 14 games last season. His career high came in 2010, when he gained 1,235 yards.

As a vested veteran, he becomes an unrestricted free agent.

I don't know all that much about him, but he is relatively young and has had some decent production in his career. The first response to this thread will probably bring up his injury issues, but I'd like to look past that for the sake of discussion.

edit: my giants fan buddy just texted me about him. "he'd be a huge upgrade over what GB has now. Good pass protector too, just can't get through a practice. younger than most FA rb's but has a lot of mileage."

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

Mortfini
Registered

11 years ago

27 years old averaged 4.5 yards a carry in all but one of his years he's very good on 3rd down with pass protection and receiving The one negative is his durability; he always seems to be bothered by a foot injury. He's had so many surgeries on his feet that he may not be able to hold up much longer.

blueleopard
Member

11 years ago

Either Chris Ivory, Reggie Bush, or we don't bother with the position.

Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings

shield4life
Veteran Member

11 years ago

To tell you the truth I would love to get him depending on the price his asking! All tho, if we get Reggie Bush would love that too, his lethal for screen plays!

Glad To Be A Packers Fan.

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

27 is getting old for a rb. especially one with a history of injuries. (can't look past it. It is a key part of discussion.)

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

edit: my giants fan buddy just texted me about him. "he'd be a huge upgrade over what GB has now. Good pass protector too, just can't get through a practice. younger than most FA rb's but has a lot of mileage."

Originally Posted by: gbguy20

The thing is it doesn't matter who they bring in or who compares other rb to the ones in GB. With the current OL it just doesn't matter. This line is designed for pass protection. They call pass plays on nearly a 2-1 ratio over the run. The GB rbs would look better on another team where they run more and have a better run block scheme.

Porforis
Veteran Member

11 years ago

The thing is it doesn't matter who they bring in or who compares other rb to the ones in GB. With the current OL it just doesn't matter. This line is designed for pass protection. They call pass plays on nearly a 2-1 ratio over the run. The GB rbs would look better on another team where they run more and have a better run block scheme.

Originally Posted by: wpr

That figure was correct in 2011, but there was a dramatic change in 2012.

http://losersbracket.com/2012/06/green-bay-packers-passing-attack-myth/

We do still pass a lot, and your point about our line being better at pass protection is true, but we're not exactly dominant protecting our QB either.

Overall, there's so many other positions out there that need work that I'm not sure we need to worry about RB at this point. Especially since APete behind our line would get probably 4, 4.5YPC at most. An upgrade in pass pro would be nice but if that's all you're going to get an RB for, what's the point?

play2win
Senior Member

11 years ago

Originally Posted by: wpr

I know what you are saying wpr, but I think the line is fine. We need our HC/OC to dedicate themselves to running more, pounding the ball, and getting their line used to a more physical approach to run blocking.

I agree our own RBs would look better in some other systems, simply because they would be used more, and more effectively... we need a change in philosophy more than anything, from the top.

As good as Bradshaw is, I think Harris is even better. The guy just needs a legit opportunity to be a top back, with an earnest number of attempts.

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

That figure was correct in 2011, but there was a dramatic change in 2012.

We do still pass a lot, and your point about our line being better at pass protection is true, but we're not exactly dominant protecting our QB either.

Overall, there's so many other positions out there that need work that I'm not sure we need to worry about RB at this point. Especially since APete behind our line would get probably 4, 4.5YPC at most. An upgrade in pass pro would be nice but if that's all you're going to get an RB for, what's the point?

Originally Posted by: Porforis

I was generalizing. There is not a huge difference between 60% and 66%.

yep.

wpr
Preferred Member

11 years ago

#10

I know what you are saying wpr, but I think the line is fine. We need our HC/OC to dedicate themselves to running more, pounding the ball, and getting their line used to a more physical approach to run blocking.

I agree our own RBs would look better in some other systems, simply because they would be used more, and more effectively... we need a change in philosophy more than anything, from the top.

As good as Bradshaw is, I think Harris is even better. The guy just needs a legit opportunity to be a top back, with an earnest number of attempts.

Originally Posted by: play2win

it is.

agreed

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

packerfanoutwest (1h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (3h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (13h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (13h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (13h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (13h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (13h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (17h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (17h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (17h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (19h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (19h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (19h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (19h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (19h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (19h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (19h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (19h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (20h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (21h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (21h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (21h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (21h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (21h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (22h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (22h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (22h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS