gbguy20
  • gbguy20
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
11 years ago
PFT 

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.
Mortfini
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.
UserPostedImage
blueleopard
11 years ago
Either Chris Ivory, Reggie Bush, or we don't bother with the position.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
shield4life
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
  • 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.)
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • 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.



UserPostedImage
Porforis
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/ 

UserPostedImage

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
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 



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
  • 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.

UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

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


UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
beast (21m) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (8h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (13h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (14h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 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.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
30m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

40m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10h / Random Babble / beast

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.