Nice mucky. One of the things I see if how poor the blocking was for him on many of the plays.

Zero is not alone when it comes to evaluating draft picks and getting them wrong. But then many of us remember the you tube reaction those kids had when Uncle Teddy took Bustin Harrell. Sometimes we are right. Uncle Teddy should listen to us. Better still, let about 50 of us from PackerHome.com sit in the draft room all 3 days. Put some bleachers up along one of the walls and feed us snacks for the whole show.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

When the Packers used the 61st overall selection on Eddie Lacy, I was not thrilled or even excited that I can remember. I thought he was another project of the Alabama offensive line, much like I feel that both Mark Ingram and Trent Richardson are. Then the Packers used the 125th overall selection on Johnathan Franklin. I was sure Franklin would be the more productive back for the Packers both receiving and rushing.

I was ... not right.

All Eddie Lacy has done during his rookie season is carried the ball 248 times for 1,028 yards (4.1 yards per carry) while rushing for 8 touchdowns. He's not that bad out of the backfield either with 31 receptions for 236 yards receiving.

That's 1,266 total offensive yards and keep in mind he missed the Bengals game and played only one play during the Redskins game. Essentially, he's giving the Packers 100 total yards on offense each game and almost a touchdown per contest.

The only weakness in Lacy's game is his blitz pickup pass protection and that is something he will certainly improve on.

Thank you, Eddie.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Who amongst us gives a rat's ass about Lacy living up to the hype? All we need is a credible running game, and imo, he looks good enough to provide it, regardless of how bad we are at creating a hole for the running back. [I] like him most because I suspect we need his beef to get through the initial (non) hole.

The fact that he excelled under a ZBS blocking system cannot be overlooked, imo. [quote/]