Coach says fullback's flexibility makes him an asset

PackersNews  wrote:

I don't mind having Kuhn on the team

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

we could find a better lead blocker for Lacy than John Kuhn

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

find a better lead blocker ... something Ted Thompson should be doing with a later round pick.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

McCarthy seems to like to use the tight ends in the capacity though, so whether or not a FB is drafted will be interesting.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

So you want Ted Thompson to use a draft pick on a position that"has become irrelevent in the modern day NFL"?
Plus most FBs go undrafted and Kuhn has beat out all the FB Thompson has drafted for the Packers... not saying he would again, but if seems like you can possility get a decent FB after the draft ... beause they're "irrelevent in the modern day NFL"

Originally Posted by: beast 

I don't think Kuhn is a bone-crushing blocker at all, which is why we suck on 3rd and 1, and goal line situations. Kuhn is slow running back. I think Kuhn is very replaceable, but then I get in trouble with all the Kool-Aid guys around because of the Packer People crap. It's like I'm pissing on their morning cheerios.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

Race not an issue , John Kuhn fills the role of blocking back, pass protector , as well as sometime ball carrier / receiver . He also plays on Special Teams . He is a valuable asset for the Packers and they are fortunate to have the Pro-Bowl FB .

:walk: :signduh:

Originally Posted by: Smokey 

1: He's white

2: Marginally talented "try hard" guy.

Packers fans love this type of player!

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Aaron Kampman, Spencer Havner, how many of these marginally talented white guys have we gone through? And the crowd loves 'em every time.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Race is not an issue.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

Looks like you set up a fake argument for you to complain about... I never said Kuhn is a bone-crusher (because he's not), or a fast RB (because he's not), or that he's Packers People (though he probably is, that also is irrelevant to the subject)

Packers seem to bring in another FB every single year, and even drafted two, Korey Hall and Quinn Johnson... and some how Kuhn gets up on the final 53 man roster and the other guy sooner or later disappears.

They've had other FBs that better fit want you seemed to suggested you wanted and they got cut. Which might mean the Packers are looking for something other than just bone-crushing blocks and speed... like maybe the best overall versatile that is a 10/jack of most/all trades that gives them the best chance to win... maybe that's why they have kept Kuhn around this long. Nothing to do with Packers people or not.

But like I think you suggested, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Packers using more TE/H-back sets where a TE is in the back field, nor surprised about a TE or two drafted.

Originally Posted by: beast 

And actually I just forgot to mention the bone-crushing blocking in my first post.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

Also, we don't spend any valuable picks trying to get a top notch fullback. We use our garbage picks or street free agents for some competition for Kuhn. Are we really trying all we can do to run the football?

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

That's what white right wingers always say, but it couldn't be farther from truth.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

Even if you did, that still would of gone into the Quinn Johnson got cut argument.



I'm very confused now... are you suggesting the Packers use a "valuable" draft pick to pick up a "top notch" player at a position you claimed is "a position that has become irrelevent in the modern day NFL"?

If it's irrelevant (like you claim) then why would you a valuable draft pick on it? Doesn't make sense to me... sounds like Al Davis talking about using 1st round picks on kickers because they're the best at their position.

Also what's a "valuable" draft pick?, just wondering where the line is between valuable draft pick and garbage draft pick.


And to answer your question... are we do everything we can do to run the ball? ... No, the Packers are a pass first offensively minded team, and rarely if ever to pass first offensively teams ever do everything they can to run the ball. Just like a lot of running teams don't do everything they can for the pass the ball.

Originally Posted by: beast 

I don't know what is so difficult to understand. We should get a bonecrushing blocking fullback for Lacy even though the FB position has become irrelevant in the NFL. That's not too difficult for you is it? Just because other teams don't use the FB anymore do the Packers have to conform?

I'm not going to talk to you like you're a 4 year old like I do others in this forum. Keep up!

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

I don't know what is so difficult to understand. We should get a bonecrushing blocking fullback for Lacy even though the FB position has become irrelevant in the NFL. That's not too difficult for you is it? Just because other teams don't use the FB anymore do the Packers have to conform?

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

No that statement made a lot more sense, than the other statements. Sounds like you wanted Quinn Johnson, a top bone crushing blocking FB, that was drafted with a valuable draft pick.

Damn those coaches for keeping the best 53 they thought could help win the most games for them! And not keeping the bone crushing FB...

More serious those... how many bone crushing FBs are there, that can keep making a good teams 53 man roster? Very few... that's why so few teams have a true very good bone crushing FB ... because most of them no longer exists... (for the most part )

Originally Posted by: beast