"I'll bet he weighs 240, but he plays like he weighs 300 pounds," one NFC North personnel man told Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "He's one of the strongest animals I've ever seen. He's a man.

"He giggles and laughs, nice guy, very personable. You don't even know he's a tough guy until he walks on the field. But, he's the toughest player on their team. Without a doubt. And let me tell you something, that rubs off on guys."

In a year or two - whenever Lacy's contract is up, it's gonna get real interesting, Thompson being Thompson. Right now we're paying Lacy what? $800 something thousand a year? Obviously, I like him for that - who wouldn't? But how about paying him market for a star RB's second contract - maybe $7 - 10 million a year for 4 or 5 seasons? That might even be on the low side. I think I'd be opposed to that; For that kind of money, we should get a gamebreaker - a threat to go all the way on any play. Solid as Lacy is, he ain't that gamebreaker.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

In a year or two - whenever Lacy's contract is up, it's gonna get real interesting, Thompson being Thompson. Right now we're paying Lacy what? $800 something thousand a year? Obviously, I like him for that - who wouldn't? But how about paying him market for a star RB's second contract - maybe $7 - 10 million a year for 4 or 5 seasons? That might even be on the low side. I think I'd be opposed to that; For that kind of money, we should get a gamebreaker - a threat to go all the way on any play. Solid as Lacy is, he ain't that gamebreaker.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

We don't need a gamebreaker.

We need a guy that moves the chains and doesn't get knocked backward. We need a guy built for smashmouth December football in brutal conditions.

Eddie Lacy gives us that.

Originally Posted by: Bigbyfan 

I disagree with this. First of all, moving the chains in bad conditions is more a product of the O Line.

More to the point, though, it's a giant step in the wrong direction if the Packers try to play "smashmouth" - which I take to mean a "run-first" offense.

We need to pass pass pass then run as a change of pace, and ideally, that running play is with a Melvin Gordon-type runner who can take it to the house on any given play.

Lacy is fine for what he does - get you 3 or 4 yards pretty regularly and occasionally break loose for 10 or 15 or 20 tops. He is just as likely to get stopped in the backfield, however, as to gain 10 to 20 yards. Stack that up against Aaron Rodgers pass plays - 65-70% successful, about the same rate of turnovers as on Lacy carries, and routinely gaining 10 to 20 yards - and ALWAYS a threat for a long gainer.

I don't want to spend big money on any RB unless he is a threat to break one, and even then, a long term high price contract is probably a bad idea.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 

This is why we have a 1-2 punch with James Starks because Starks DOES have the speed needed to take it to the house. We can wear down a defense with Lacy and light them up with either the passing game or James Starks. Sounds like a great combination to keep in place for as long as possible.

Originally Posted by: rabidgopher04 

Agreed, although I really liked Franklin better. lol

I think when it comes down to it, Lacy could go down as Ted's best draft pick ever.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

I disagree with this. First of all, moving the chains in bad conditions is more a product of the O Line.

More to the point, though, it's a giant step in the wrong direction if the Packers try to play "smashmouth" - which I take to mean a "run-first" offense.

We need to pass pass pass then run as a change of pace, and ideally, that running play is with a Melvin Gordon-type runner who can take it to the house on any given play.

Lacy is fine for what he does - get you 3 or 4 yards pretty regularly and occasionally break loose for 10 or 15 or 20 tops. He is just as likely to get stopped in the backfield, however, as to gain 10 to 20 yards. Stack that up against Aaron Rodgers pass plays - 65-70% successful, about the same rate of turnovers as on Lacy carries, and routinely gaining 10 to 20 yards - and ALWAYS a threat for a long gainer.

I don't want to spend big money on any RB unless he is a threat to break one, and even then, a long term high price contract is probably a bad idea.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker