nerdmann
7 years ago

I would be wary. He's the wrong side of 30. His usage isn't that high for someone his age but part of that is due to injuries and suspensions. He averaged a mere 3.9 yards per carry last year. His 18 touchdowns last year, while quite impressive, are a massive outlier in his career numbers (his previous best was 7). Last year was his most carries in a year and he appeared to wear down. He was largely unproductive the last month of the regular season and completely useless in the playoffs.

If Green Bay were exploring it as a one, maybe two year stopgap, then it might work out. I think his role would have to be short yardage and spelling Monty in a few obvious runnng situations. Any prospective contract would have to reflect that role. I'm guessing he'll be signed by someone else for more.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



I think he'd be a great short yardage specialist. He'd have to beat out Don Jackson to start.

How does he look in pass pro?
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Nonstopdrivel
7 years ago
Don Jackson rushed all of 10 times for a whopping 32 yards in 2016. I don't think even an over-the-hill LaGarrette Blount would have a difficult time beating out Don Jackson for a roster spot.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
7 years ago

Don Jackson rushed all of 10 times for a whopping 32 yards in 2016. I don't think even an over-the-hill LaGarrette Blount would have a difficult time beating out Don Jackson for a roster spot.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



They could have reached an injury settlement with Don Jackson, but they kept him around. Dude can play. Needs to learn the offense and work on pass pro. Crockett can play too.

I'm predicting Jackson gets 4.5 per.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
DoddPower
7 years ago

Don Jackson rushed all of 10 times for a whopping 32 yards in 2016. I don't think even an over-the-hill LaGarrette Blount would have a difficult time beating out Don Jackson for a roster spot.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



Jackson is a scrub.
sschind
7 years ago
With the signing of Michael I think Teds FA RB deals are done. I'm hoping he drafts someone as early as day 2 if the right guy is there and we know Montgomery will be in the mix so that leaves Monty, Michael, Jackson and a rookie. Unless Michael's deal includes very little if any guarantees I don't think Ted will bring any other higher profile RBs who will likely command at least some guarantees. A few more UDFA I could see but not someone like Blount.
DoddPower
7 years ago
Ted will draft the next Brandon Jackson (ick).
sschind
7 years ago

Ted will draft the next Brandon Jackson (ick).

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



That's what thinking quality RBs are a dime a dozen and can be found late in the draft leaves you with. Yes, you can find a diamond in the rough but teams looking to upgrade their backfield probably should do a bit more than draft late and hope it works out.

I went back through all the RBs drafted 4th round or later since the 2000 draft and I'd say only about 10 or 12 produced anything more than spot duty and even some of those who were starters were nothing special. I didn't include the 2016 draft because the jury is still out but Jordan Howard looks like he may be the best of the bunch. The jury is still out on Jay Ajayi as well but he does look pretty good. The best of the rest were D. Freeman, A. Blue, L, Murray, A, Morris.

A lot of fans don't think a good RB is important to the Packers offense and that we can plug
anyone in and be OK. If that's your feeling fine but all you are likely to get with that attitude is just that, an OK back.

I think we all saw what a top level RB like Eddie Lacy can do for this offense in his first two years. If my choice is a guy like a healthy dedicated Eddie Lacy that we have to spend a 2nd or third rounder, or even a first for the right guy, I'd take that over a shot in the dark 3rd day pick any day.

I'm not saying higher draft picks always work out but the odds are better and if you want threat at RB as opposed to a guy who just wears the number you have to take the chance. Terrell Davis' and Arian Fosters are the rare exception rather than the rule.

I don't want Ted to reach for a RB by any means and if there are higher rated players at other positions I certainly don't want him taking the RB just to get one on day 1 or 2. From what is being said this draft is loaded at the position. This may be the year where several day three backs eventually turn out to be something but I'm not holding my breath that a 4th or 5th rounder is going to be the back that makes our offense run smoother. He may be OK but I'd rather have something more than just OK.




Smokey
7 years ago
TT will not spend High Dollars for a High Dollar RB like Blount. GB has RB's only to keep Defenses honest for Aaron Rodgers and the GB passing attack.

I can see that GB's greatest need is at the CB/CB's position. I just wish that more had the same clarity to see it too .


[cheers]

UserPostedImage
sschind
7 years ago

TT will not spend High Dollars for a High Dollar RB like Blount. GB has RB's only to keep Defenses honest for Aaron Rodgers and the GB passing attack.

I can see that GB's greatest need is at the CB/CB's position. I just wish that more had the same clarity to see it too .


[cheers]

Originally Posted by: Smokey 



Everybody and their brother knows the Packers greatest need is CB and we see it with the same clarity that you do. Its hard to not know as some people insist on bringing it up in every thread. That said does that mean we can't talk about other positions. We lost Lang so we need to replace him. We need a CB. A little depth on the O-line would be nice. Yeah but we need a CB. A pass rusher would really help. Yeah but we NEED a CB. It was raining today YEAH BUT WE REALLY NEED A CB WHY AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN SEE THAT.

We get it. We need a CB but we could use help in other areas as well. Beside CB that is.
Zero2Cool
7 years ago

Everybody and their brother knows the Packers greatest need is CB and we see it with the same clarity that you do. Its hard to not know as some people insist on bringing it up in every thread. That said does that mean we can't talk about other positions. We lost Lang so we need to replace him. We need a CB. A little depth on the O-line would be nice. Yeah but we need a CB. A pass rusher would really help. Yeah but we NEED a CB. It was raining today YEAH BUT WE REALLY NEED A CB WHY AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO CAN SEE THAT.

We get it. We need a CB but we could use help in other areas as well. Beside CB that is.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



It's pretty obnoxious isn't it? At least, that's my OFFICIAL opinion of it.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
bboystyle (5m) : 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 (14m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (34m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (43m) : 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 (55m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (4h) : 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 (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (5h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (5h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (5h) : Packers will get in
beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
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
4m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

31m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

3h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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