Rockmolder
16 years ago

Ahman Green was not appreciated by some, I feel. Those who claim he was not an elite back I think are sadly mistaken. He could run, catch, block, he was the man during his prime. That was one helluva good move by Sherman.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



Who the heck said he wasn't an elite back? Whoever said that is now on my idiot list.

In terms of fantasy football (yes, fantasy football matters for RB production), he was #3 in 2001 and #3 in 2003. He was #3 in '01 and '03 in total yards from scrimmage. He got 20 TDs in '03, which was 2nd in the NFL (for any position). He was a Pro Bowler in '01, '02, '03, and '04. He was a damn good screen back.

Geez, I guess some people smoke too much crack. Anyone who would be disappointed in that much production in 4 years for a RB is an idiot. Realistically, the life expectancy of a RB is very short. He's 29th all-time in career rushing yards, which is pretty impressive.

"SlickVision" wrote:



I agree. He's actually one of the reasons I became a Packer fan over another team.

The one thing you can complain about, I guess, are his fumbles. He fumbled 7 times, of which we lost possesion 5 times, in his 1800 yard season. 6 time in a 1200 yard season and 7 times again in another 1200 yard season.

Still, he was an amazing back. It's a shame that he wasn't used the first 2 years and declined so horribly fast when he did.
Zero2Cool
16 years ago

Ahman Green was not appreciated by some, I feel. Those who claim he was not an elite back I think are sadly mistaken. He could run, catch, block, he was the man during his prime. That was one helluva good move by Sherman.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



Who the heck said he wasn't an elite back? Whoever said that is now on my idiot list.

In terms of fantasy football (yes, fantasy football matters for RB production), he was #3 in 2001 and #3 in 2003. He was #3 in '01 and '03 in total yards from scrimmage. He got 20 TDs in '03, which was 2nd in the NFL (for any position). He was a Pro Bowler in '01, '02, '03, and '04. He was a damn good screen back.

Geez, I guess some people smoke too much crack. Anyone who would be disappointed in that much production in 4 years for a RB is an idiot. Realistically, the life expectancy of a RB is very short. He's 29th all-time in career rushing yards, which is pretty impressive.

"SlickVision" wrote:



I can't recall who, but I think it was on this website here somewhere it was said that Ahman Green wasn't that good or shouldn't be considered elite.

As per someone elses argument about fumbles. Check his fumbles per carry. Compare that to the rest of the NFL during those times.


edit, Career.
Carries 2015
Fumbles 35 (1 fumble : 57 carries)
Fumbles lost 23 ( 1 fumble lost : 87 carries)
UserPostedImage
dfosterf
16 years ago

Ahman Green was not appreciated by some, I feel. Those who claim he was not an elite back I think are sadly mistaken. He could run, catch, block, he was the man during his prime. That was one helluva good move by Sherman.

"SlickVision" wrote:



Who the heck said he wasn't an elite back? Whoever said that is now on my idiot list.

In terms of fantasy football (yes, fantasy football matters for RB production), he was #3 in 2001 and #3 in 2003. He was #3 in '01 and '03 in total yards from scrimmage. He got 20 TDs in '03, which was 2nd in the NFL (for any position). He was a Pro Bowler in '01, '02, '03, and '04. He was a damn good screen back.

Geez, I guess some people smoke too much crack. Anyone who would be disappointed in that much production in 4 years for a RB is an idiot. Realistically, the life expectancy of a RB is very short. He's 29th all-time in career rushing yards, which is pretty impressive.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



I can't recall who, but I think it was on this website here somewhere it was said that Ahman Green wasn't that good or shouldn't be considered elite.

As per someone elses argument about fumbles. Check his fumbles per carry. Compare that to the rest of the NFL during those times.


edit, Career.
Carries 2015
Fumbles 35 (1 fumble : 57 carries)
Fumbles lost 23 ( 1 fumble lost : 87 carries)

"SlickVision" wrote:



Hah. Ryan Grant couldn't carry Ahman Green's jockstrap. Ted should have mentioned that to him during the contract negotiations.

Ted: "I have seen Ahman Green run the football sir. I know Ahman Green. You sir, are no Ahman Green."

You know, kinda like this:

Senator, you are no Jack Kennedy 

...shoulda seen the back strokin' young Dan feebly attempted on that day.

Tom Brokaw: Senator Quayle, I don't mean to beat this drum until it has no more sound in it. But to follow up on Brit Hume's question, when you said that it was a hypothetical situation, it is, sir, after all, the reason that we're here tonight, because you are running not just for Vice President (Applause) and if you cite the experience that you had in Congress, surely you must have some plan in mind about what you would do if it fell to you to become President of the United States, as it has to so many Vice Presidents just in the last 25 years or so.
Quayle: Let me try to answer the question one more time. I think this is the fourth time that I've had this question.
Brokaw: The third time.
Quayle: Three times that I've had this question and I will try to answer it again for you, as clearly as I can, because the question you are asking is, "What kind of qualifications does Dan Quayle have to be president," "What kind of qualifications do I have," and "What would I do in this kind of a situation?" And what would I do in this situation? [...] I have far more experience than many others that sought the office of vice president of this country. I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency. I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush administration, if that unfortunate event would ever occur.
Judy Woodruff: Senator [Bentsen]?
Bentsen: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy: I knew Jack Kennedy; Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy. (Prolonged shouts and applause.) What has to be done in a situation like that is to call in the
Woodruff: Please, please, once again you are only taking time away from your own candidate.
Quayle: That was really uncalled for, Senator. (Shouts and applause.)
Bentsen: You are the one that was making the comparison, Senator and I'm one who knew him well. And frankly I think you are so far apart in the objectives you choose for your country that I did not think the comparison was well-taken.




That was a smack-down...one of the best ever. And I'm a republican, for the record.


Anybody that says Ahman Green wasn't the absolute shit in his prime apparently never watched him play.
all_about_da_packers
16 years ago
Let's not underestimate the talent around Green, namely on the O-line.

The continuity was tremendous, and frankly we had 4 pro-bowl offensive linemen clearing paths for Green.

Not to undermine Green by any means, but our current o-line is not even in the same ball park when it comes to that offensive line (albeit scheme doesn't help our O-line much, seemingly).
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
Zero2Cool
16 years ago

Let's not underestimate the talent around Green, namely on the O-line.

The continuity was tremendous, and frankly we had 4 pro-bowl offensive linemen clearing paths for Green.

Not to undermine Green by any means, but our current o-line is not even in the same ball park when it comes to that offensive line (albeit scheme doesn't help our O-line much, seemingly).

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:



I'm on THIS side of the fence, now THIS side of the fence! Don't under estimate the talent around Green, don't underestimate Green's talent ... c'mon!

I think we derailed the shit out of this thread. I don't think Green is going to be on the roster this year.

I'm all for ...
Grant
Jackson
Wynn
Lumpkin
Johnson

if we keep 5.
UserPostedImage
all_about_da_packers
16 years ago
^ We'll to be fair, talking of Green can contribute to our current RB situation.

Green had the o-line, and was in a scheme that played to his talents. He was a great player, but those things made him a real playmaker. Grant showed shades of that in his first year, but last year... yeah no.

Perhaps the key to our RB situation is tweaking the scheme? Can Jackson and Wynn even play in a more man-blocking run scheme? Jackson developed in the ZBS in Nebraska, so perhaps he's real limited in that way?

McCarthy talks about scheme development and the like ... perhaps he needs to develop a scheme that better puts Grant in a position to succeed?

Personally, I think Grant can succeed in the ZBS - he just needs a path to get to the second level.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
packersfan101101
16 years ago

Note how Pelissero avoided mentioning Brandon Jackson's yards per carry (5.5) because he wanted to make him look bad. This is what drives me nuts about these writers sometimes. I agree with PackFanWithTwins that Jackson should be used way more than he was last season. I also agree that less ZBS would be a good thing.

"Greg C." wrote:



Yea i agree thats ridiculus, Brandon Jackson is much better then the write makes him sound and in my opinion he should be the starter. In Grant you have someone who will just repeatedly run up the middle and is no threat in the passing game, but in jackson you have someone who can go up the middle but also bounce outside and and make some people miss. Also he is a threat in the passing game.
brandon jackson is amazing
zombieslayer
16 years ago



Yea i agree thats ridiculus, Brandon Jackson is much better then the write makes him sound and in my opinion he should be the starter. In Grant you have someone who will just repeatedly run up the middle and is no threat in the passing game, but in jackson you have someone who can go up the middle but also bounce outside and and make some people miss. Also he is a threat in the passing game.

"packersfan101101" wrote:



I wouldn't go as far as say Jackson should start over Grant. However, in an offensive scheme I would run, we'd see probably 60/40 Grant/Jackson.

I am anti-run, unless you have an elite back. We do not have an elite back.

In the WCO, you can get by with a mediocre RB and still win SB after SB. Can anyone name the starting RB on all five of the 49er SB teams? I live in San Francisco and I can't. Heck, we didn't even have a 900 yard rusher when we won the SB.

Jackson brings more diversity. He's more a WCO back. With Grant, you have no screen threat. You know he's going to get the ball and run up the middle for 3.9 yards a carry. Big deal.

Grant is tough though, and can carry a good workload. I was happy with him in '07 but the drop off was significant and he better show some improvement in '08.

Yes, our OL is mediocre, but Grant holding out for more money and getting more money, he better produce.

More importantly, Jackson is more WCO, and we are a WCO team, like it or not. Jackson MAY be a better long-term fit. We will see in 2009.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Dulak
16 years ago
wynn had some good runs in 07 too from what I saw
zombieslayer
16 years ago

wynn had some good runs in 07 too from what I saw

"Dulak" wrote:



Wynn is a very talented kid. Problem with him is upstairs. If he gets his head together, he could be a decent RB.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Fan Shout
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Golden with two TDs in red zone drills today
Mucky Tundra (1h) : @JacobMorley Shoutout to Quinn Ewers for allowing Matthew Golden to be available when Green Bay picked.
Zero2Cool (5h) : The menu you expanded to log in, it's the first icon under "PackersHome" .. maybe i should add text to it
dfosterf (5h) : Feelin' pfowish can't find the sun. No big deal, will drag a laptop out when the time comes
Zero2Cool (5h) : if you're on mobile, open the menu and its the "sun" icon
dfosterf (5h) : Can't find the toggle, lol
dfosterf (5h) : I can find that the Microsoft lady rep for Titletown Tech is the philanthropy boss for the entire Microsoft corporation, but. .
Zero2Cool (5h) : There's a toggle for light/dark theme. Super easy.
dfosterf (6h) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (6h) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (6h) : *Friday*
dfosterf (6h) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (6h) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (6h) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (6h) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (6h) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (7h) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (7h) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (7h) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (7h) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (7h) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (7h) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (7h) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (7h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (7h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (7h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (7h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (14h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
5h / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.