Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)
earthquake
12 years ago

the easiest to fill, please let me know who the pack has had since ryan grant a few yrs ago ??
believe me im all for the passing game, but i would love a rb who can get the ball so defenses across the league cant get a chance to kill arod every game !!

Originally Posted by: nyrpack 



RB is one of the easiest positions to plug a no-name guy in and get solid production. The last "franchise" RB the packers had was Ahman Green in 2004/2006. Do you know what the packers have done since 2006?

13-3 nfc championship loss
6-10
11-5 playoffs
10-6 superbowl win
15-1 playoffs
55-25

Ok, now tell me which superbowl winning team has had a top 5 RB in the last 5 years... 10 years?

The game has evolved, in most cases if you have a "Franchise" running back, you don't have a winning team. Look at Steven Jackson, Adrian Peterson, Chris Johnson(when he was good), MJD, etc etc, how many games have those teams won over the last 5 years?

If you have to rely on a top flight RB to win, you're not going to win.
blank
GermanGilbert
12 years ago

the easiest to fill, please let me know who the pack has had since ryan grant a few yrs ago ??

Originally Posted by: nyrpack 



It doesn't go down to the Packers to define the position easiest to fill. If the Packers do not get a starting caliber RB out of UDFAs it doesn't mean it's not the easisest position to fill. Arian Foster, UDFA, leading the league in rushing the last 2 years. Alfred Morris, UDFA, pretty darn good for the Redskins, Ryan Grant was an UDFA either btw. It's the easiest position to fill, I totally agree.


blank
buckeyepackfan
12 years ago

the easiest to fill, please let me know who the pack has had since ryan grant a few yrs ago ??
believe me im all for the passing game, but i would love a rb who can get the ball so defenses across the league cant get a chance to kill arod every game !!

Originally Posted by: nyrpack 



You missed my point, you don't trade away a WR who is finally coming into his own, it may take another 3 yrs to replace him.

Packers lose Jennings next year, and trade away Jones, that leaves only Jordy as a proven wr, Cobb probably but with what he is showing this year, but that still would leave you with only 2 proven wr's.
Neither is going to be as effective without Jones and/or Jennings.

The Packers have not had great success replacing Grant, but could be just dumb luck, Starks looked like he would be the guy, but injuries have slowed him, Brandon Saine was gonna get a shot, again injuries,Green needs more than 2 weeks to prove himself.
He doesn't work out, well then there is White.
He doesn't work out, maybe Ted will bring in some guy named yellow.

RB's can adapt to an offense much quicker than wr's.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
RajiRoar
12 years ago
James Jones?

no.

a mid-low draft pick?

maybe.

If we are not going to invest in a young/studmuffin RB, then maybe we can get bye using ol' vets who will play cheap for a shot at a ring.

keep in mind, Jones signed a short deal, Jennings may be on the way out, Driver is retiring, Finley sucks...

we need to start stocking up on pass catchers BEFORE we have a problem.

MintBaconDrivel
Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
12 years ago
people who want a stud rb are like nations who want a nuke or driving a Lamborghini in any American city. it looks real good sitting there but you can't use it. You only want one because someone else has one.
The stud rb will not get 25 carries and have a 100+ yard game. All you need is some schmoe who will get 15-20 carries and help move the chains. A 3 yard per carry avg is nice but not required.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
12 years ago

people who want a stud rb are like nations who want a nuke or driving a Lamborghini in any American city. it looks real good sitting there but you can't use it. You only want one because someone else has one.
The stud rb will not get 25 carries and have a 100+ yard game. All you need is some schmoe who will get 15-20 carries and help move the chains. A 3 yard per carry avg is nice but not required.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



I'd settle for a dude who's money in short yardage.
“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.”
yooperfan
12 years ago

I'd settle for a dude who's money in short yardage.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



I'll take Kuhn.
We don't need Stephan Jackson.

zombieslayer
12 years ago

people who want a stud rb are like nations who want a nuke or driving a Lamborghini in any American city. it looks real good sitting there but you can't use it. You only want one because someone else has one.
The stud rb will not get 25 carries and have a 100+ yard game. All you need is some schmoe who will get 15-20 carries and help move the chains. A 3 yard per carry avg is nice but not required.

Originally Posted by: wpr 




My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Yerko
12 years ago
NYRPack...you know your idea would have been amazing had it been after a JJ drop heavy game or earlier in the year before his 3 games where he caught 2 touchdowns each time.

I =d> you for the thought, but I will side with the majority as well. James Jones belongs on the Packers because there truly is no telling what is going to happen with our receivers in the next 1-2 years. Jennings is up for a new contract and DD is on the last leg of his contract. Giving up JJ would leave us pretty bare at the receiver position.

Don't get me wrong, seeing Steven Jackson in a Packers jersey would be friggin' amazing...


UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
12 years ago
I believe I posted this in anothe thread.

If part of that trade includes an Oline that can run block and an offensive strategy that concentrates on running the ball then maybe. Peterson would be a mediocre back behind our run blocking and play calling. I went back a took a hard look at all our run plays and believe me when I tell you RB is not the problem.

When you see a team that dominates at running, you see lineman taking their blocks 5 yards down field. Our oline seldom block on the defensive side of the ball. And that is not because the guys can't, it seems to be by design. They want it always to look like we are passing so even in run blocking we backup instead of drive forward. There also have been many times, where we have Crabtree single blocking a DE on the front side of the run. Crabtree may be a good blocking TE, but he is not going to drive DE's with 30+ lbs on him off the ball.

Backs don't do well when they don't have anyplace to run.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (5m) : Bleh, that only impacts two games.
    Zero2Cool (12m) : Packers are gonna get 3rd place division schedule next year.
    Mucky Tundra (1h) : Kanata, seek help! lol
    beast (3h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status
    Zero2Cool (3h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha
    TheKanataThrilla (3h) : That was terrible.
    TheKanataThrilla (3h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.
    beast (4h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent
    beast (4h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime
    beast (4h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing
    Zero2Cool (4h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is
    Zero2Cool (5h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true
    beast (5h) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management
    wpr (7h) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.
    Mucky Tundra (15h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago
    beast (16h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years
    Zero2Cool (22h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.
    packerfanoutwest (22h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it
    beast (23h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done
    Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.
    Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore
    packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!
    Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!
    beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
    beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
    Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
    Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
    beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
    beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
    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
    1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    2h / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

    5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    11h / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

    17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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