Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
4 Pages123>»
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline nyrpack  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:34:30 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 64

i know it sounds crazy but i hear stephan jackson will not be back next season with the rams, there going a different direction with younger guys, the guy is a workhorse and still has alot of carries left in him, i think jones right now has a value so high i doubt he can keep it at this pace. with jennings coming back hopefully sooner then later and cobb getting more and more plays and there always donald still around the pack could manage without jones, its all my opinion that i think makes sense for both teams lord knows we need a every down back that brings a true running game to the field

any thoughts !!

Message modified by moderator Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:10:19 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Admin: fixed the title

jimmy b.
Offline nerdmann  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:36:49 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,715
Applause Received: 666

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
i know it sounds crazy but i hear stephan jackson will not be back next season with the rams, there going a different direction with younger guys, the guy is a workhorse and still has alot of carries left in him, i think jones right now has a value so high i doubt he can keep it at this pace. with jennings coming back hopefully sooner then later and cobb getting more and more plays and there always donald still around the pack could manage without jones, its all my opinion that i think makes sense for both teams lord knows we need a every down back that brings a true running game to the field

any thoughts !!


What about Jennings? Jones is a year younger.
“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.”
Offline GermanGilbert  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:39:09 PM(UTC)
GermanGilbert

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 11/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 37
Applause Received: 87

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
i know it sounds crazy but i hear stephan jackson will not be back next season with the rams, there going a different direction with younger guys, the guy is a workhorse and still has alot of carries left in him, i think jones right now has a value so high i doubt he can keep it at this pace. with jennings coming back hopefully sooner then later and cobb getting more and more plays and there always donald still around the pack could manage without jones, its all my opinion that i think makes sense for both teams lord knows we need a every down back that brings a true running game to the field

any thoughts !!


That would IMO be a dumbass move as hell. Double-D's time is over, Jennings probably will be gone after the season, we need JJ way more than a RB that's reaching the wrong side of the 3 next offseason. No way I'd do that.

blank
thanks Post received 1 applause.
rabidgopher04 on 10/24/2012(UTC)
Offline zombieslayer  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:40:16 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

No no no no no no no.

We are a passing team. Or maybe we should just get rid of Aaron Rodgers and Mike McCarthy. Maybe that will make some of the fans happier.

Let's spend all our money on RBs and shoot for 8-8 every year. Brick wall

We're losing Gregorious. Driver's retiring. So that leaves Jordy, Cobb, and Jones. Does anyone remember 2005? You can NOT have too many WRs.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
thanks Post received 3 applause.
Zero2Cool on 10/24/2012(UTC), wpr on 10/24/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline nyrpack  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:03:16 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 64

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer Go to Quoted Post
No no no no no no no.

We are a passing team. Or maybe we should just get rid of Aaron Rodgers and Mike McCarthy. Maybe that will make some of the fans happier.

Let's spend all our money on RBs and shoot for 8-8 every year. Brick wall

We're losing Gregorious. Driver's retiring. So that leaves Jordy, Cobb, and Jones. Does anyone remember 2005? You can NOT have too many WRs.


much easier getting a wr then a # 1 rb, cobb is more then enough to step up and be a # 2 !!
jimmy b.
Offline GermanGilbert  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:19:55 PM(UTC)
GermanGilbert

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 11/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 37
Applause Received: 87

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
much easier getting a wr then a # 1 rb, cobb is more then enough to step up and be a # 2 !!


As ZS said, the Packers are a passing team and need more than 2 quality WRs. Run the ball to set up the pass, no need to spend big bucks on a RB. And Steven Jackson would ask for big bucks. That said, I'm not against spending a lot money on a RB that's 25, 26 years old and turned out as a big difference maker for the Packers, however, I'm totally against cashing up the bank account of a RB, that took the big load for a team and is over 30. For RBs turning 30 is a big issue, how many backs over 30 can you think of that had another 3 or 4 great years?
blank
thanks Post received 2 applause.
nerdmann on 10/24/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline steveishere  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:36:31 PM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 48
Applause Received: 981

Brick wall

NO!
Offline zombieslayer  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:13:48 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

All I really should reply is 2005. Then people should cringe thinking of that year and realize we need every WR we can get.

Remember the last time we started taking WRs off the street? How did that work out?
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline buckeyepackfan  
#9 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:35:16 PM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2014

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Lima, Ohio

Applause Given: 355
Applause Received: 458

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
much easier getting a wr then a # 1 rb, cobb is more then enough to step up and be a # 2 !!


The RB position is the easiest to fill. Just look around The NFL, there are many guys who started out as UDFA's and are now #1 RB's.

That guy The Packers just shut down in Texas a couple weeks ago comes to mind.

Wr's take time to develope, especially with The way The Packers utilize them.

They want their starters to be able to play all wr positions.

The norm in The NFL is 3 yrs, some develope faster(Greg,Randall), some slower(JJ), and most hit the norm(Jordy).

There are plenty of young wr available, but there are also plenty of young rb's and they can step into the starting role much easier.

Give Alex Green a chance, it's only been 2 weeks.
Enjoy the ride – It kicks and just keeps on kickin’. "Stats are for Losers"
thanks Post received 2 applause.
wpr on 10/24/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline nyrpack  
#10 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:02:10 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 64

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan Go to Quoted Post
The RB position is the easiest to fill. Just look around The NFL, there are many guys who started out as UDFA's and are now #1 RB's.

That guy The Packers just shut down in Texas a couple weeks ago comes to mind.

Wr's take time to develope, especially with The way The Packers utilize them.

They want their starters to be able to play all wr positions.

The norm in The NFL is 3 yrs, some develope faster(Greg,Randall), some slower(JJ), and most hit the norm(Jordy).

There are plenty of young wr available, but there are also plenty of young rb's and they can step into the starting role much easier.

Give Alex Green a chance, it's only been 2 weeks.


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 !!
jimmy b.
Offline earthquake  
#11 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:11:44 PM(UTC)
earthquake

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/11/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 194
Applause Received: 63

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
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 !!


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
thanks Post received 2 applause.
wpr on 10/24/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline GermanGilbert  
#12 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:17:11 PM(UTC)
GermanGilbert

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 11/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 37
Applause Received: 87

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
the easiest to fill, please let me know who the pack has had since ryan grant a few yrs ago ??


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
Offline buckeyepackfan  
#13 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:18:58 PM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2012Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2014

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Lima, Ohio

Applause Given: 355
Applause Received: 458

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
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 !!


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.
Enjoy the ride – It kicks and just keeps on kickin’. "Stats are for Losers"
Offline RajiRoar  
#14 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 7:10:16 PM(UTC)
Laser Gunns

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/30/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 43
Applause Received: 256

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!
Offline wpr  
#15 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:17:18 PM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 3,152
Applause Received: 1,522

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

"Will you follow me, one last time?" Thorin Oakenshield
thanks Post received 2 applause.
zombieslayer on 10/25/2012(UTC), earthquake on 10/25/2012(UTC)
Offline nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:39:22 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,715
Applause Received: 666

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
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.


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.”
Offline yooperfan  
#17 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:32:09 AM(UTC)
yooperfan

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Ishpeming Michigan

Applause Given: 637
Applause Received: 295

Originally Posted by: nerdmann Go to Quoted Post
I'd settle for a dude who's money in short yardage.


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

thanks Post received 3 applause.
wpr on 10/25/2012(UTC), zombieslayer on 10/25/2012(UTC), macbob on 10/26/2012(UTC)
Offline zombieslayer  
#18 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 7:02:33 AM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
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.


My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Offline Yerko  
#19 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:22:00 AM(UTC)
Yerko

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Joined: 10/15/2008(UTC)
Location: Chicago, IL

Applause Given: 160
Applause Received: 264

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 Applause 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
Online PackFanWithTwins  
#20 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:23:48 AM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

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 to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline dfosterf  
#21 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:47:06 PM(UTC)
dfosterf

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

United States
Joined: 8/19/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 208
Applause Received: 430

JAMES JONES!

I saw it. I saw the potential. I defended him. Sometimes I don't know WHY I did, but I did. My wife told me she bought a couch the other day- turned out she she bought a friggin' ROOM. She hit me with my consolation prize after she hit me with the price for the room...

JAMES JONES! (Autographed helmet, probably went for real cheap)

She had/has no clue who James Jones is. She only hears me yellin' from afar, "JAMES JONES!"


I'm married to a good woman, lol

I don't want to trade James Jones. I like him.
UserPostedImage
damn skippy I'm an owner. I currently own a full .00001924537805515393 % of the Green Bay Packers.



Offline nyrpack  
#22 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:07:18 PM(UTC)
nyrpack

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)
Location: long island, ny

Applause Given: 5
Applause Received: 64

obviously im in the minority here, i have nothing but praise for jones but if want a guy like jackson it would take a guy like jones as tradebait. i truly think cobb, driver and boykin could pick up the slack if jones were not here. remember when the pack is on the road and in hostile stadiums and there pinned in and its 3 and 1 , having a guy like jackson is money, and when teams lineup to stack the line arod could go play action and hit wide open recievers if he so chooses. again its only my opinion and i respect all the counterpoints which do make lots of sense !!
jimmy b.
Offline zombieslayer  
#23 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 5:54:01 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer

Rank: Most Valuable Player

Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: San Francisco

Applause Given: 778
Applause Received: 495

Originally Posted by: nyrpack Go to Quoted Post
obviously im in the minority here, i have nothing but praise for jones but if want a guy like jackson it would take a guy like jones as tradebait. i truly think cobb, driver and boykin could pick up the slack if jones were not here. remember when the pack is on the road and in hostile stadiums and there pinned in and its 3 and 1 , having a guy like jackson is money, and when teams lineup to stack the line arod could go play action and hit wide open recievers if he so chooses. again its only my opinion and i respect all the counterpoints which do make lots of sense !!


With all due respect, you're thinking short term. Ted Thompson and The Zombieslayer are thinking long-term so it's not gonna happen.

JJ will be good for at least 3-4 years and more than likely 5-6. Driver is done after this season. Gregorious will probably follow the $$$. Then what? You expect Boykin to be as good as JJ or Driver? Fat chance.

Aaron Rodgers needs weapons. If anything, we need an improved OL. We absolutely positively do NOT need a 29-year-old RB.

When Jackson gets 450 yards on 150 carries next year, then 200 yards on 70 carries the year after that and JJ is getting 1000 yards on 80 receptions and 10 TDs on another team for 3 straight years, you'd be kicking yourself.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)

2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. Ted Thompson Mike McCarthy Aaron Rodgers
Online PackFanWithTwins  
#24 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 6:04:39 PM(UTC)
PackFanWithTwins

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Joined: 9/26/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 13
Applause Received: 398

Don't forget that Jackson will be a Free agent after this year also. This would also double the hit to the cap of Jones bringing Jackson in.


What we should have done is sign Wells and trade him for Jackson.
The world needs ditch diggers to Danny!!!
UserPostedImage
Offline Porforis  
#25 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 7:48:11 PM(UTC)
Porforis

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 8/22/2009(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Applause Given: 169
Applause Received: 333

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins Go to Quoted Post
Don't forget that Jackson will be a Free agent after this year also. This would also double the hit to the cap of Jones bringing Jackson in.

What we should have done is sign Wells and trade him for Jackson.


I really don't see that either... We brought in Benson to be an effective RB. He was a very effective RB, but got hurt. How would Jackson have been an improvement over Benson when healthy, and who's to say Jackson wouldn't get dinged up as well, putting us in the exact same situation?
UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
4 Pages123>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
10m / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / civic

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Laser Gunns

27-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nyrpack

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / rabidgopher04

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

26-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann