Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
5 Pages123>»

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
nyrpack  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:34:30 PM(UTC)
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 !!
nerdmann  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:36:49 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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.
GermanGilbert  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:39:09 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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.

zombieslayer  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 2:40:16 PM(UTC)
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. ](*,)

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.
nyrpack  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:03:16 PM(UTC)
zombieslayer said: 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. ](*,)

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 !!
GermanGilbert  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:19:55 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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?
steveishere  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 3:36:31 PM(UTC)
](*,)

NO!
zombieslayer  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:13:48 PM(UTC)
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?
buckeyepackfan  
#9 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:35:16 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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.
nyrpack  
#10 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:02:10 PM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan said: 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 !!
earthquake  
#11 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:11:44 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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.
GermanGilbert  
#12 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:17:11 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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.

buckeyepackfan  
#13 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:18:58 PM(UTC)
nyrpack said: 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.
RajiRoar  
#14 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 7:10:16 PM(UTC)
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.
wpr  
#15 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 8:17:18 PM(UTC)
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.
nerdmann  
#16 Posted : Wednesday, October 24, 2012 9:39:22 PM(UTC)
wpr said: 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.
yooperfan  
#17 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:32:09 AM(UTC)
nerdmann said: 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.

zombieslayer  
#18 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 7:02:33 AM(UTC)
wpr said: 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.


Yerko  
#19 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:22:00 AM(UTC)
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...

PackFanWithTwins  
#20 Posted : Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:23:48 AM(UTC)
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.
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 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

Fan Shout
Smokey (5m) : Hello dhazer !
Smokey (10h) : Chief Salad Day !
Smokey (24-Jun) : Guest ? Join us Today !
Smokey (24-Jun) : Saturday , it's PIZZA NIGHT !
Smokey (23-Jun) : Friday is Seafood day , not Pizza night . Eat a Shrimp !
Cheesey (23-Jun) : Happy B-day rocker!
Zero2Cool (22-Jun) : Today's Birthdays: hardrocker950 (33)
Smokey (22-Jun) : Coffee anyone ?
Smokey (21-Jun) : good show
Cheesey (21-Jun) : APPLE with ice cream!
Smokey (20-Jun) : Cherry with Vanilla Ice Cream !!
Cheesey (20-Jun) : APPLE!
Smokey (20-Jun) : Apple or Cherry Pie ?
TheKanataThrilla (18-Jun) : The only have 2 preseason games. I like that as the fans get to see more of the starters.
TheKanataThrilla (18-Jun) : Next week I believe the CFL season starts. Go Redblacks!!!
Smokey (18-Jun) : Been researching CFL , Edmonton Eskimos have the best colors/uniforms .
Smokey (18-Jun) : When does the CFL Season start anyway ?
Smokey (18-Jun) : Saw Flute CFL highlights in the day, full CFL game was /is rare .
TheKanataThrilla (18-Jun) : I wish many of you would have seen Doug Flutie in the CFL. Absolute beauty.
TheKanataThrilla (18-Jun) : Vince Young cut from Sask. Roughriders. Good for him to consider the CFL, but only a select few NFL QB castoffs are a good CFL fit.
Smokey (17-Jun) : R 2
Zero2Cool (17-Jun) : Not all hackers are bad
Smokey (16-Jun) : Public Hangings for Hackers .
Cheesey (16-Jun) : No, he said HACKERS!
Smokey (16-Jun) : Did you say Crackers ?
Zero2Cool (16-Jun) : PACKERS PACKERS PACKERS
Cheesey (16-Jun) : "That is true, my dear Smokey!"LOL!
Smokey (15-Jun) : dat ? Brer Cheesey ?
Cheesey (15-Jun) : True dat, Smokey. MUCH better!
Smokey (15-Jun) : I like the fillets/tenders, they usually are a better deal.
Cheesey (15-Jun) : Good one, Porforis! Made me laugh!
Porforis (15-Jun) : Shoulda gone with Kentucky Fried Chickadee
Cheesey (15-Jun) : Last time I had KFC, the pieces were so small it should be renamed "Kentucky Fried Sparrow"
Cheesey (15-Jun) : POPEYES! (Or Churches chicken)
Smokey (15-Jun) : KFC or Popeyes Chicken ?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2017 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 7:30 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 8 @ 3:25 PM
at Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 15 @ 12:00 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 AM
- BYE -
Monday, Nov 6 @ 7:30 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
RAVENS
Sunday, Nov 26 @ 7:30 PM
at Steelers
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 10 @ 12:00 PM
at Browns
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Saturday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
8m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / steveishere

25-Jun / Around The NFL / Smokey

25-Jun / Football Familiarity / Smokey

25-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / isocleas2

24-Jun / Around The NFL / beast

23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines