Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
5 Pages«<345
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
PackerTraxx  
#81 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:51:36 AM(UTC)
Thanks, if that is the extent and the Packers can satisfy themselves he'll fit in well; for a 6th or 7th I would say "go for it".
Pack93z  
#82 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:58:57 AM(UTC)
To be complete.. there were work ethic questions coming into this season.


Quote:
His lack of commitment was startling to coaches from the day he was claimed off waivers from the Titans an undrafted rookie in 2010. For the first two weeks after being acquired by Tampa Bay, Blount, who was suspended at Oregon for punching a Boise State player, never made it to work on time and compiled fines of more than $15,000. Exasperated, then-coach Raheem Morris and general manager Mark Dominik ordered him to hire a car service with a driver to wake him up in the morning and transport him less than 3 miles from his apartment to One Buc Place. After a few weeks, they canceled the car service for one day. And Blount was late. He continued to need a driver to get to work in 2011. But his poor preparation habits also spread to the meeting room, where coaches said he would sometimes fall asleep.
Porforis  
#83 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:00:28 AM(UTC)
Not everyone needs to be "Packers people" to contribute, but that's pretty bad if true. Keep him away.
Pack93z  
#84 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:02:07 AM(UTC)
Porforis said: Go to Quoted Post
Not everyone needs to be "Packers people" to contribute, but that's pretty bad if true. Keep him away.


That was 2011... just keep in mind.


More Recently.

Quote:
TAMPA Tampa Bay Buccaneers RB LeGarrette Blount closed out last week's 38-10 victory against the Kansas City Chiefs, running five times for 53 yards and a touchdown during the final offensive drive.

The Bucs don't plan to use Blount exclusively in a closer's role, but closing out games could become a big part of Blount's job description.

Tampa Bay (2-3) plays the New Orleans Saints (1-4) at 1 p.m. Sunday at Raymond James Stadium.

"Every game is different, but that is a nice model that happened (Sunday),'' Bucs coach Greg Schiano said. "After playing for three hours in 85-degree heat and now you have this 250-pound man coming at you. That would work nice.''

Blount certainly wouldn't mind. He yearns to regain his role as a starter and is eager to get more work early in games, but knows he's suited to fill a closer's role and would gladly accept it.

"It's fun being a reliever,'' Blount said. "If I can, I want to get in early. But if I get in later, I'll just play later. I have a passion for the game and whenever I get a chance to play I just make the best of my opportunities.''
play2win  
#85 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:18:18 AM(UTC)
I've been rethinking my position on trading for a RB, and I think I am all for it now. Getting a top tier RB in our backfield right now with Rodgers would help both the offense (to extend drives), and the defense (to keep them off the field as much as possible).

Ted, make the trade! I would prefer either of Blount or Jackson. Do it!!!! Trade a #3. Go for it. The one you didn't trade for Lynch got us Green. Don't make the same mistake twice.
doddpower  
#86 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:28:04 AM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
I've been rethinking my position on trading for a RB, and I think I am all for it now. Getting a top tier RB in our backfield right now with Rodgers would help both the offense (to extend drives), and the defense (to keep them off the field as much as possible).

Ted, make the trade! I would prefer either of Blount or Jackson. Do it!!!! Trade a #3. Go for it. The one you didn't trade for Lynch got us Green. Don't make the same mistake twice.


To be fair though, having Lynch on this team and his new contract would probably mean losing another key player; perhaps Raji, Jennings, etc. Perhaps that would be worth it, but there's something to say about a cheaper player to preserve other seemingly more important positions, in this offense anyway. Additionally, Lynch is a guy that needs carries to really get going, which is something he sometimes wouldn't get in this offense.
gbguy20  
#87 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:32:37 AM(UTC)
doddpower said: Go to Quoted Post
To be fair though, having Lynch on this team and his new contract would probably mean losing another key player; perhaps Raji, Jennings, etc. Perhaps that would be worth it, but there's something to say about a cheaper player to preserve other seemingly more important positions, in this offense anyway. Additionally, Lynch is a guy that needs carries to really get going, which is something he sometimes wouldn't get in this offense.


I'm still on the fence about paying big money to keep raji around.
play2win  
#88 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 9:39:27 AM(UTC)
Well doddpower, I do know we won a SB the year many people wanted us to trade for Lynch. Looking back, there were some disappointed players when we didn't make the move, like Woodson and Rodgers. I would say, we might have fared better last season had we made the trade. Running to extend drives and save your defense is something we desperately needed last year, and we could use better production on that end this year too.

Your point is well taken on the number of players we need to re-sign after this season, and money spent on a RB now to finish our season may take away from getting more mid-season signing opportunities completed. I just happen to think adding a proven pro like Steven Jackson would give this team quite a bit more confidence, and could go a long way towards our getting another SB win. That is what we need, and I don't know if we can trust the RBs we have currently to get the job done - I mean, in reaching that ultimate goal. Starks has so much proving to do, and I don't know about Green. Adding Jackson could work wonders. and I think it might be worth the pick.
Porforis  
#89 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 11:19:24 AM(UTC)
gbguy20 said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm still on the fence about paying big money to keep raji around.


If we don't, it HAS to be because we can get a player that's still effective to replace him for less. We've gone down this road before with poor results.
PackFanWithTwins  
#90 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 11:28:12 AM(UTC)
With a salary of 540k only about 1/2 we would be responsible for, and for only a 7th rounder. This is the type of move I would love to see. We all dream of what a productive run game could do for Rodgers and the passing game. This is a type of move to make if you are serious about doing everything you can to try and win a SB. He may turn out not to be the answer, but then again, he might. And it wouldn't cost the team much.

Blount possible trading block

Quote:
The NFL trade deadline is approaching, as any opportunity to trade players within the NFL this season will end on Thursday. That means we'll see a lot of rumors, most of them turning to absolutely nothing. One of them certainly is significant and has consistently been mentioned: the Tampa Bay Buccaneers want to trade Legarrette Blount.

Trading Blount would be perfectly logical. Doug Martin looks like a feature back, the Bucs have two backups in the form of D.J. Ware and Michael Smith and Blount is barely featuring in this offense. He could also be worth a bit: he's incredibly cheap this season, as he's playing under an exclusive-rights tender (worth just slightly more than the minimum salary), and he'll be a restricted free agent next year.

Despite all of those factors, ESPN's John Clayton reports that Legarrette Blount could be had for just a seventh-round pick (via Evan Silva). Apparently the Bucs are in the market of handing out players for peanuts. After all, they received nothing for Kellen Winslow, barely anything for Brian Price and simply cut Tanard Jackson and Dezmon Briscoe. Getting value hasn't been at the forefront of their minds since Greg Schiano got here.

Still, trading Blount for a seventh-round pick seems silly. Blount is far from the greatest running back in the NFL, but he's still a useful player. Giving 30 touches per game to Doug Martin isn't exactly sustainable, and Blount is a decent if inconsistent runner. Despite losing Carl Nicks for the season, the Bucs have a chance to make the playoffs and Blount could play a role there. Is a measly seventh-round pick worth more than a decent backup running back?

If the Bucs do trade him for a seventh-rounder, that will tell us exactly what they think of Legarrette Blount: someone who is useless on this team.
doddpower  
#91 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:20:21 PM(UTC)
I understand there's not much the Packers could do to improve the offensive line run blocking at this point in the season, but as many others have said, that's a higher priority for me. Regardless of the reason, be it scheme, talent, execution, etc., if the offensive line blocked better, the running backs currently on the roster would do a sufficient job, at worst. With this blocking, I really don't think anything other than an elite talent at RB would make a substantial difference. I don't consider Blount, Jackson, or even D. Williams an elite talent. As a result, I can't see them being worth much money at all (or especially a nice draft pick).

If for some reason the Bucs were really interested in trading Blount for a 7th, of course I'd love that. I really can't imagine why in the hell the Bucs would trade him for that, but if so, the Packers should jump all over it.
wpr  
#92 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 2:53:14 PM(UTC)
play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
I've been rethinking my position on trading for a RB, and I think I am all for it now. Getting a top tier RB in our backfield right now with Rodgers would help both the offense (to extend drives), and the defense (to keep them off the field as much as possible).

Ted, make the trade! I would prefer either of Blount or Jackson. Do it!!!! Trade a #3. Go for it. The one you didn't trade for Lynch got us Green. Don't make the same mistake twice.


Buffalo got a 4th from Seattle in 2011 and a 5th in 2012. That would be trading Lynch for House and Manning. Not Green.
Zero2Cool  
#93 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:08:47 PM(UTC)
wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Buffalo got a 4th from Seattle in 2011 and a 5th in 2012. That would be trading Lynch for House and Manning. Not Green.


It would have taken the Packers late 3rd round pick to better Seattle's early 4th rounder. And then the Packers late 4th round pick in 2012 to better Seattle's early 5th round pick.
beast  
#94 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:43:42 PM(UTC)
Looking back on it... it might of been nice having Lynch instead of Green. Though that's the short term... long run it could be different. But Lynch hopefully would of been able to do more and so teams could focus so much on the passing game making it even better.

Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
It would have taken the Packers late 3rd round pick to better Seattle's early 4th rounder. And then the Packers late 4th round pick in 2012 to better Seattle's early 5th round pick.


Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
It would have taken the Packers late 3rd round pick to better Seattle's early 4th rounder. And then the Packers late 4th round pick in 2012 to better Seattle's early 5th round pick.


It wasn't an early 4th round pick... it was the 25th pick in the 4th round.
And the 5th round pick was the 12th pick in the round.

So I'd say late 4th and mid 5th.

So according to the "Value-Chart" which is outdated and never was totally correct though two combined would be about "88" points or high 4th round pick.

So Green's 3rd round pick by it's self should of more than covered it... even if they threw their 7th round pick with Lynch.

http://www.draftcountdow...features/Value-Chart.php



wpr said: Go to Quoted Post
Buffalo got a 4th from Seattle in 2011 and a 5th in 2012. That would be trading Lynch for House and Manning. Not Green.


Those picks were lower than the Ones Seahawks offered, also House was picked with a compensatory spot... can't trade compensatory picks... can't trade Compensatory pick.

Plus Lynch and Green are both RBs so it's apples to apples, and the vales were pretty close, from Green draft pick spot to Lynch traded value he got the Bills.
wpr  
#95 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 4:15:32 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
It would have taken the Packers late 3rd round pick to better Seattle's early 4th rounder. And then the Packers late 4th round pick in 2012 to better Seattle's early 5th round pick.


Just saying that they got a 4th and 5th for Lynch and then who GB selected in those rounds.
Zero2Cool  
#96 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 4:21:02 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
It wasn't an early 4th round pick... it was the 25th pick in the 4th round.
And the 5th round pick was the 12th pick in the round.


You sure think you're smart with that hindsight in your back pocket huh lol. This isn't your fault, its mine. Okay, fixing my error that I assumed others were following along with, AT THE TIME OF THE TRADE, the Packers were presumed to be selecting later in the round than Seahawks, who btw, played so poorly their coach was fired.

At the time of the trade.
Seahawks 2 - 2
Packers 3 - 1

So, what the picks ACTUALLY were, is not relevant as at the time, no one knew. Thus, the perception was, the Packers would be selecting LATER in each round than the Seahawks, meaning the Bills would want a perceived Packers late 3rd to beat out the Seahawks early 4th.

I believe 2010 was the year the Seahawks were 7 - 9 and won a playoff game (that I predicted they would btw) that actually put them so late in each round.



I hope I've explained myself and my pea brain thinking much better than I did before. Blushing
thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win  
#97 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 4:46:15 PM(UTC)
All I'm saying is: make the freaking trade Ted! ;-)

I think a 3rd is worth what he would now add to the team. Figure, we trade for him tomorrow. We play both Starks and Green Sunday v. AZ, then Jackson has two solid weeks to get up to speed with our O.

Imagine how excited the rest of this team would be adding another talent like that to our backfield. Without the trade, we seem pretty thin at RB. I think a move like that would add to our chances at a Super Bowl win. I think not making this trade could have the inverse effect.
beast  
#98 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:16:34 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
So, what the picks ACTUALLY were, is not relevant as at the time, no one knew. Thus, the perception was, the Packers would be selecting LATER in each round than the Seahawks, meaning the Bills would want a perceived Packers late 3rd to beat out the Seahawks early 4th.


Good point. It was early in the year.


play2win said: Go to Quoted Post
All I'm saying is: make the freaking trade Ted! ;-)

I think a 3rd is worth what he would now add to the team. Figure, we trade for him tomorrow. We play both Starks and Green Sunday v. AZ, then Jackson has two solid weeks to get up to speed with our O.


Looking back on it I think Lynch might of been good. But Jackson is 29 and seems like RBs drop off around 30... so I don't know... also depend on what are the Rams asking for in return and what is Jackson looking for to sign a 3 year or so deal...

zombieslayer  
#99 Posted : Wednesday, October 31, 2012 6:17:22 PM(UTC)
beast said: Go to Quoted Post
But Jackson is 29 and seems like RBs drop off around 30...


How many RBs at 30 are in the NFL who are active and actually decent? Anyone have that list? I'm assuming it's very short. It's about as long as a Vikings fan is happy.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
5 Pages«<345
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
The_Green_Ninja (18-Feb) : out of curiosity... did any ever by the Starr Favre and Rodgers photo... and has a good scanner?
uffda udfa (17-Feb) : NFL Network showing GB at Dallas. Packers programming all day.
uffda udfa (17-Feb) : Julius Peppers appears done with Packers per Demovsky.
Cheesey (16-Feb) : If the spot was so bad, he wouldnt still be going there.
uffda udfa (15-Feb) : Best of luck at your new fishing hole, Buck.
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : "they always do" "good luck with that" I said to him as I walked away and headed to my other favorite hole!
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : "Nah" he said , I'm much snarter than these fish, sooner or later they will start biting! They akways
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : "Maybe you should try another spot" I said to him each day.
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : Each day I asked him gow they were biting. "Not very well" was his reply each day
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : For the third day in a row, I went to my favorite fishing spot. The same guy was there everyday
uffda udfa (14-Feb) : Interesting. Why would he leave the team that has the greatest need at CB?
Zero2Cool (14-Feb) : Former Packers corner Bené Benwikere signs with Bengals, per report
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

11h / Community Welcome! / wpr

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

17h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

19-Feb / Around The NFL / uffda udfa

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / TedThompsonsShades

16-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa


Packers Headlines