Discussion Board
Welcome Guest! You can login or register. Login or Register.
2 Pages12>

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
MintBaconDrivel  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 5:46:53 PM(UTC)
JSOnline said:
If the Packers had stuck with the 55th pick in the second round, would they have selected running back Montee Ball instead of Eddie Lacy?Kevin Seifert proposes the question at ESPN. During the draft last Friday, the Packers traded their 55th pick to the 49ers and moved down to No. 61 and then took Lacy (Green Bay also received a sixth-round pick). The Broncos scooped up Ball three picks earlier at No. 58.An interesting part of Seifert's story is Denver's decision to take Ball over Lacy. The Broncos say it came down to Lacy's injury history. It was also reported that the Steelers passed on Lacy because of toe fusion.We know that the Packers appeared comfortable taking a running back in the second round - at least with the 61st pick. Had the Packers not traded with the 49ers, however, it would have been interesting to see if the 55th pick could have been Lacy, Ball, or someone else.Read Seifert's story here.
dfosterf  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 6:01:41 PM(UTC)
If I had caught Demi Moore before her first audition outside the studios, I'd have had a real shot at tagging her in her prime.

If these lottery tickets I have in my wallet hit, I might get a crack at an around the globe tour.

If I knew those woods were going to take my golf ball today, I'd have aimed more left.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 6:02:08 PM(UTC)
I would think maybe they were OK with either and figured one or the other would be there at 61. Before the draft, I wanted Montee Ball - maybe a little bit of homerism, but I expect him to have an excellent career too. I am now totally psyched up for Eddie Lacy, though. If part of his greatness was running behind the 'Bama O Line, and the Packers O Line is relatively worse - in a NFL sense anyway, there is something that will MORE than make up for that: I refer to the element to surprise running for a strongly pass-first team - as well as having fewer defenders in the box when he runs for the Packers.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#4 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 6:04:14 PM(UTC)
dfosterf said: Go to Quoted Post
If I had caught Demi Moore before her first audition outside the studios, I'd have had a real shot at tagging her in her prime.

If these lottery tickets I have in my wallet hit, I might get a crack at an around the globe tour.

If I knew those woods were going to take my golf ball today, I'd have aimed more left.


NEVER aim left ........ oooh sorry, I forgot I wasn't in the Back Alley.

Zero2Cool  
#5 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 6:05:36 PM(UTC)
I would rather Eddie Lacy over Montee Ball.
Gaycandybacon  
#6 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 6:18:14 PM(UTC)
We obviously had Lacy over Ball on our draft board. I mean either would be great players for us, but I don't see why everyone wanted Ball so much over Lacy from what I've been hearing.
User is suspended until 5/28/2018 11:54:40 AM(UTC) DakotaT  
#7 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 7:40:38 PM(UTC)
dfosterf said: Go to Quoted Post
If I had caught Demi Moore before her first audition outside the studios, I'd have had a real shot at tagging her in her prime.

If these lottery tickets I have in my wallet hit, I might get a crack at an around the globe tour.

If I knew those woods were going to take my golf ball today, I'd have aimed more left.


If you weren't so lame you could come up with better metaphors such as - if I didn't have such a nice ass, Mrs. Dakota wouldn't have grabbed it and I wouldn't have three beautiful daughters. [neener]
TwinkieGorilla  
#8 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 9:58:20 PM(UTC)
ARE YOU KIDDING EVEN?!

Either of them are better, at least in prospective theory, than any backs we've had in forever. For years now our running game has amounted to nothing more than a few brilliant flashes in an otherwise transparent attempt at hammering square pegs into round holes. Getting an "iffy" dude on the level of Lacey at this point (Gee, who's our QB again?) is like some sort of ridiculous thought which almost makes me feel guilty when thinking about how potent it could make our offense.
nerdmann  
#9 Posted : Wednesday, May 1, 2013 10:19:12 PM(UTC)
Seifert's a Queens loving little bitch. Fuck him.
play2win  
#10 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 5:05:55 AM(UTC)
I suspect the thought with the trade down was that one of the two might be there. Not sure what Ted thought of Montee Ball though. I'm glad we added both Lacy and Franklin, and I see an entirely new day on offense for Green Bay as a result.

Cannot wait to see Lacy as Spin Bot! Cannot wait to see Franklin knifing through opposing secondaries. Not sure what to say about Ball. Tough runner, a little upright, not much break away speed. Lotta miles on that odometer. I like who we got, very much so.

This will help extend drives, control games, save Rodgers from all out pass rushes, make our passing game -better-!, and keep our D off the field.
Pack93z  
#11 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 11:47:30 AM(UTC)
For me.. watching every Badger game each season vs a collection of 5 games of Bama this year, I think Ball has the better overall career in the pros.

Now would Ball fit in with the Packers or Lacy with the Broncos better than where they landed, we shall never know. But based on the talents they bring to the field, I would put Ball ahead of Lacy.

And that is not homerism.. I haven't like many Badger backs as pros.. Dayne included. Just think Balls talents will be more productive at this level and for a longer duration.

I like my crow served cold... thank you very much. That is if Lacy can serve it.
Zero2Cool  
#12 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 12:22:01 PM(UTC)
Pack93z said: Go to Quoted Post
For me.. watching every Badger game each season vs a collection of 5 games of Bama this year, I think Ball has the better overall career in the pros.

Now would Ball fit in with the Packers or Lacy with the Broncos better than where they landed, we shall never know. But based on the talents they bring to the field, I would put Ball ahead of Lacy.

And that is not homerism.. I haven't like many Badger backs as pros.. Dayne included. Just think Balls talents will be more productive at this level and for a longer duration.

I like my crow served cold... thank you very much. That is if Lacy can serve it.


I think Eddie Lacy (why do people only use last names?) will be better for the Packers than Montee Ball would have been. I think Ball needs a wider hole than Lacy. I also feel that Lacy is more of a punishing back, which I think will help the Packers offense.

I feel Ball to the Broncos is a better fit than Lacy with the Broncos too.



I just don't think Lacy will live up to the hype. If he can punch it through on * and short, average more than 4 yards a carry, doesn't get the QB killed and doesn't fumble ... I'll put it down as a win for the Packers.
Gaycandybacon  
#13 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:34:17 PM(UTC)
All I have to say is woulda, coulda, shoulda.

He's not on our team, Lacy is. I don't wanna speculate who will be better at the next level. You just don't know till a couple years later. Both have strengths and weaknesses. I think Eddie will bring more to the team, simply because we didn't have that bruiser since Grant was healthy 07-09. And not have to rely on Kuhn to carry the ball every 3rd and short. Monte Ball just isn't that thumper that I like..

Really this RB class was so deep, I don't think we're complaining what we got. At least i'm not. Lets Box!
Dulak  
#14 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:48:59 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post

I just don't think Lacy will live up to the hype. If he can punch it through on * and short, average more than 4 yards a carry, doesn't get the QB killed and doesn't fumble ... I'll put it down as a win for the Packers.



IMO if he doesn't run into his own blockers or repeatedly run into the mass of bodies and repeatedly get 1-2 yards; and then finally gets decent yardage when he doesn't do this (anyone figure out whom Im talking about) ... Ill be happy.

Gaycandybacon  
#15 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 1:59:04 PM(UTC)
Dulak said: Go to Quoted Post
IMO if he doesn't run into his own blockers or repeatedly run into the mass of bodies and repeatedly get 1-2 yards; and then finally gets decent yardage when he doesn't do this (anyone figure out whom Im talking about) ... Ill be happy.



Alex Green? :-k
dfosterf  
#16 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 2:48:21 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool said: Go to Quoted Post
I think Eddie Lacy (why do people only use last names?) will be better for the Packers than Montee Ball would have been. I think Ball needs a wider hole than Lacy. I also feel that Lacy is more of a punishing back, which I think will help the Packers offense.

I feel Ball to the Broncos is a better fit than Lacy with the Broncos too.



I just don't think Lacy will live up to the hype. If he can punch it through on * and short, average more than 4 yards a carry, doesn't get the QB killed and doesn't fumble ... I'll put it down as a win for the Packers.





Who amongst us gives a rat's ass about Lacy living up to the hype? All we need is a credible running game, and imo, he looks good enough to provide it, regardless of how bad we are at creating a hole for the running back. [I] like him most because I suspect we need his beef to get through the initial (non) hole.


The fact that he excelled under a ZBS blocking system cannot be overlooked, imo. I think he is the perfect fit for us.
Gaycandybacon  
#17 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 2:54:25 PM(UTC)
dfosterf said: Go to Quoted Post
Who amongst us gives a rat's ass about Lacy living up to the hype? All we need is a credible running game, and imo, he looks good enough to provide it, regardless of how bad we are at creating a hole for the running back. [I] like him most because I suspect we need his beef to get through the initial (non) hole.


The fact that he excelled under a ZBS blocking system cannot be overlooked, imo.


Him and Franklin will make our Offensive line look like a pro bowl line.Flapper \:d/ Laugh LOL Drool
dfosterf  
#18 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 3:00:38 PM(UTC)
Gaycandybacon said: Go to Quoted Post
Him and Franklin will make our Offensive line look like a pro bowl line.Flapper \:d/ Laugh LOL Drool




This is a possibility, also. I frankly doubt it, to be honest... I'm totally fine with our current running backs... If there is no hole, there is no hole...


My minimal hopes rest reflecting upon the the production of Ahman Green and Ryan Grant. They seemed to manage without a hole, to my satisfaction, at least.

Gaycandybacon  
#19 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 3:09:05 PM(UTC)
dfosterf said: Go to Quoted Post
This is a possibility, also. I frankly doubt it, to be honest... I'm totally fine with our current running backs... If there is no hole, there is no hole...


My minimal hopes rest reflecting upon the the production of Ahman Green and Ryan Grant. They seemed to manage without a hole, to my satisfaction, at least.



Honestly this line isn't that bad, we've just went through some troubles last year. From not running the ball effectively(which has to do with the running backs we've had as well) to not keeping healthy. Imo we have some physical lineman especially our guards. We just need to get some depth and stay healthy which we have gotten through the draft. This is a team game. I'm not blaming it all on the offensive line. Hell two years ago we only gave up 29 sacks. The thing i'll say about this line is that it lacks consistency. It's not like our lines gonna be the same as last years either. There's always room for improvement, no matter how bad the supposed coaching is. I'm very hopeful our line will be better.
dfosterf  
#20 Posted : Thursday, May 2, 2013 3:16:33 PM(UTC)
I applaud you because that is what I want to be true. I want to sense it, and you put me in a better mood about the whole damn thing. Flapper
Rss Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
2 Pages12>
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
Cheesey (9m) : Rodgers would have hit open guys. The game plan wouldn't have killed us. Less 3 and outs, and maybe some scores.
beast (47m) : Rodgers wouldn't of abandon attepting to get the ball to Nelson and Adams.
Zero2Cool (1h) : Rodgers with that game plan would have came up short too.
beast (2h) : Yeah the Packers defense got wore out... being on the field so long. Giving longer breathers than 3&out would of helped a lot IMO.
Cheesey (2h) : There wouldn't have been so many 3 and outs, thus keeping our D off the field.
Cheesey (2h) : True, but with the low score we would have had a chance with Rodgers behind center.
Zero2Cool (3h) : Brees is a damn good QB, not giving Capers a pass, not even close.
Zero2Cool (3h) : Saints kicked Packers ass with Rodgers too.
Cheesey (3h) : That's just it. Rodgers needs a DEFENSE as well. And without him, there is NO chance.
beast (4h) : Just fire everyone! Rodgers can do it without them! Hell trade for the healthy Browns players!
Cheesey (6h) : Capers needs to GO. So do players that can't cut it.
Zero2Cool (7h) : Capers presser summed up? INjuries are why we suck. (shut up, coach and adapt)
Zero2Cool (7h) : nearly crapped myself hearing dom capers talk, forgot to close the tab after mccarthy haha
Zero2Cool (7h) : McCarthy said the communication was not good enough on defense yesterday. Injuries in secondary have complicated substitution patterns.
Zero2Cool (7h) : McCarthy again says "I believe in him"... sorry, BS, we saw how you believe in him yesterday.
Zero2Cool (7h) : @The_Green_Gold Highest graded players Kenny Clark & Blake Martinez. It wouldn't be possible to grade an entire defense
Porforis (8h) : Well, it WAS clean until someone 'shouted' in it...
Zero2Cool (8h) : QB Brett Hundley when targeting a WR against Saints: 6-for-15, 54 yards.
Zero2Cool (8h) : clean?
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
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
at Panthers
Saturday, Dec 23 @ 7:30 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 12:00 PM
at Lions
Think About It
Think About It
Recent Topics
3m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

5m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Smokey

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / PackFanWithTwins

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Porforis

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

22-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

22-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

Headlines