1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

BEAST Mode!

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Incubes12, Apr 26, 2010.

  1. CM_Awesome

    CM_Awesome Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    964
    Ratings:
    +4
    That would be one of the positives I could think if we bring Lynch in. Rodgers and him could have some great chemistry together because they played together at Cal. Maybe I'm being too harsh on the guy. Just from what I read the guy just acts like a complete imbecile over and over again. For his sake I hope he can get his life turned around.
     
  2. A12ROD903

    A12ROD903 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    570
    Ratings:
    +22
    So you honestly think you are going to get 2 starting RB's who are still in their prime to split carries? I mean we arent talking young Grant being backed up by old priest holmes or something like that. We are talking taking a starting RB from another team and turning him into a backup for backup money? Why would he do that when he could go to a team and be a starter and make starter money???? I also think that doing that would be a slap in the face to Ryan Grant. Do you know how hard he has worked??? I mean the guy was undrafted and now hes good enough to be a starting running back for the Green Bay Packers. If TT or MM or anyone in that organization didnt think he was good enough they could have cut him at any time.

    I dont see it happening, its like telling AP he has to back up or split carries with CJ or vice versa...
     
  3. A12ROD903

    A12ROD903 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    570
    Ratings:
    +22
    This is exactly what Im talking about!!!! Because Grant didnt make the top 10 plays every monday on ESPN or the media doesnt talk about him week in and week out, he cant be that good right? The lines I posted in the page earlier were just his rushing stats alone. You wouldnt take 1200+ yds and 11 TD's???

    Youve narrowed your judgment of RG's performance down to how many 100 yd games he had last year?

    Oh yeah, theres another little stat people seem forget. With all of the hard times that OL caused last season and RG getting hit (constantly) that guy fumbled all of 0 times.. CJ fumbled 3 times.... AP, well we all know that stat.
     
  4. Incubes12

    Incubes12 Bay Harbor Butcher?

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,758
    Ratings:
    +317
    No, the point is that Lynch has dropped in value in terms of his attitude and numbers over the last two seasons. We can get him for next to nothing because of this, that is the oppotunity we are facing. If another team thinks he is still of value and needs to fill that need as a primary rusher, than by all means, they can spend more on him. I dont think there are many teams in the NFL that would consider him a starter, he just doesn't come to play a whole game. What I'm saying is why not try and give him a chance and see how he feels in a 3rd down, goal line position. It can't hurt an he can always say no.
     
  5. Jess

    Jess Movement!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,118
    Ratings:
    +471
    If Rodgers got hurt, do you really think we could rely on Grant to carry this team? I don't. If defenses decided one day that they were going to focus on Grant he'd be screwed. He gets what he gets because the defense is so concerned about Rodgers. Imagine what Rodgers could do if he had a running back that teams were actually scared of.

    Oh, and I would take CJ and his 3 fumbles over Grant every day of the week. Considering he ran for like 800 yards more than Grant.
     
  6. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Put the Titans' line in GB, and see how he performs. Put Wells, Colledge, Tauscher and Clifton run blocking for CJ and see how he likes (Sitton is a beast at run blocking).

    Give him 76 more carries (358 to 282), and see how he does.

    Since Grant came to the NFL, he's the #2 leading rusher, only behind Peterson.

    Not saying Grant is better than CJ, but the environment CLEARLY favors CJ...

    You're right that teams aren't scared of Grant, because that's not the way he runs. But it's no coincidence Green Bay was #1 in ball possession last season... Teams absolutely respect him.
     
  7. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,168
    Ratings:
    +4,098
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WWmIIfMcys]YouTube - The Life and Fumbles of Adrian Peterson[/ame]
     
  8. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,168
    Ratings:
    +4,098
    Of course not. No run first team is very good in the league. Chris Johnson is the best RB in the league and they went 8-8. Same for Carolina. This is a passing league now and will be for the foreseeable future. I laughed when the Vikings and Detroit drafted RBs very high in the draft. Its all about passing and stopping the pass.
     
  9. A12ROD903

    A12ROD903 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    570
    Ratings:
    +22
    To each their own, Grant is not bad and doesnt need to be replaced because his name doesnt make the headlines for 17 weeks in a row.
     
  10. Incubes12

    Incubes12 Bay Harbor Butcher?

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,758
    Ratings:
    +317
    The main argument against bringing in Lynch to me seems to be that, in essence, we are a passing team and that our running game, in playing 2nd fiddle to the pass, really doesn't need to be anything more than 1 solid guy. This is a great counterargument to that and it's yet another reason why bringing in another good back couldn't hurt.

    The issue isn't whether or not Ryan Grant is a good running back, it's that it couldn't hurt to give him some good help (Jackson is pretty average) as long as it's available at low cost, which it is in this situation. Trust me, I LOVE what Ryan Grant has done for this team, he has quietly become one of the top backs in the league and he consistently produces for the team. He's a noble guy and I don't think the addition of Lynch in a somewhat limited role would upset him.

    My only other worry would be that Lynch wouldn't be okay with just a 3rd down role right now. However, I tried to make the point that there's no harm in letting him sit, I think that we might see him sit for awhile unless he accepts a role like this because I don't think there are many teams out there that would look to him as a #1 back.
     
  11. TheGiftedApe

    TheGiftedApe TheGiftedApe

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2010
    Messages:
    572
    Ratings:
    +77
    Cause grant would be a good back in a 2-back system, but in the current system where he is the "Featured guy" he SUCKS HARD. Too many 0 yard and 1 yard gains, too many dropped balls, not enough heart early in the season. He really only runs hard when things are going good or theres a Huge hole for him. He gives into tacklers and doesnt show power through the hole much anymore. I will say he doesnt fumble much anymore though, But we need some kind of change of pace from him, someone who will bring a spark, Whether thats a Power back like lynch, or more of a Speed back. His stats are inflated since he is the only guy getting touches really. I hope this starks kid blows him out of the water.
     
  12. A12ROD903

    A12ROD903 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    570
    Ratings:
    +22
    So you dont like 1200 yds and 11 tds rushing last season???

    Did you know Grant is the #2 in yardage the last 3 years behind AP?

    Or do you just post the first thing that pops into your head without thinking. You say Grant SUCKS HARD, prove it!

    Also, you say Grant usually only manages 0-1 yd per carry... how can his AVG be 5.8 yds?????
     
  13. NYPacker

    NYPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    1,582
    Ratings:
    +38
    I think Starks resembles a much younger Ryan Grant. Same running style but with a bit more vision, power, and tiny flashes of speed:

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJ3dPkL0pr4]YouTube - Former Bulls RB James Starks Drafted by the Green Bay Packers[/ame]
     
  14. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Nope.

    The main argument is that he robbed a policeman's wife for 20 bucks, and hit and ran sumebody...

    As well as the monetary and compensatory, but mainly monetary cost it would take.

    And, if I had to guess, this guy will be suspended...

    So no, talent isn't the problem. He is a more talented back than Grant. Not more productive, though...
     
  15. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,168
    Ratings:
    +4,098
    So today I have seen threads about this idiot and pacman jones... Who wants to be the first to start a threat on why TT should sign Jamarcus Russell when the Raiders cut him? LOL
     
  16. DTown SBrown

    DTown SBrown Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2010
    Messages:
    274
    Ratings:
    +48
    THat may be due to watching him run into blockers and proceed to fall down a lot.

    Many quickly forget that Grant is the king of racking up huge yardage in blowout games when we give him 25- 30 carries, with 15-20 all when running the clock out in a blowout.

    In 4 games alone last season, STL, SF, CLE, and DET, grant racked up
    98 of his 282 touches (34%)
    and gained:
    466 of his 1253 yds (37%)
    Thats in 25 % of his games, almost all blowouts, almost all horrid Defenses. Put him against a decent line and he falls down the board. These numbers are really just the tip of the iceberg, and just about anyone who has watched him run over the last 2 seasons can tell he is adequate at best. Not a premiere back, sorry. While I think he would be OK with a bruiser back there to wear down a D, as a lead back, he lacks the awareness to hit a hole on 1 cut (please someone argue that he his, I think we all have at least one headsmack memory of him plowing into Colledge or Stitton when trying to find the hole) and he lacks the power to burst through defenders at the line. His speed to the edge is so-so.

    Sorry, just not convinced he can be "the guy" to build around.
     
  17. CM_Awesome

    CM_Awesome Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    964
    Ratings:
    +4
    I'm not claiming he's a premiere elite back. Read my post again. I said he "gets the job done." While we could do better at RB we certainly could do worse. Grant has solid production and doesn't turn the ball over. Peterson averaged the same yards per carry as Grant, and coughed the ball up numerous times. So an argument could actually be made that Grant is a more desirable RB than Peterson. Also, we are a passing team. We don't need a Superman at RB.
     
  18. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,168
    Ratings:
    +4,098
    Yeah because other big name backs dont do this at all! Adrian Peterson in 3 games last season against the Browns and Lions had 405 yards and 6 TDs.

    We have "the guy" to build around, his name is Aaron Rodgers. The packers are a passing team because we have a top 3 QB in the NFL, to suggest we should go away from that is ludicrous.
     
  19. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    amen!!!
     
  20. Jess

    Jess Movement!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2009
    Messages:
    3,118
    Ratings:
    +471
    This whole "we're a passing team" argument isn't one I like. You don't not try to get better at the running back position because you're a passing team. Philadelphia was a passing team for all those years, didn't stop them from having Brian Westbrook who was one of the best in the league then. The Packers had Favre, but they added Ahman Green and his 1800 yards like 10 years ago. There's always room for an elite running back, so if we could upgrade from Grant we absolutely should.

    (Not saying Marshawn Lynch is an upgrade, just that if we could find someone better we should upgrade)
     
  21. CM_Awesome

    CM_Awesome Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2007
    Messages:
    964
    Ratings:
    +4
    I used the we're a passing team argument because that is the focal point in this offense. It's becoming a focal point of all offenses in the NFL as it continues to become more and more of a passing league. I'm not arguing against upgrading by any means. If there is a RB out there that we can get who is better than Grant, then I'm always open to it. My point is since we are a passing team and have such an explosive passing attack, we only need to adequate at best in our rushing attack. Especially considering our other needs such as CB and OLB. I'd rather pursue those areas first. Again I'll state that Grant is a very good RB and doesn't need to be upgraded.
     

Share This Page