Bet the Texans..

kmac

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Location
Milwaukee
And then gets trapped in that closet. He wants to crap on you, yes he do.

Man, I got to make 2 ****** jokes and 2 R. Kelly jokes in the same thread. Awesome.
 

NDPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
2,253
Reaction score
2
Location
North Dakota
Actually, I might be in the minority that thinks the Pack should have kept Davenport. He might be the only RB we had that can pound out 3 yards a carry with absolutely no hole to run through. Until the line can start getting the job done up front, we will need a "bruiser" of a RB, like #44.
 

TOPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
2,084
Reaction score
0
Location
Toronto, Ontario
NDPackerFan said:
Actually, I might be in the minority that thinks the Pack should have kept Davenport. He might be the only RB we had that can pound out 3 yards a carry with absolutely no hole to run through. Until the line can start getting the job done up front, we will need a "bruiser" of a RB, like #44.

The problem is he can only be counted on for 5 games a year. Runs too high and is too injury prone. It's too bad because a mix of size and speed like that is very rare.
 

cyoung

Cheesehead
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
1,276
Reaction score
2
Location
Iowa
You Never know maybe this season he'll play a full 16 games, maybe he's feeling a lot better. I 100% agree with NDPackerFan He was a lot better at being the "Bruiser" then Green/Gado/Herron. I think all teams should have a Power halfback.
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
NDPackerFan said:
Actually, I might be in the minority that thinks the Pack should have kept Davenport. He might be the only RB we had that can pound out 3 yards a carry with absolutely no hole to run through. Until the line can start getting the job done up front, we will need a "bruiser" of a RB, like #44.

The trouble is that he really couldn't be counted on to pound out those three yards. Often he was stopped cold, especially in this preseason. And he never looked like a threat to break a long one. Personally, I think he lost a step or two over the past couple years. I remember that huge game he had against the Rams a few years ago, and I also remember how great he was at returning kickoffs that one year. He was fast, and tacklers would bounce off of him. I never saw that kind of explosiveness from him again. I think the injuries have taken their toll.
 

NDPackerFan

Cheesehead
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
2,253
Reaction score
2
Location
North Dakota
Greg C. said:
NDPackerFan said:
Actually, I might be in the minority that thinks the Pack should have kept Davenport. He might be the only RB we had that can pound out 3 yards a carry with absolutely no hole to run through. Until the line can start getting the job done up front, we will need a "bruiser" of a RB, like #44.

The trouble is that he really couldn't be counted on to pound out those three yards. Often he was stopped cold, especially in this preseason. And he never looked like a threat to break a long one. Personally, I think he lost a step or two over the past couple years. I remember that huge game he had against the Rams a few years ago, and I also remember how great he was at returning kickoffs that one year. He was fast, and tacklers would bounce off of him. I never saw that kind of explosiveness from him again. I think the injuries have taken their toll.

He never really was a threat to break a long one. He got the tough yards when the line wasn't able to open up running lanes. I'm just saying that if our O-Line isn't opening up holes, who's going to make a hole and pound out 3-4 yards?
 

Greg C.

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
2,856
Reaction score
0
Location
Marquette, Michigan
NDPackerFan said:
He never really was a threat to break a long one. He got the tough yards when the line wasn't able to open up running lanes. I'm just saying that if our O-Line isn't opening up holes, who's going to make a hole and pound out 3-4 yards?

You make good points, ND, and I'm not in total disagreement with you by any means. Honestly, when Davenport converted that fourth down against Tennessee I thought he was going to make the team. But I guess he was just too much of a specialist. He never developed his blocking skills at the NFL level (even though he played fullback in college) and was never much of a threat as a pass catcher or trying to run around the end. He was strictly an up-the-middle or off-tackle kind of runner.

This offense in particular seems to favor all-purpose backs, and these bigger backs seem to have trouble finding employment in the NFL these days. Exceptions: Jerome Bettis (retired), Mike Alstott, T.J. Duckett (traded by Falcons because he was a poor fit in the zone-blocking scheme).
 

Staff online

Members online

Latest posts

Top