Jamal Charles still an option ?

[thequick12]

Seems like he's worth taking a chance on if he's healthy he helps the team quite a bit especially come playoff time. if he's not healthy, IR and you still have 3 rookies one of which will likely land on the practice squad either way.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

He had a visit with Denver today.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not happening........We got a full house, no need for Charles and sadly....Blount.

The Packers wouldn't be able to protect Williams or Jones from being snatched up, unless they get hurt, or really look terrible, it's going to be Monty and them on the 53.

 

[SD Cheesehead]

Not happening........We got a full house, no need for Charles and sadly....Blount.

The Packers wouldn't be able to protect Williams or Jones from being snatched up, unless they get hurt, or really look terrible, it's going to be Monty and them on the 53.

But do we really want to go into a season with a backfield with so little experience? Monty being the veteran with a whopping 80 carries. Seems pretty risky. We have plenty of cap space so why it add a very high upside veteran like Charles as insurance during camp. if they all look good in camp you could even keep 4 backs with 1 being inactive every week

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

But do we really want to go into a season with a backfield with so little experience? Monty being the veteran with a whopping 80 carries. Seems pretty risky. We have plenty of cap space so why it add a very high upside veteran like Charles as insurance during camp. if they all look good in camp you could even keep 4 backs with 1 being inactive every week

I get what you are saying, but you almost have to let this play out and see what you have with Williams, Jones and Mays. TT doesn't like committing draft picks to throw aways. If you sign Charles, Blount or another $1-4M/year back, you commit to them. That would probably mean that you lose at least one if not 2 of the rookies you just drafted. I think TT went "all in" on the 4 (Monty, Williams, Jones and Mays) today by cutting Michael and Jackson.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I get what you are saying, but you almost have to let this play out and see what you have with Williams, Jones and Mays. TT doesn't like committing draft picks to throw aways. If you sign Charles, Blount or another $1-4M/year back, you commit to them. That would probably mean that you lose at least one if not 2 of the rookies you just drafted. I think TT went "all in" on the 4 (Monty, Williams, Jones and Mays) today by cutting Michael and Jackson.

Ted must have really liked the rookies he got. And anyone who doesn't like Monty, is just wrong.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Nope, not happening.

 

[Jerellh528]

Ted must have really liked the rookies he got. And anyone who doesn't like Monty, is just wrong.

I don't think anyone doesn't like Monty, he's very likable, as much as they're rightfully a bit skeptical. Outside of his one monster game that blew up his stats, he didn't do a ton that showed he's a 3 down starting back. I think TT drafting 3 rbs kinda shows that. We didn't draft 3 rbs with lacy back there.

 

[RRyder]

And here I thought drafting 3 RBs would stop Charles/Blount threads from popping up....... This one's on me

 

[thequick12]

Drafting 3 rbs that don't look like difference makers as much as they just look like bodies. Charles could be a difference making weapon out of the back field both as a receiver and a rusher. Jones sounds like he could be a similar dual threat but the other 2 just seem like guys. Williams sounds like a possession back if that makes sense, no big play ability not ever gonna score an 80 yard td and likely not even a 30/40 yarder. Charles would be that homerun back the packers still lack, if healthy.

 

[sschind]

I get what you are saying, but you almost have to let this play out and see what you have with Williams, Jones and Mays. TT doesn't like committing draft picks to throw aways. If you sign Charles, Blount or another $1-4M/year back, you commit to them. That would probably mean that you lose at least one if not 2 of the rookies you just drafted. I think TT went "all in" on the 4 (Monty, Williams, Jones and Mays) today by cutting Michael and Jackson.

Not that I disagree with you but there is still a possibility that they sign someone and drop the 2nd FB. I wouldn't be opposed to that at all. Sign Blount and drop Kerridge.

 

[sschind]

Drafting 3 rbs that don't look like difference makers as much as they just look like bodies. Charles could be a difference making weapon out of the back field both as a receiver and a rusher. Jones sounds like he could be a similar dual threat but the other 2 just seem like guys. Williams sounds like a possession back if that makes sense, no big play ability not ever gonna score an 80 yard td and likely not even a 30/40 yarder. Charles would be that homerun back the packers still lack, if healthy.

As much as I would love to see a guy who could score those 80 or even 30-40 yard TDs I'd much rather have a back that could consistently pick up 4 or 5 yard per carry. We have Aaron Rodgers and the passing offense for the quick score.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Not that I disagree with you but there is still a possibility that they sign someone and drop the 2nd FB. I wouldn't be opposed to that at all. Sign Blount and drop Kerridge.

I hear ya, but I don't see a place for Kerridge on the final 53, but hope he can be slid to the PS. I think when you have Bennett, Kendricks and Rodgers (Richard), you may see some formations with 2 TE's and less reliance on a FB. As long as Rip holds up in the Preseason, he may be the only FB on the 53. But I am with you, I will take Blount over Kerridge anyday.

 

[rodell330]

Kerridge will be kept around for special teams purposes unless somebody beats him out.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Seems like he's worth taking a chance on if he's healthy he helps the team quite a bit especially come playoff time. if he's not healthy, IR and you still have 3 rookies one of which will likely land on the practice squad either way.

There's no reason to sign Charles as he hasn't been able to stay healthy over the past two seasons and is 30 years old.

Not happening........We got a full house, no need for Charles and sadly....Blount.

The Packers wouldn't be able to protect Williams or Jones from being snatched up, unless they get hurt, or really look terrible, it's going to be Monty and them on the 53.

I'm concerned about entering the season with running back group with a total of 80 career attempts. I would like Thompson to add a veteran player to the position preferably in Blount.

 

[AKCheese]

JC no
Blount? ... he would make some sense

 

[Poppa San]

No longer available. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...-charles-signs-1year-deal-with-denver-broncos