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

Running Back

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Vltrophy, Feb 21, 2012.

  1. GWheels

    GWheels Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2011
    Messages:
    418
    Ratings:
    +208
    It's a painting by Andrew Goralski called "Storm Chaser". The painting is 15"x 35".
     
  2. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,055
    Ratings:
    +4,048
    Those same people pointed out his huge run in the playoffs.

    The sane people countered with showing them the ring finger.
     
  3. okcpackerfan

    okcpackerfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    715
    Ratings:
    +175
    do you honestly think any NFL team, while drafting a specific position, says "yea that guy is the best at the position we need but we are going to go ahead and take this bad guy"

    every team takes the player they think is the best fit at that time, otherwise they wouldn't draft them. That said I think we need to work on the offensive line more than running back.
     
  4. Vltrophy

    Vltrophy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,749
    Ratings:
    +385
    When drafting it's like a roll of the dice. You win some you lose some. Every team has had a few busts. When you draft a guy you always hope for the best. Just b/c a team drafts a player doesn't mean they need him at that time. 2005 we drafted Rodgers. Didn't need him at the time but he was the best at the position.
     
  5. Helmets

    Helmets Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    607
    Ratings:
    +217
    I am still a bit bitter about not getting Lynch. With Lynch we may have made a run deep into the playoffs this year. Ted could have had him for a bag of doughnuts last year. Only in his 4th seasonand only 24 years old. Everyone thinks Ted is now a genius because we won the Superbowl. If Williams doesn't pick Vick in the endzone, we make a quick playoff exit and people are wondering where we might have ended up with Lynch. Now we can all sit back and wonder where we might have ended up with him toting the rock for us this past season. His 1200 yards and ability to catch the football out of the backfield as well as convert on third and short without seeing a slow folk-hero fullback stumble around and not convert would be pretty refreshing. Teddy, I think you screwed up on this one...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Helmets

    Helmets Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    607
    Ratings:
    +217
    Seattle got him for a 4th round pick and a conditional pick thiS year which started as a 6th rounder, but most likely would be a 5th round based on Lynch's performance with Seattle.

    Like I said...a bag of doughnuts.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Alex

    Alex Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    407
    Ratings:
    +213
    The only thing Grant is good at is running head first into the first person in front of him and going down, with his very occasional good run. If he leaves I won't be sad
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Rocky11

    Rocky11 Superbowl bound Pack

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    231
    Ratings:
    +61
    Face it, the running game is not all that good. Some like Grant, some Stark, others Saine but the bottom line is it would be nice to have a good, dependable back. Should we spend our money on one, probably not. We need to spend money on defense. Isn't it ironical that we went 15 - 2 on the year and are complaining about things like this.
     
  9. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,828
    Ratings:
    +2,936
    Wow. I understood the push to acquire Lynch in the 2010 season since it was obvious Grant was greatly missed and Jackson was not up to the job of carrying the load as the featured back. So for those upset Thompson 'sat on his hands' waiting for Starks who hadn't played a "real" game of football for almost two years, I understood. But Thompson was vindicated by WINNING A TITLE his way, not your way. Still being bitter baffles me. You were decisively proven wrong, in fact as decisively as possible in the NFL: Thompson didn't have to trade for Lynch or any RB to win it all. Look, we've all been wrong, including Thompson, so why not just admit it when you are/were?

    We can play "what if" all day long and accomplish nothing because no one can win that game because "what if" didn't happen. But I'll post again that if you build your team as a prolific passing offense - so much so that your franchise QB set an all-time QB rating record and the team led the league in scoring at 35 ppg - if that passing offense has its worst day in a season and a half, you aren't going to win even if you have a better than average RB. And isn't that all Lynch is? Does anyone mistake him for a great back? Where does he rank among his contemporaries? Obviously Starks' problem is staying on the field but when he was healthy, how much difference is there between the two?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,055
    Ratings:
    +4,048
    In the 2011 season Ryan Grant averaged 4.2 yards a carry. James Starks averaged 4.3 and Marshawn Lynch averaged...... wait for it..... 4.2 yards

    Running in the NFL is dead, may it rest in peace.
     
  11. Rocky11

    Rocky11 Superbowl bound Pack

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    231
    Ratings:
    +61
    That's an interesting observation ivo10. Teams like Houston would be in poor shape if they didn't have the running game. Not every team has Rodgers or Brady or Brees. The run still sets up the pass. McCarthy knows that too. He tries to have so many runs during a game even if it is not successful. He don't run as much as others but he don't have to. Running is important in the NFL and I believe it always will be. The league keeps putting in rules to try to make the passing game better to make it more exiting and therefore making more money. But you can't say that it's not exciting when Adrian Peterson or some other back (sorry for the Minnesota reference die hard fans) breaks through the line for a big gain.
     
  12. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,828
    Ratings:
    +2,936
    I don't think that's true anymore. For the top offensive teams like the Packers, the running game just has to be good enough so teams can't rush the passer without fear of being burned by the run. IMO more and more in the NFL the passing game sets up the running game.

    Here are the top scoring five teams in the 2011 regular season and how they ranked in average yards rushing/game:
    1. Packers 27th
    2. Saints 6th
    3. Patriots 20th
    4. Lions 29th
    5. Carolina 3rd

    Here are the top 5 teams in average yards rushing/game and how they finished in scoring:
    1. Broncos 25th
    2. Texans 10th
    3. Panthers 5th (tied)
    4. Vikings 19th
    5. Eagles 8th

    Here are the top 5 teams in average yards passing/game and how they finished in scoring:
    1. Saints 2nd
    2. Patriots 3rd
    3. Packers 1st
    4. Lions 5th
    5. Giants 9th

    Finally, look at the Super Bowl participants: The Giants were 9th in scoring, 5th in passing yards/game and 32nd in rushing yards/game. The Pats were 3rd in scoring, 2nd in passing yards/game and 20th in rushing yards/game.

    Yes, some teams depend upon the run more than the pass. But don’t the stats above show pretty clearly the passing game is more important and success in the passing game correlates more directly to scoring?
     
  13. Rocky11

    Rocky11 Superbowl bound Pack

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    231
    Ratings:
    +61
    I agree that the pass is most important. I just thought is was pre-mature to declare the run dead. I will always be important to slow the pass rush and keep defenses honest.
     
  14. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,055
    Ratings:
    +4,048
    Houston was in poor shape after they lost their starting QB.
     
  15. Helmets

    Helmets Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    607
    Ratings:
    +217
    You are comparing a runningback that has been on teams with horrible quarterbacks, vs. two backs that are on a team with a quarterback that many would argue is the best in the league and that passes the majority of the time. Put Lynch on the Packers with the offensive weapons and quarterback - where defenses are not stacking eight in the box to stop him, and you know he would average more yards per carry than either of those two average runningbacks. Come on Ivo - you're smarter than that!
     
  16. Helmets

    Helmets Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    607
    Ratings:
    +217
    Perhaps, just perhaps, if you had an above average RB that could take the load off of Rodgers and the passing game, could convert a 3rd and 1 or presented the fact that the Packers may try to run the ball on 3rd and 3 - to keep the defense honest - maybe, just maybe, the offense does not have its worst day in a season and a half.
     
  17. Vltrophy

    Vltrophy Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2012
    Messages:
    3,749
    Ratings:
    +385
    You have to have a decent dunning game that will open up the passing game. Granted we weren't in the top 5 in rushing,it still helps to keep the D honest
     
  18. The Drew

    The Drew #packergang

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,262
    Ratings:
    +484
    We have 3 young RBs that will benefit from a full off season and another year under their belt.... be patient everyone! We all know Starks has potential... Green showed signs... and Saine was said to have the best hands on the team by the NFL MVP... plus Saine has the speed... Just wait and see
     
  19. EvAn

    EvAn Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2012
    Messages:
    86
    Ratings:
    +14
    Yea I read somewhere Saine has like a 4.3 40yd dash, I think he could make an impact this year after participating in all the OTAs. Same with Green too.
     
  20. Bogart

    Bogart Duke Mantee

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    Messages:
    2,551
    Ratings:
    +871
    If they go for a running back, I would recommend someone that can take hits and be a hard one to bring down.

    It don't have to always be the fastest guy, as long as he gets the yards and first downs. But hey, I do like Starks. Give him a chance, he was great this season.


    But I don't think our offense needs any help, we need all the help on the defensive side after this team broke records for sucking so bad. That's gotta be embarrassing to go 15-1 and have a defense that broke records for giving up the most passing yards ever.
     
  21. Southpaw

    Southpaw Endorphin Junkie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,164
    Ratings:
    +422
    I actually think it would be better to have a scat back than a power runner. I think Starks is capable of being guy that can break tackles and is hard to bring down. Although he does need to prove he can stay healthy

    But having a RB who is elusive and quick and can be a threat in the receiving game would be better. Someone like LaMichael James would be ideal although I'm not sure we'd target him before he got off the board

    Starks, Green and James as part of a RB rotation sounds good to me.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  22. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,216
    Ratings:
    +626
    Prior to the Combine, James has a late second to third round grade.
     
  23. tenplay

    tenplay Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2011
    Messages:
    19
    Ratings:
    +5
    Lynch is only 25 and already has 3 1000 yard seasons playing on teams with lousy OLs and QBs. The Seahawks and his agent are still trying to work out a longterm contract. The Hawks are interested in Flynn as their future QB. A deal benefiting both teams involving Lynch and Flynn should be worked out. Then we will be good at RB for the next 4-5 years. Plus AR and Lynch are teammates and friends from their college days at Cal.
     
  24. Southpaw

    Southpaw Endorphin Junkie

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,164
    Ratings:
    +422
    I know but I'm still not sure we'll be looking for a HB that early. But it would be cool if we can get a good edge rusher and a D-End and James.

    James is also a good returner and that could maybe give Cobb a chance to concentrate more on being a receiver. Cobb has been shaky at times back there.

    IDK though. We'll see what happens. Once this whole Flynn/Well tag fiasco gets figured out I think we'll get a better view of what our draft will look like
     
  25. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,828
    Ratings:
    +2,936
    If the Packers can tag and trade Flynn they have to get better compensation than Lynch IMO. Straight up for a draft pick what do you think the Hawks would get for Lynch? IMO Lynch would only marginally improve the Packers' RB situation at best. I would much prefer getting a second rounder for Flynn. Honestly, I'd rather have a comp 3rd rounder too. Or a player who can help on defense.
     

Share This Page