Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Something seems pretty special about Dujuan Harris..
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="HyponGrey" data-source="post: 482560" data-attributes="member: 6441"><p>Now do me a favor and pay attention, because you keep skipping parts of my posts to go to your soapbox. I don't feel like quoting myself.</p><p>First off, from Packers.com, which would be his most recent weigh in, and what I use: <strong>5'8 203</strong>, though according to my friend's cousin Isaac Redman, it's closer to <strong>5'7</strong>. This puts my standard at <strong>5'11 218</strong> and really, as I said, I prefer <strong>5'10 215. </strong>Are you with me so far? <strong>5'10 215 Standard, Harris 5'8 203</strong>.</p><p>Also remember that I said that mold was what the majority of starting backs in the league were, an average if you will. I will now attempt to prove that the mold exists, not how productive you can be within the mold, because I already said production exists outside the mold. Just proving that the mold exists. Still with me?</p><p>Now that that's out of the way, lets look at the listed staring backs. From the official team websites:</p><p> </p><p>Ridley<strong> 5-11</strong> <strong>220 </strong>Vereen 5-9 205 Woodhead 5-8 200</p><p>Bush <strong>6-0</strong> 203</p><p>Greene <strong>5-11 226</strong></p><p>Spiller <strong>5-11</strong> 200 Jackson <strong>6-1 216 </strong></p><p> </p><p>Green-Ellis <strong>5-11 220</strong></p><p>Rice 5-8 <strong>212</strong></p><p>Richardson 5-9 <strong>230</strong></p><p>Dwyer <strong>5-11 229</strong> Mendenhall <strong>5-10 225</strong> Redman <strong>6-0 230</strong></p><p>Foster <strong>6-1 229</strong></p><p>Ballard <strong>5'10 217</strong></p><p>Jones-Drew 5-7 210</p><p>Johnson <strong>5-11</strong> 191</p><p> </p><p>Charles<strong> 5-11</strong> 199</p><p>McGahee <strong>6-0 235</strong> Moreno <strong>5-11</strong> 200</p><p>McFadden <strong>6-1 218</strong></p><p>Matthews <strong>6-0 218</strong></p><p> </p><p>Murray <strong>6-0 215</strong></p><p>Bradshaw <strong>5-10 214</strong> Wilson <strong>5-10</strong> 205</p><p>McCoy <strong>5-11</strong> 208 Brown <strong>6-0 223</strong></p><p>Morris <strong>5-10 218</strong></p><p> </p><p>Forte <strong>6-2 218</strong></p><p>Leshoure <strong>6-0 227</strong></p><p>Green <strong>6-0 225</strong> (listed as our starting back) Grant <strong>6-1 222</strong> Starks <strong>6-2 218</strong> Benson <strong>5-11 227</strong> Harris 5-8 203</p><p>Peterson <strong>6-1 217</strong></p><p> </p><p>Turner <strong>5-10 244</strong> Rodgers 5-6 196</p><p>Stewart <strong>5-10 235</strong> Williams 5-9 <strong>215</strong></p><p>Thomas <strong>5-11 215 </strong>Ingram 5-9 <strong>215</strong> Ivory <strong>6-0 222</strong> Sproles 5-6 190</p><p>Martin 5-9 <strong>223</strong></p><p> </p><p>Wells <strong>6'2 229</strong> Stephens-Howley 5-7 185</p><p>Jackson <strong>6-2 240</strong> Richardson <strong>5-10</strong> 196</p><p>Gore 5-9 <strong>217 </strong>Hunter 5-7 200</p><p>Lynch <strong>5-11 215</strong></p><p> </p><p>Now, looking at those numbers, it sure seems apparent to me that there is a widespread perception around the league that backs of a certain size range tend to have a greater chance of being productive. It also seems that 5-8 203 Harris does not fit into that range. Now pay VERY close attention to these words: That does not mean Harris cannot be productive. He has been productive for us, and I hope he continues to be for a long time.</p><p> </p><p>Somebody feel free to average some of those.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="HyponGrey, post: 482560, member: 6441"] Now do me a favor and pay attention, because you keep skipping parts of my posts to go to your soapbox. I don't feel like quoting myself. First off, from Packers.com, which would be his most recent weigh in, and what I use: [B]5'8 203[/B], though according to my friend's cousin Isaac Redman, it's closer to [B]5'7[/B]. This puts my standard at [B]5'11 218[/B] and really, as I said, I prefer [B]5'10 215. [/B]Are you with me so far? [B]5'10 215 Standard, Harris 5'8 203[/B]. Also remember that I said that mold was what the majority of starting backs in the league were, an average if you will. I will now attempt to prove that the mold exists, not how productive you can be within the mold, because I already said production exists outside the mold. Just proving that the mold exists. Still with me? Now that that's out of the way, lets look at the listed staring backs. From the official team websites: Ridley[B] 5-11[/B] [B]220 [/B]Vereen 5-9 205 Woodhead 5-8 200 Bush [B]6-0[/B] 203 Greene [B]5-11 226[/B] Spiller [B]5-11[/B] 200 Jackson [B]6-1 216 [/B] Green-Ellis [B]5-11 220[/B] Rice 5-8 [B]212[/B] Richardson 5-9 [B]230[/B] Dwyer [B]5-11 229[/B] Mendenhall [B]5-10 225[/B] Redman [B]6-0 230[/B] Foster [B]6-1 229[/B] Ballard [B]5'10 217[/B] Jones-Drew 5-7 210 Johnson [B]5-11[/B] 191 Charles[B] 5-11[/B] 199 McGahee [B]6-0 235[/B] Moreno [B]5-11[/B] 200 McFadden [B]6-1 218[/B] Matthews [B]6-0 218[/B] Murray [B]6-0 215[/B] Bradshaw [B]5-10 214[/B] Wilson [B]5-10[/B] 205 McCoy [B]5-11[/B] 208 Brown [B]6-0 223[/B] Morris [B]5-10 218[/B] Forte [B]6-2 218[/B] Leshoure [B]6-0 227[/B] Green [B]6-0 225[/B] (listed as our starting back) Grant [B]6-1 222[/B] Starks [B]6-2 218[/B] Benson [B]5-11 227[/B] Harris 5-8 203 Peterson [B]6-1 217[/B] Turner [B]5-10 244[/B] Rodgers 5-6 196 Stewart [B]5-10 235[/B] Williams 5-9 [B]215[/B] Thomas [B]5-11 215 [/B]Ingram 5-9 [B]215[/B] Ivory [B]6-0 222[/B] Sproles 5-6 190 Martin 5-9 [B]223[/B] Wells [B]6'2 229[/B] Stephens-Howley 5-7 185 Jackson [B]6-2 240[/B] Richardson [B]5-10[/B] 196 Gore 5-9 [B]217 [/B]Hunter 5-7 200 Lynch [B]5-11 215[/B] Now, looking at those numbers, it sure seems apparent to me that there is a widespread perception around the league that backs of a certain size range tend to have a greater chance of being productive. It also seems that 5-8 203 Harris does not fit into that range. Now pay VERY close attention to these words: That does not mean Harris cannot be productive. He has been productive for us, and I hope he continues to be for a long time. Somebody feel free to average some of those. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
2024 Round 7, pick 245: Michael Pratt, QB
Latest: DoURant
Yesterday at 10:04 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Who Will Start?
Latest: gopkrs
Yesterday at 9:54 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
G
2024 draft discussion thread
Latest: GreenBaySlacker
Yesterday at 9:16 PM
Draft Talk
Moving Up
Latest: Thirteen Below
Yesterday at 8:29 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Time to call Brett back from the woodshed....
Latest: longtimefan
Yesterday at 8:25 PM
Brett Favre Discussion
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Something seems pretty special about Dujuan Harris..
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top