What type of RB do we need in Green Bay?

[rodell330]

A running back who can catch out of the backfield and is explosive being able to cut and plant on a dime?? or a pounder who will pick up the tough yards and wear out the defense??

 

[adambr2]

Very possible to have both nowadays, as most teams seem to employ some type of 2 back system. The quick athletic back fits well into the WCO. But we do need a hard-nosed pounder to help us with the 3rd/4th and short and goalline situations.

Since Peyton Hillis is still unsigned I would have to think his price has become relatively cheap and could be targeted by TT as that short yardage back. I would be comfortable going into this year with a Harris/Hillis tandem.

 

[Einstein McFly]

One who can tell where the blitz is coming from and pick it up effectively. We're a passing team folks. No matter how good of a back we have, we're going to be passing more than running. We need a back who will help us with that.

 

[GWheels]

either a duel back combination with those skills or one back (like Ahman Green except less fumbles) that can do relatively both with decent success. Most important is a back that can keep the defense honest and not just load up for the pass.

 

[FrankRizzo]

Looking at what we have now in DuJuan Harris, and to a less certain degree Alex Green, James Starks, Cedric Benson, I would say we could benefit most from a pure-burner. A guy who if the defense sleeps for just a second over-worrying about our TE and WRs, we can make pay with a big play from a RB with speed to kill.
A Jamaal Charles, Chris Johnson type. Now there aren't many like them, but there are plenty with similar speed who if used right, we could benefit from.

 

[HyponGrey]

Harris is our speed threat with explosive cuts, Green plays best in space and has the hands. To compliment that group, give me a big-ish back who can stick his foot in. Starks WOULD be that guy, if he wasn't glass.

 

[13 Times Champs]

A Dorsey Levens type

 

[Poppa San]

This guy:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[GeeDogWarrior]

One that doesn't suck - One that averages close to 5 yards a Pop - one that averages over a 1,000 yards a year.

We just need a Running back that can become "THE ONE!" (does jet li karate taunts)

 

[Sunshine885500]

Christine Micheal or Marcus Lattimore in the 2nd Rd or with their 1st pick in Rd 3 if GB trades down and picks up an extra 3rd pick. They both have a history (injury or otherwise) which may cause them to slide but both will have something to prove at the next level which could be an absolute steal for whomever selects them. Both are thickly built and can carry the ball 20+ times a game but if I had my choice it would be Micheal from Texas A&M. He has the looks of a guy who is gonna be a stud at the next level especially in the right system. The way his vision is in between the tackles and his change of direction after making a cut reminds me a lot of another famous RB called Emmitt Smith.

There are 4 attributes that make a great RB (Vision, Speed, Power, & Desire). I wanted GB to grab Emmitt Smith when he came out of Florida, but the Cowboys traded up right before us and took him and we got stuck with Micheal Thompson out of the Univ. of Minnesota. He's young and has to grow up and become a Pro but a 5'10" & 221lbs he runs with the body lean and vision that you need at the RB position. You be the judge:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Notice the similarities in the Running Styles:

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Sunshine885500]

I'll say this much. I'm very happy about our current RB situation much more then I was last year this time. I believe that Lacy should be on this list & I believe that all of the top backs from this year's draft will have success over their career. Here's a followup to what is being said about Micheal (Seattle).

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/stor...ichardson-leads-top-10-running-backs-2016-nfl

Christine Michael - RB - Seahawks​

​

Seahawks second-round RB Christine Michael reportedly impressed the coaching staff during OTAs and minicamp.
With Marshawn Lynch skipping all the voluntary sessions, Michael got a chance to spread his extremely talented wings. Former NFL scout Matt Williamson predicts Michael will be a "total stud and true every-down running back" by 2016. That big chance could come sooner if Marshawn Lynch's unresolved DUI case grows legs before Week 1. We suspect Michael will outplay incumbent backup Robert Turbin at training camp.

Related: Robert Turbin​

Source​

​

 

[Raptorman]

I would say that before you worry about the type of RB you have in the backfield you need an offensive line that is not offensive when it comes to run blocking. Am I wrong or did I see somewhere that the Packers O-line did not do so well in that area the last few years? It doesn't matter how good of a back you have if the holes aren't there for him to run through.

Correct me if I am wrong on the o-line blocking.

 

[longtimefan]

There are 4 attributes that make a great RB (Vision, Speed, Power, & Desire). I wanted GB to grab Emmitt Smith when he came out of Florida, but the Cowboys traded up right before us and took him and we got stuck with Micheal Thompson out of the Univ. of Minnesota.

Micheal Thompson? Or Darrell?

 

[weeds]

I would say that before you worry about the type of RB you have in the backfield you need an offensive line that is not offensive when it comes to run blocking. Am I wrong or did I see somewhere that the Packers O-line did not do so well in that area the last few years? It doesn't matter how good of a back you have if the holes aren't there for him to run through.

Correct me if I am wrong on the o-line blocking.

You know something, Raptor?, you're on the money here. However, the proverbial devil is in the details. I've always been a fan of "line play", if you will. I've always admired the big fat guys up front. I'm one of those guys who has been known to miss plays because I really don't pay primary attention to which back gets the ball. So...in the case of the Vikings for example, #28 could be scooting for a 30 yard run and I'll be talking about the blocking that allowed him to do so. I'll maintain, as you do and rightly so, that the Green Bay Packers could have #28 in its backfield and he'd be an 'average back'.

Now... is that because the Pack and McCarthy are 'pass first', or, McCarthy abandons the run too quickly; or, the Packers' offense is geared toward moving the chains in larger increments, or, James Campen doesn't know how to coach up his guys, or, the ZBS-flavored blocking schemes (the Packers and their media downplay the actual usage of the ZBS-that's why I use the qualifier "flavored"); or, our OL are too 'athletic' for a power running game ... I don't know. What I do know, based on my own bias confirmation, is that by-and-large, the holes aren't there. I get tired of watching Green Bay running backs running head first into the *** of a GB lineman who has been "stood up".

 

[PackerFlatLander]

The best recipe for success in the running game, would be to just use the best back for the best situation. Franklin looks like he's got some burst to him, and would be dangerous catching passes on screens or in the flat, out of the backfield. Drop the ZBS nonsense and go back to the bread and butter Ahman Green play with him. Then use Lacy up the gut. That's been my biggest beef with McCarthy, is his silly insistence that the ZBS is the way to go. Um, no, it isn't. The ZBS sucks, and it's prototype track star offensive linemen experiment has been a disaster. The Packers won a Super Bowl in spite of it, sure as hell not because of it!

 

[fanindaup]

I would say that before you worry about the type of RB you have in the backfield you need an offensive line that is not offensive when it comes to run blocking. Am I wrong or did I see somewhere that the Packers O-line did not do so well in that area the last few years? It doesn't matter how good of a back you have if the holes aren't there for him to run through.

Correct me if I am wrong on the o-line blocking.

Lions had a crappy O line while Barry Sanders tore up the league. Sometimes the great backs make the line, sometimes a great line makes the back. Same with quarterbacks and wide receivers. So, all the Packers need is for one of their guys to be the next Barry Sanders and voila!

 

[Sunshine885500]

Micheal Thompson? Or Darrell?

Your right it was Darrell

 

[realcaliforniacheese]

The best recipe for success in the running game, would be to just use the best back for the best situation. Franklin looks like he's got some burst to him, and would be dangerous catching passes on screens or in the flat, out of the backfield. Drop the ZBS nonsense and go back to the bread and butter Ahman Green play with him. Then use Lacy up the gut. That's been my biggest beef with McCarthy, is his silly insistence that the ZBS is the way to go. Um, no, it isn't. The ZBS sucks, and it's prototype track star offensive linemen experiment has been a disaster. The Packers won a Super Bowl in spite of it, sure as hell not because of it!

Lots of teams including championship teams use and have been using the zone blocking scheme for a very long time. You have to have a back that can see the hole and make the cut to get to it before it closes. We just drafted two guys that can do that and I think with our rearranging of the O Line we are going to see much more production out of the blocking scheme.

It's very difficult to put together lineman that can both be great road graders and pass protectors when you are always picking at the back end of the draft. I think you will agree that with the guy we have under center it is better to lean towards pass protection than run blocking.

 

[El Guapo]

I find it interesting when someone like Slaughter25 clicks on "disagree" as was the case with Weed's followup to Raptorman, but then doesn't even bother to post their thoughts. I couldn't agree more with Raptorman and Weeds. We can talk all day about style of back. We've had every style of back in Green Bay during the MM/TT era. Granted they haven't been elite backs but we've had the guys. We just have been stuck with mediocre backs running behind offensive lines that were better at pass blocking than run blocking.

I'm also with fanindaup on this one, that only a greatest-of-all-time back like Barry Sanders could gain yards behind a bad O-line. We aren't going to get that type of back if we keep winning the division or get lucky, so we better work on our run blocking a lot more

 

[realcaliforniacheese]

You know something, Raptor?, you're on the money here. However, the proverbial devil is in the details. I've always been a fan of "line play", if you will. I've always admired the big fat guys up front. I'm one of those guys who has been known to miss plays because I really don't pay primary attention to which back gets the ball. So...in the case of the Vikings for example, #28 could be scooting for a 30 yard run and I'll be talking about the blocking that allowed him to do so. I'll maintain, as you do and rightly so, that the Green Bay Packers could have #28 in its backfield and he'd be an 'average back'.

Now... is that because the Pack and McCarthy are 'pass first', or, McCarthy abandons the run too quickly; or, the Packers' offense is geared toward moving the chains in larger increments, or, James Campen doesn't know how to coach up his guys, or, the ZBS-flavored blocking schemes (the Packers and their media downplay the actual usage of the ZBS-that's why I use the qualifier "flavored"); or, our OL are too 'athletic' for a power running game ... I don't know. What I do know, based on my own bias confirmation, is that by-and-large, the holes aren't there. I get tired of watching Green Bay running backs running head first into the *** of a GB lineman who has been "stood up".

Before his injury Ryan Grant excelled in the ZBS, at the end of the season Harris did a good job of finding the holes to cut an blow thru. I think the issue is not the scheme, but the fact that Since Grant, we have had trouble finding a back who has the patience to wait for that hole to open and then make the cut thru the hole. Starks is a standup runner, Green had the acl injury and last year wasn't fully recovered. Benson was getting in a groove before his injury. I think we have a couple of guys that have the ability to make that cut and blow thru the holes, they just have to learn to have the vision and patience, then watch out.

 

[weeds]

I hope you're right, realcal.

 

[slaughter25]

I find it interesting when someone like Slaughter25 clicks on "disagree" as was the case with Weed's followup to Raptorman, but then doesn't even bother to post their thoughts. I couldn't agree more with Raptorman and Weeds. We can talk all day about style of back. We've had every style of back in Green Bay during the MM/TT era. Granted they haven't been elite backs but we've had the guys. We just have been stuck with mediocre backs running behind offensive lines that were better at pass blocking than run blocking.

I'm also with fanindaup on this one, that only a greatest-of-all-time back like Barry Sanders could gain yards behind a bad O-line. We aren't going to get that type of back if we keep winning the division or get lucky, so we better work on our run blocking a lot more

YOU CALLIN ME OUT?!?!?! (please understand I am kidding lol).

Sorry I didnt have time to post why I disagree with him so here it goes. There is not an offensive line in this league that AP couldn't run behind. We are talking about the most powerful and devastating back of this generation. I know drafting at the top of the draft has netted MN some pretty decent hog mollies to line up in front of him but its not like they are throwing 3 or 4 pro bowlers out there every week. He could come here and rush for 1400+ yds every year if we had a guy like that in our backfield.

For the most part I agree with what you and the other guys mentioned in your post and the previous ones. The packers have fielded a combination of finesse blockers more suited towards the pass and a slough of unproven or frankly untalented RB's for the past several years. Those types of backs cannot and will not flourish without being given the right recipe of scheme and OL talent. But a once in a generation type back like AP is going to get his no matter who he is running behind.

 

[slaughter25]

I hope you're right, realcal.

That makes a couple million of us. lol. This offense will be drool worthy if they can put together some sort of running game. Its not a given at this point but the pieces seem to be there. Its up to MM to stick to his damn guns and run the ball. And the players to execute. Its a lot to ask for but if there ever was a time for them to step up its right now.

 

[HardRightEdge]

How about a pounder with the potential to rack up an above average number of 20+ yard gains?

It seems Lacy is intended to be TT's Steven Jackson surrogate. There are some notable similarities:

Both are big (230 lbs.) and most effective between the tackles. Both are strong in the lower body, can move a pile or fall forward for yards. Both are credited for being patient runners, essential in a zone blocking scheme.

Neither of these players are strictly pounders. Both are quick in the hole and show elusiveness when they get clean to the second level.

While neither would be confused with CJ2K or Jamal Charles turning the corner or exploding away from the D, they both showed Combine / Pro Day speeds around 4.45, certainly fast enough to run away from LBs and safties.

Coming out, Jackson was credited with better vision, and as a better receiver and pass blocker. Whether Lacy improves in these areas remains to be seen; to his credit he wasn't a feature player until last year and comes into the league light on game experience. At least he's credited with decent hands. We throw enough on 1st. and 2nd. downs that he'll need to become at least an adequate pass blocker to avoid rotational status...unless he starts cranking out 100 yd. games in which case adjustments will be made to keep him on the field (see Starks, Super Bowl run).

As a runner though, and going back to the OP question, how about a little of both?

 

[fanindaup]

Between Lacy, Franklin and Harris they (should) have all the features an OC could want in a back. Maybe one of them is a more complete package, but I have to think the running game is already going to be better. I'm just asking for a credible threat, which should bring a safety within 20 yards of the line of scrimmage on occasion. Please, for the love of God, stop strangling us with cover-2.

I'm going to be watching the RB position to see who makes the cut. I figure Lacy and Franklin are shoe-ins because of their draft status but everyone else is on notice. I'm guessing at this point Starks is finished but TT surprises me every year at cutdown time so you never know.