-
JS-----IS LACY WORTH THE WEIGHT ???
-
Quote:
"I contacted an agent who has studied the running back market because of a client hitting free agency, and he guessed that Lacy will get a deal worth about $2 million plus plenty of incentives. Maybe it will end up being more, but if it’s even near that range, that’s low risk for the Packers."]
I've been lukewarm about signing Lacy, but if they can get him for that, do it!
-
if lacy is only going to get that much then he is waaaay heavier then any of us thought
-
Lacy always reminded me of the Colorado University mascot when he ran - and I wouldn't want to have to tackle that thing. My point is, other than endurance - and you can always give him breaks, I don't think playing at a higher weight hurts Lacy's performance.
Just the same, though, I have said, and I still say I hope they don't sign him for much more than the vet minimum. Given the same hole, Montgomery or Michael get a helluva lot more yards; And given no hole at all, Lacy has never been a Jim Brown anyway. Somebody will pay him a lot more than we should.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
texaspackerbacker
Lacy always reminded me of the Colorado University mascot when he ran - and I wouldn't want to have to tackle that thing. My point is, other than endurance - and you can always give him breaks, I don't think playing at a higher weight hurts Lacy's performance.
Tell his ankles that.
-
It is all right here:
There's reason to be a Lacy skeptic.
a) He had everything to play for (i.e., a new contract) in 2016, but after losing weight early in the spring he slowly put it back on until by the start of the season he looked like he was pretty much back where he’d ended 2015.
Then several months of limited activity after ankle surgery made the hill climb even higher.
b) Based on his last sighting during media availability in the locker room in January, he if anything has added a few pounds.
c) Weight battles like this are tough.
A scout I talked to late this week likened it to a player with a substance-abuse problem in that you can go to great lengths to help him, but it won’t matter until he’s all in.
“It’s not a matter of just changing habits here and there,” the scout said, “it’s a matter of changing your lifestyle. Your eating habits, day to day your exercise habits, your approach to it all.”
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pbmax
Tell his ankles that.
He absolutely was heavy, but incredibly he seemed fit and was running very well. IMO it was that stupid jumping/hurdling he started doing, while it was somewhat effective every time I saw him do it I was sure it was going to cause trouble - don't know why the coaches didn't put a stop to it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
texaspackerbacker
Lacy always reminded me of the Colorado University mascot when he ran - and I wouldn't want to have to tackle that thing. My point is, other than endurance - and you can always give him breaks, I don't think playing at a higher weight hurts Lacy's performance.
Just the same, though, I have said, and I still say I hope they don't sign him for much more than the vet minimum. Given the same hole, Montgomery or Michael get a helluva lot more yards; And given no hole at all, Lacy has never been a Jim Brown anyway. Somebody will pay him a lot more than we should.
I'm not so sure or confident about Michael at all. He was a warm body when the Pack needed one, and showed very little. Hole or no hole, he danced behind the line and often went down there because of it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
if lacy is only going to get that much then he is waaaay heavier then any of us thought
How heavy do you suspect he is right now, a tub of lard maybe?
-
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
texaspackerbacker
Lacy always reminded me of the Colorado University mascot when he ran - and I wouldn't want to have to tackle that thing. My point is, other than endurance - and you can always give him breaks, I don't think playing at a higher weight hurts Lacy's performance.
Just the same, though, I have said, and I still say I hope they don't sign him for much more than the vet minimum. Given the same hole, Montgomery or Michael get a helluva lot more yards; And given no hole at all, Lacy has never been a Jim Brown anyway. Somebody will pay him a lot more than we should.
I think they should . . . weight..
-
He has surpassed Craig Ironhead Heyward in weight and is approaching Jared Lorenzen size.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Vincenzo
How heavy do you suspect he is right now, a tub of lard maybe?
well, if you follow all the rumors on his weight over the last 2 years, he could have ended last season as high as 265, he lost a little according to one sideline report, but nowhere near as much as the 15 pounds or so the team wanted him to lose
then by the start of this season, the reports were that he had put it all back on, and the eye test proves that
then he had ankle surgery, so he wasn't able to work out at all. now reports are saying he's put on even more
so we could be looking at a running back that weighs 270+ at the least
if, he is somehow worth only 2 million plus incentives, then he could be even heavier
i mean hell, starks got 3 million a year to be a backup to a workhorse
-
He lost more than the 15 in the offseason, those pics showed that. But by June's minicamp, he had put weight back on. McCarthy wouldn't comment but did say there was more to do. So either he was back over the threshold or they knew it would be a battle because he had already gained weight back.
By camp, he was much closer to last season's weight, but in far better shape as you could see on his runs.
The problem is that he cannot consistently maintain a weight with his habits as they are right now. Like Gilbert, he needs a babysitter.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guiness
I'm not so sure or confident about Michael at all. He was a warm body when the Pack needed one, and showed very little. Hole or no hole, he danced behind the line and often went down there because of it.
I agree, Michael is not a good running back.....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pbmax
He lost more than the 15 in the offseason, those pics showed that. But by June's minicamp, he had put weight back on. McCarthy wouldn't comment but did say there was more to do. So either he was back over the threshold or they knew it would be a battle because he had already gained weight back.
By camp, he was much closer to last season's weight, but in far better shape as you could see on his runs.
The problem is that he cannot consistently maintain a weight with his habits as they are right now. Like Gilbert, he needs a babysitter.
nah thats what the early rumor was, that he lost 15, the sideline report during one of the early games said he got nowhere near that, and at his peak might have lost only half that
pictures don't mean dick. i can suck n my gut and look in shape too for a picture
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
if lacy is only going to get that much then he is waaaay heavier then any of us thought
Not necessarily. He's known to struggle with his weight, and he's coming off a season ending injury. It's understandable teams would be hesitant to give him big money until they know something about his conditioning and his ankle.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
nah thats what the early rumor was, that he lost 15, the sideline report during one of the early games said he got nowhere near that, and at his peak might have lost only half that
pictures don't mean dick. i can suck n my gut and look in shape too for a picture
I don't believe that at all. He might have reported to camp at less than half that weight loss, but during the spring he was visibly thinner.
This was May: http://www.espn.com/blog/green-bay-p...nd-tony-horton
http://a3.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img...%2D9.jpg&w=570
http://ll-media.tmz.com/2016/03/02/0...facebook-4.jpg
http://media.jrn.com/images/lacy_split.jpg
-
Actually, the Packers have him right where they want him. They ought to be able to re-sign him for a reasonable, very reasonable, one year deal. In the meantime, they can draft and rook and Montgomery will get better with a full offseason and camp of training as a RB.
Green Bay can afford to weight to see what other teams do. IF someone else wants to overpay, well, that's just that much more Chick Fil A that Eddy can afford.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fritz
Actually, the Packers have him right where they want him. They ought to be able to re-sign him for a reasonable, very reasonable, one year deal. In the meantime, they can draft and rook and Montgomery will get better with a full offseason and camp of training as a RB.
Green Bay can afford to weight to see what other teams do. IF someone else wants to overpay, well, that's just that much more Chick Fil A that Eddy can afford.
:lol:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Joemailman
Not necessarily. He's known to struggle with his weight, and he's coming off a season ending injury. It's understandable teams would be hesitant to give him big money until they know something about his conditioning and his ankle.
2 million is what teams throw at players with issues with hardly any talent at all
lacy has plenty of talent, someone will pay him if not us
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
2 million is what teams throw at players with issues with hardly any talent at all
lacy has plenty of talent, someone will pay him if not us
Not RBs. Of all the positions in the game it might be the most "young mans position" of them all. With guys like Latavius Murry up for FA this year Eddie might find it hard to get anyone to pay him a lot.
-
2 million is solid backup territory. But we're talking about 2 million plus incentives. When talking about incentives, details matter. But if the incentives are significant and attainable, Lacy might go for a deal like that.
Keep in mind, NFL teams have always had their concerns about Lacy. There are reasons why a guy who had obvious 1st round talent was available at the end of the 2nd round.
-
does it win lacy any brownie points that he played that week 6 game on an already messed up ankle that fat mike called "not a serious injury"
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
does it win lacy any brownie points that he played that week 6 game on an already messed up ankle that fat mike called "not a serious injury"
Probably, but it might be offset by the fact that the Packers and other teams don't know how bad the ankle is. Will teams want to offer big money to a RB with a bad ankle? Keep in mind that there could be a correlation between his weight and the bad ankle.
-
Nobody, certainly not I, would accuse Lacy of lacking courage. And whatever his ankle problem was/is, it shouldn't carry into next season. My gripe about him is just the kind of back he is in general. If somebody doesn't have the power running ability of Jim Brown or Earl Campbell - and virtually nobody does, including Lacy, then the team is better off with a RB with more speed and cutting ability.
As for "correlation between his weight and the bad ankle", if that's the case, then why don't just about every O Linemen and a lot of D Linemen have chronic ankle problems? There are a helluva lot of fatties in football and out with no problem that way - I say that as one of them hahahaha.
-
are those fatties sprinting, spinning and jumping like lacy does
and yes, actually most of them do have knee and ankle problems i believe
the 245-255 lacy is exactly the kinda of back we need in green bay, a mudder that can get 4 to 5 yards every carry. fast quick backs get nerfed late in the season when the weather gets cold and shitty
the big question is, can he ever get back and stay at that weight, cause it doesn't work being as big as he's been the last couple years. you would think he works out enough during the season, so he's got to change his diet or start doing what i did, switch from beer to rum and diet coke
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
are those fatties sprinting, spinning and jumping like lacy does
and yes, actually most of them do have knee and ankle problems i believe
the 245-255 lacy is exactly the kinda of back we need in green bay, a mudder that can get 4 to 5 yards every carry. fast quick backs get nerfed late in the season when the weather gets cold and shitty
the big question is, can he ever get back and stay at that weight, cause it doesn't work being as big as he's been the last couple years. you would think he works out enough during the season, so he's got to change his diet or start doing what i did, switch from beer to rum and diet coke
I think Lacy's weight problems happen when he goes back home. It seemed he put the weight back on last year between the OTA's and training camp. Maybe he should live with Rodgers and eat that California stuff instead of going back to New Orleans for his mom's crawfish.
-
maybe so, he did come to training camp with a gut, that i kept telling everyone, only to be told i was wrong because the homer news kept saying he was super slim, but he gained a lot between the start of camp and the time he got injured
and if he really had lost all the weight that some folks are saying he did, i doubt fat mike would have fined him, even if he had just gotten close to the target weight
-
and do you think crawdads are really all that fattening?
man you have to work so hard just to get a little bit of meat. i would imagine you'd lose more calories then you would gain by eating them
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
and do you think crawdads are really all that fattening?
man you have to work so hard just to get a little bit of meat. i would imagine you'd lose more calories then you would gain by eating them
Squeeze the tail and suck the head......hardly any work.
-
The argument about running in GB late in the season has to have been debunked by now. When we the last muddy game the Packers played? Monty got 180 in December in Chicago. The old adage of late season plodding RBs has been replaced by 300 yard passing days in January.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
alquaal
Squeeze the tail and suck the head......hardly any work.
/r/nocontext calling
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Joemailman
I think Lacy's weight problems happen when he goes back home. It seemed he put the weight back on last year between the OTA's and training camp. Maybe he should live with Rodgers and eat that California stuff instead of going back to New Orleans for his mom's crawfish.
He doesn't need calf problems.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zool
The argument about running in GB late in the season has to have been debunked by now. When we the last muddy game the Packers played? Monty got 180 in December in Chicago. The old adage of late season plodding RBs has been replaced by 300 yard passing days in January.
But Saint Ron said this, so it must be true.
Even if he never really adhered to it. Unless you want to count mudder Edgar Bennett.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
are those fatties sprinting, spinning and jumping like lacy does
and yes, actually most of them do have knee and ankle problems i believe
the 245-255 lacy is exactly the kinda of back we need in green bay, a mudder that can get 4 to 5 yards every carry. fast quick backs get nerfed late in the season when the weather gets cold and shitty
the big question is, can he ever get back and stay at that weight, cause it doesn't work being as big as he's been the last couple years. you would think he works out enough during the season, so he's got to change his diet or start doing what i did, switch from beer to rum and diet coke
The days of big clods who can't move are long gone. A slow O Lineman has a maybe 5.0-5.5 time in the 40. Try running that. Neither I nor, I suspect, almost anybody posting here could do that at the primest time of their life. I didn't watch much of the Senior Bowl practices, but one thing I did see was some running drills of the linemen, and believe me, some of those fatties were really hauling ass.
And emphatically NO, what the Packers need is NOT "a mudder that can get 4 to 5 yards every carry". Partly that is because our O Line just doesn't make it possible; Partly it is because so many games are played on artificial turf or fast fields in warm climates; Mostly it is because we have Aaron Rodgers, which means our passing game should dominate and our running game should mostly consist of surprises/change of pace plays/etc. mixed in.
And diet, nutrition, and crap like that are greatly overrated.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
texaspackerbacker
The days of big clods who can't move are long gone. A slow O Lineman has a maybe 5.0-5.5 time in the 40. Try running that. Neither I nor, I suspect, almost anybody posting here could do that at the primest time of their life. I didn't watch much of the Senior Bowl practices, but one thing I did see was some running drills of the linemen, and believe me, some of those fatties were really hauling ass.
And emphatically NO, what the Packers need is NOT "a mudder that can get 4 to 5 yards every carry". Partly that is because our O Line just doesn't make it possible; Partly it is because so many games are played on artificial turf or fast fields in warm climates; Mostly it is because we have Aaron Rodgers, which means our passing game should dominate and our running game should mostly consist of surprises/change of pace plays/etc. mixed in.
And diet, nutrition, and crap like that are greatly overrated.
4.3, in the primest of my life
-
hahahaha I did say "almost".
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
red
4.3, in the primest of my life
I confess, I have a hard time imagining you as a WR or DB.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by
texaspackerbacker
And diet, nutrition, and crap like that are greatly overrated.
Holy Smokes. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.