How's Marshawn Lynch Doing...?

[Fritz]

I have noticed in the past week or so, on NFL pre-game shows, on the internet, in the GB media, that it is now accepted wisdom that Thompson should have shoveled out the third rounder for Marshawn Lynch because then, at least, the Packers would have a proven running back.

This has become the conventional wisdom, so I decided to check and see how ol' Marshawn-the-proven-NFL-running-back was doing for his new team. I didn't pay much attention to his stats with the Bills, having read many times that those stats really don't "count" since the Bills' o-line and heck, the whole team, is so bad.

So for the Seahogs - a team with a better record than the Packers - ol' Marshawn carried the ball 17 times against da Bears - for 44 yards and a 2.6 yards per carry average.

Compare that to the two-headed kitten that pretends to be the Packers' running attack. Against the same opponent, those Bears, JackKuhn carried the ball 13 times for 43 yards, for a 3.3 yards per carry average.

So what is the evidence that suggests Thompson whiffed so badly by not taking Lynch? What has he brought to Seattle? 2.6 yards per carry?

[ThunderDan]

I have noticed in the past week or so, on NFL pre-game shows, on the internet, in the GB media, that it is now accepted wisdom that Thompson should have shoveled out the third rounder for Marshawn Lynch because then, at least, the Packers would have a proven running back.

This has become the conventional wisdom, so I decided to check and see how ol' Marshawn-the-proven-NFL-running-back was doing for his new team. I didn't pay much attention to his stats with the Bills, having read many times that those stats really don't "count" since the Bills' o-line and heck, the whole team, is so bad.

So for the Seahogs - a team with a better record than the Packers - ol' Marshawn carried the ball 17 times against da Bears - for 44 yards and a 2.6 yards per carry average.

Compare that to the two-headed kitten that pretends to be the Packers' running attack. Against the same opponent, those Bears, JackKuhn carried the ball 13 times for 43 yards, for a 3.3 yards per carry average.

So what is the evidence that suggests Thompson whiffed so badly by not taking Lynch? What has he brought to Seattle? 2.6 yards per carry?

Obviously our O-Line must be better than the Seahags so your stats don't mean anything! :lol:

[Kiwon]

Compare that to the two-headed kitten that pretends to be the Packers' running attack.

:D

[Tarlam!]

At the time the trade went down, conventional wisdom had the Packers as a playoff contender at least and the Seahawks as an also ran, so a Seattle 3rd felt more like a 2nd and a Green Bay 3rd felt more like a 4th.

Do the math.

[Fritz]

I'm awful at math, Tar. What are you saying?

[Tarlam!]

I'm awful at math, Tar. What are you saying?

You're right. He was traded for a conditional 4th, which will turn into a 3rd if he plays well. I thought he went for a 3rd.

My apolgies for being unreliable!

[Guiness]

I'm awful at math, Tar. What are you saying?

I think what Tar's saying is that the price might've been different for the Pack vs the Hawks because of their expected draft status. 32nd pick of the 3rd round is pretty much a 4th round pick, top 5 pick of the 3rd round might as well be a 2nd rounder. So the Bills might've been asking us for a 2nd instead of a 3rd.

edit: I see it was a 4th, which could become a 3rd. Same logic applies, of course.

Of course, if I'm putting words in Tar's mouth, he's welcome to tell me to go back to drinking and lurking!

[ThunderDan]

I'm awful at math, Tar. What are you saying?

I think what Tar's saying is that the price might've been different for the Pack vs the Hawks because of their expected draft status. 32nd pick of the 3rd round is pretty much a 4th round pick, top 5 pick of the 3rd round might as well be a 2nd rounder. So the Bills might've been asking us for a 2nd instead of a 3rd.

edit: I see it was a 4th, which could become a 3rd. Same logic applies, of course.

Of course, if I'm putting words in Tar's mouth, he's welcome to tell me to go back to drinking and lurking!

I think Fritz was trying to get that ML is no better (so far) than Kuhnnnn and BJack. So no trade is saving us the 3rd or 4th round pick it would have cost us with no increase in production.

[ND72]

Brandon Jackson 67 305 4.6 71 1
John Kuhn 34 142 4.2 18 1
Aaron Rodgers 23 113 4.9 17 3

So here is what I see being wrong...we are averaging 4.57 per carry...um, YES...thank you! Why aren't we running more? Here's the other thing....Rodgers leads all runners with 3 TD...come on man!

Adrian Peterson 112 553 4.9 80 4

With Jackson and Kuhn, we have 101 carries, 447 yards, 4.4 per carry. Really not a lot worse than the supposed best runner in the game, I personally would like us to just use it more. I really think Jackson and Kuhn can do it. PLUS, I've always liked Jackson, and during the Chicago game I really though, ya know, maybe he just won't do it...but then against Washington and Miami, he's running more confident, harder, and finding the cuts...USE the kid!

[Fritz]

I just get tired of analysts who analize.

[packerbacker1234]

Well, using the bears game for a comparison is sort of meh. The bears have arguably one of the best defenses in the nfl right now. They are winning games with QB's who are ending it with an under 10 rating. Just saying, that defense is stellar.

Lets see what he does against the more average teams before we start saying he wasn't worth it.

[Noodle]

I'm with ND. We have a combo of backs who really can get it done. Why we don't run more is an absolute mystery to me.

Like everyone here, I also don't understand why we don't try to run traditional or middle screens more with Jackson. The guy is pretty good in space.

In my day, which was many moons ago, the screen package was the best remedy to teams that were teeing off on rushing the passer. Has the NFL changed that much, or are we not taking advantage of a golden opportunity?

[Tarlam!]

In my day, which was many moons ago,

Did any of you realise that a day on the moon equals a year on the moon? I learned that piece of trivia only this morning by watching a re-run of West Wing.

Now, back on topic. Mortenson reported it was a conditional 4th, ML's Wiki page says it was a 2011 4th and a conditional 2012 pick. Since I don't really know the details, I can't say(offer an IMHO) if TT did a prudent job or not.

[Bretsky]

I have noticed in the past week or so, on NFL pre-game shows, on the internet, in the GB media, that it is now accepted wisdom that Thompson should have shoveled out the third rounder for Marshawn Lynch because then, at least, the Packers would have a proven running back.

This has become the conventional wisdom, so I decided to check and see how ol' Marshawn-the-proven-NFL-running-back was doing for his new team. I didn't pay much attention to his stats with the Bills, having read many times that those stats really don't "count" since the Bills' o-line and heck, the whole team, is so bad.

So for the Seahogs - a team with a better record than the Packers - ol' Marshawn carried the ball 17 times against da Bears - for 44 yards and a 2.6 yards per carry average.

Compare that to the two-headed kitten that pretends to be the Packers' running attack. Against the same opponent, those Bears, JackKuhn carried the ball 13 times for 43 yards, for a 3.3 yards per carry average.

So what is the evidence that suggests Thompson whiffed so badly by not taking Lynch? What has he brought to Seattle? 2.6 yards per carry?


Marshawn Lynch is a better RB than Brandon Jackson; I'm not dwelling on the stats. He'd have helped and may have been a long term stellar one two punch with Grant.

I'm fine if TT can't cough up a high draft pick for a veteran; the dude could get a suspension with another strike and that's why you get a first round talent for a round 3 or 4 pick.

I was also pleaseantly surprised by the Seattle's GM who stated when in GB they nearly traded for Stehen Jackson for high picks.

Now as for standing still. We've had some situations where we've needed to punch the ball in from near the goal line. How did standing still at RB work for us there ? That is where Lynch would have helped.

Our real mistake may have been TT dragging his feet (if he did) on Ryan Torrain

[Tarlam!]

Our real mistake may have been TT dragging his feet (if he did) on Ryan Torrain

I believe both Nance and Torrain were on the 'skins' PS and TT picked Nance of the two. That wouldn't be feet dragging, that would be poor scouting if Nance is a JAG.

[Bretsky]

Our real mistake may have been TT dragging his feet (if he did) on Ryan Torrain

I believe both Nance and Torrain were on the 'skins' PS and TT picked Nance of the two. That wouldn't be feet dragging, that would be poor scouting if Nance is a JAG.


I think you are right
I think Nance is a JAG

But it would not surprise me if TT tried to get the guy and he instead decided to stay with Washington instead. He knew Shannahan and maybe he thought Washington was a more attractive situation for him to stay in.

Of course, then we can blame GB for not closing another sale :lol:
Or maybe we just selected the wrong guy

[Bossman641]

I watched the Bears game, and Lynch looked better than his stats suggest. There were a few times where Urlacher had him all but wrapped up for a 3-4 yard loss and he broke the tackle and turned it into a 1 yard gain. He looked good but no worldbeater.

[Fritz]

Well, using the bears game for a comparison is sort of meh. The bears have arguably one of the best defenses in the nfl right now. They are winning games with QB's who are ending it with an under 10 rating. Just saying, that defense is stellar.

Lets see what he does against the more average teams before we start saying he wasn't worth it.

Part of the point of using the Bears game as a basis of comparison is that I also gave the numbers of the Green Bay runners against that same defense...


I don't see Lynch/Grant as a "one-two" punch next year, had TT made the deal. That's not MM's style. He seems to like to ride one horse if it's a guy he likes (as opposed to cobbling together a running game). So I think next year would've been potentiall problematic if TT had gotten Lynch.

Now, had TT traded for Shane Lechler I'd have been ecstatic. A clear upgrade at a position of need.

[Bretsky]

Well, using the bears game for a comparison is sort of meh. The bears have arguably one of the best defenses in the nfl right now. They are winning games with QB's who are ending it with an under 10 rating. Just saying, that defense is stellar.

Lets see what he does against the more average teams before we start saying he wasn't worth it.

Part of the point of using the Bears game as a basis of comparison is that I also gave the numbers of the Green Bay runners against that same defense...


I don't see Lynch/Grant as a "one-two" punch next year, had TT made the deal. That's not MM's style. He seems to like to ride one horse if it's a guy he likes (as opposed to cobbling together a running game). So I think next year would've been potentiall problematic if TT had gotten Lynch.

Now, had TT traded for Shane Lechler I'd have been ecstatic. A clear upgrade at a position of need.


That also describes Lynch

[mmmdk]

Well, using the bears game for a comparison is sort of meh. The bears have arguably one of the best defenses in the nfl right now. They are winning games with QB's who are ending it with an under 10 rating. Just saying, that defense is stellar.

Lets see what he does against the more average teams before we start saying he wasn't worth it.

Part of the point of using the Bears game as a basis of comparison is that I also gave the numbers of the Green Bay runners against that same defense...


I don't see Lynch/Grant as a "one-two" punch next year, had TT made the deal. That's not MM's style. He seems to like to ride one horse if it's a guy he likes (as opposed to cobbling together a running game). So I think next year would've been potentiall problematic if TT had gotten Lynch.

Now, had TT traded for Shane Lechler I'd have been ecstatic. A clear upgrade at a position of need.


That also describes Lynch

A trade for Shane Lechler would have been amazing but I fear that TT would've felt that he belittled himself as GM with such a move or he just loves his draft picks too much?

Lynch would have an ok move but Lynch can't fix the trouble on Packers offense: McCarthys limitations as OC & HC.

[Bretsky]

Well, using the bears game for a comparison is sort of meh. The bears have arguably one of the best defenses in the nfl right now. They are winning games with QB's who are ending it with an under 10 rating. Just saying, that defense is stellar.

Lets see what he does against the more average teams before we start saying he wasn't worth it.

Part of the point of using the Bears game as a basis of comparison is that I also gave the numbers of the Green Bay runners against that same defense...


I don't see Lynch/Grant as a "one-two" punch next year, had TT made the deal. That's not MM's style. He seems to like to ride one horse if it's a guy he likes (as opposed to cobbling together a running game). So I think next year would've been potentiall problematic if TT had gotten Lynch.

Now, had TT traded for Shane Lechler I'd have been ecstatic. A clear upgrade at a position of need.


That also describes Lynch

A trade for Shane Lechler would have been amazing but I fear that TT would've felt that he belittled himself as GM with such a move or he just loves his draft picks too much?

Lynch would have an ok move but Lynch can't fix the trouble on Packers offense: McCarthys limitations as OC & HC.


Honestly I'm still luke warm with MM as a coach; many of us thought he was brilliant last year when things were working better and now many have jumped off his ship.

I think he's average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.

The only coach I think is junk is Slocum.

Who knows what Oakland would want for Lechler but I doubt TT would part with anything high for him and da Raiders are probably not taking a sixth round pick. Lynch........I'd be fine trading for him or not but I do think he's way more talented than what we have.

[Fritz]

Okay, the Lynch watch:

25 carries, 89 yards. One really long run, a lot of tiny little short runs. A 3.56 average.

[mmmdk]

Well, using the bears game for a comparison is sort of meh. The bears have arguably one of the best defenses in the nfl right now. They are winning games with QB's who are ending it with an under 10 rating. Just saying, that defense is stellar.

Lets see what he does against the more average teams before we start saying he wasn't worth it.

Part of the point of using the Bears game as a basis of comparison is that I also gave the numbers of the Green Bay runners against that same defense...


I don't see Lynch/Grant as a "one-two" punch next year, had TT made the deal. That's not MM's style. He seems to like to ride one horse if it's a guy he likes (as opposed to cobbling together a running game). So I think next year would've been potentiall problematic if TT had gotten Lynch.

Now, had TT traded for Shane Lechler I'd have been ecstatic. A clear upgrade at a position of need.


That also describes Lynch

A trade for Shane Lechler would have been amazing but I fear that TT would've felt that he belittled himself as GM with such a move or he just loves his draft picks too much?

Lynch would have an ok move but Lynch can't fix the trouble on Packers offense: McCarthys limitations as OC & HC.


Honestly I'm still luke warm with MM as a coach; many of us thought he was brilliant last year when things were working better and now many have jumped off his ship.

I think he's average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.

The only coach I think is junk is Slocum.

Who knows what Oakland would want for Lechler but I doubt TT would part with anything high for him and da Raiders are probably not taking a sixth round pick. Lynch........I'd be fine trading for him or not but I do think he's way more talented than what we have.

Very well said, B.

[ThunderDan]

Okay, the Lynch watch:

25 carries, 89 yards. One really long run, a lot of tiny little short runs. A 3.56 average.

Jackson and Kuhn 20 rushes, 70 yards 3.5 ypc

[ThunderDan]

Honestly I'm still luke warm with MM as a coach; many of us thought he was brilliant last year when things were working better and now many have jumped off his ship.

I think he's average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.
The only coach I think is junk is Slocum.

Who knows what Oakland would want for Lechler but I doubt TT would part with anything high for him and da Raiders are probably not taking a sixth round pick. Lynch........I'd be fine trading for him or not but I do think he's way more talented than what we have.

Not sure what you are getting at here. Please explain.

[mmmdk]

Honestly I'm still luke warm with MM as a coach; many of us thought he was brilliant last year when things were working better and now many have jumped off his ship.

I think he's average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.
The only coach I think is junk is Slocum.

Who knows what Oakland would want for Lechler but I doubt TT would part with anything high for him and da Raiders are probably not taking a sixth round pick. Lynch........I'd be fine trading for him or not but I do think he's way more talented than what we have.

Not sure what you are getting at here. Please explain.

Wow, me too - I missed the "not" about the players. Kinda like an oxymoron, B.

[Bretsky]

Honestly I'm still luke warm with MM as a coach; many of us thought he was brilliant last year when things were working better and now many have jumped off his ship.

I think he's average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.
The only coach I think is junk is Slocum.

Who knows what Oakland would want for Lechler but I doubt TT would part with anything high for him and da Raiders are probably not taking a sixth round pick. Lynch........I'd be fine trading for him or not but I do think he's way more talented than what we have.

Not sure what you are getting at here. Please explain.

Not a strong statement
Just my way of saying I don't think we're losing due to MM himself; it's due to a lack of talent on the field and he's making due with what he has.

[pbmax]

Okay, the Lynch watch:

25 carries, 89 yards. One really long run, a lot of tiny little short runs. A 3.56 average.

Jackson and Kuhn 20 rushes, 70 yards 3.5 ypc
3.5 X 3 downs = 10.5 yards!

We should never pass!

[pbmax]

I think he's [M3] average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.
Perhaps he is average as a head coach, I won't debate that here. But he does have a specialty that has won out in every type of season so far; his passing game. And he has done it with less than Lee, Quarless and Tom "Anthony Munoz" Crabtree at TE.

If he unsticks the WR/TE passing game, as I expect he will, then this team will catch fire. Unless 4 more starters go down to injury.

[Packgator]

Okay, the Lynch watch:

25 carries, 89 yards. One really long run, a lot of tiny little short runs. A 3.56 average.

Against Oakland.....

9 carries for 7 yards.

[Pugger]

I have no problem with TT not making the deal for Lynch. We had much more pressing issues in the end. But I do have issues with our run blocking! How can we not get a 3rd and one stinkin' foot yesterday? :evil: With how lousy we are at this only an elite back like Peterson could get anything with our crappy blocking up front.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Didn't feel he was worth it at the time and still don't.

[get louder at lambeau]

I have no problem with TT not making the deal for Lynch. We had much more pressing issues in the end. But I do have issues with our run blocking! How can we not get a 3rd and one stinkin' foot yesterday? :evil: With how lousy we are at this only an elite back like Peterson could get anything with our crappy blocking up front.

Peterson failed at short yardage yesterday too, 1 yard to the endzone and he couldn't get in. It happens to the best of em.

[pbmax]

I think he's [M3] average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.
Perhaps he is average as a head coach, I won't debate that here. But he does have a specialty that has won out in every type of season so far; his passing game. And he has done it with less than Lee, Quarless and Tom "Anthony Munoz" Crabtree at TE.

If he unsticks the WR/TE passing game, as I expect he will, then this team will catch fire. Unless 4 more starters go down to injury.
Still waiting to get unstuck Coach! Though McGinn forgave him for going multi-wide versus the Jets. Thought it kept the Jets from blitzing and made them play more zone than usual.

It would also help if Aaron would pass to one of the short routes in 3rd and less than 8 and if the WRs would have onto more than half the passes. Nice to see Jennings getting his due.

[Fritz]

Okay, the Lynch watch:

25 carries, 89 yards. One really long run, a lot of tiny little short runs. A 3.56 average.

Against Oakland.....

9 carries for 7 yards.

Thank you Packgator. And note that his longest run was...seven yards. Thus, his other eight carries went for a total of zero yards.

I like having that third round pick here and not in Seattle...especially since the Vikes no longer have one!

[Packgator]

Against Oakland.....

9 carries for 7 yards.

Against the Giants....

11 carries for 48 yards (long 26 yards)

[pbmax]

I think he's [M3] average and I think we're not cutting it because of the players.
Perhaps he is average as a head coach, I won't debate that here. But he does have a specialty that has won out in every type of season so far; his passing game. And he has done it with less than Lee, Quarless and Tom "Anthony Munoz" Crabtree at TE.

If he unsticks the WR/TE passing game, as I expect he will, then this team will catch fire. Unless 4 more starters go down to injury.
Still waiting to get unstuck Coach! Though McGinn forgave him for going multi-wide versus the Jets. Thought it kept the Jets from blitzing and made them play more zone than usual.

It would also help if Aaron would pass to one of the short routes in 3rd and less than 8 and if the WRs would have onto more than half the passes. Nice to see Jennings getting his due.
OK, passing game possibly unstuck now. But with both Lees hurting and Tausch on IR, we are one to two more injuries away from catastrophe if my prophecy is to be believed.

[channtheman]

Okay, the Lynch watch:

25 carries, 89 yards. One really long run, a lot of tiny little short runs. A 3.56 average.

Jackson and Kuhn 20 rushes, 70 yards 3.5 ypc
3.5 X 3 downs = 10.5 yards!

We should never pass!

I had a dumbass football coach in high school who said the goal for each play was 3 yards because 4 X 3 is 12 and you only need 10 yards for a first down.

[Cheesehead Craig]

13 carries 29 yds vs AZ

This against a team that's one of the worst run defenses in the league. Anyone else still think this guy would have been worth it?

[ThunderDan]

I think we should have given them a 2!

[ThunderDan]

I think we should have given them a 2!

Some reason the LOL went to the thread title and not my post. I am glad we did not trade for Lynch!

[esoxx]

It's already being called one of the greatest TD runs in NFL playoff history:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GD5EUVIvWo

[vince]

That was a great run. I don't know what his 40 time is, but he doesn't seem to have much speed.

Saints D was not good covering or tackling yesterday.

[rbaloha1]

That was a great run. I don't know what his 40 time is, but he doesn't seem to have much speed.

Saints D was not good covering or tackling yesterday.

Who cares about 40 time? Homerun hitter the Packers lack.

[esoxx]

Yeah, when your past his prime QB is keeping up with him and throwing blocks 40 yards downfield, it doesn't say much for speed.
Can't imagine Kerry Collins keeping up when Chris Johnson cranks up a long run.

[MadtownPacker]

Wow!! darren "not very" sharper whiffing on a important tackle? I can't believe it!! I wonder if Harvey cares to comment.

[vince]

Who cares about 40 time? Homerun hitter the Packers lack.
Marshawn Lynch a homerun hitter? Please. One run does not make a homerun hitter.

I'll take the promise of Starks plus the 3rd and 4th it would have cost all day long and twice on Sunday.

[pbmax]

Who cares about 40 time? Homerun hitter the Packers lack.

That is exactly what Marshawn Lynch is not. That was a bad and injured defense tackling like snowmen. Lynch is good, but not because he is a homerun threat. I haven't looked at the numbers, but I bet Grant has more and longer runs.

[esoxx]

Regardless, that run alone in that situation and with that much on the line made the trade worthwhile for Seattle.

[rbaloha1]

Marshawn Lynch a homerun hitter? Please. One run does not make a homerun hitter.

I'll take the promise of Starks plus the 3rd and 4th it would have cost all day long and twice on Sunday.

Starks is only promise. Lynch is proven. IMO TT messed up for not securing Lynch given the current state of affairs of the running game.

When A-rod is your leading rusher in 2 games that is a problem.

[rbaloha1]

Regardless, that run alone in that situation and with that much on the line made the trade worthwhile for Seattle.

Yes. Lets see Starks make a run over 20 yards in the playoffs.

[Scott Campbell]

Starks is only promise. Lynch is proven.


Proven that he can't cut it in Buffalo.

[SlimPickens]

http://rubechat.kfan.com/images/smilies/deadhorse.gif

[pbmax]

http://rubechat.kfan.com/images/smilies/deadhorse.gif

Give it time. This thread could go for 20 pages before a new fact is introduced. We have yet to begun to squabble.

[esoxx]

http://rubechat.kfan.com/images/smilies/deadhorse.gif

I thought you were against animal abuse.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Like I said before, the guy makes his only play of the season and suddenly he's an elite back that we should have gotten. :roll:

[red]

lynch is not a homerun threat and that was not a homerun

that was like a single with 7 or 8 errors on the plays resulting in a score

he showed a hell of a lot of heart on the run, but about 10 guys missed tackles, others just gave up (porter), and when was the last time you saw our qb and a o-lineman 70 yards downfield blocking?

now jamaal charels, he just had a homerun

[mmmdk]

McCarthy said: "Brandon Jackson to me is an every-down back.".

[red]

McCarthy said: "Brandon Jackson to me is an every-down back.".

then MM needs to be fired ASAP

he's delusional

[mmmdk]

then MM needs to be fired ASAP

he's delusional

McCarthy said this on the 16th of August 2010 and again in week 2 2010.

[esoxx]

McCarthy said: "Brandon Jackson to me is an every-down back.".

He is. Every time I see him he's down on his back.

[vince]

He stuck up for one of his guys in public. Imagine that. Fire his ass.

[mmmdk]

He stuck up for one of his guys in public. Imagine that. Fire his ass.

Point taken! I understand the week 2 remark but the preseason observation speaks volumes. Bad Judgement on talent.

[retailguy]

He stuck up for one of his guys in public. Imagine that. Fire his ass.

I think they were saying that they thought McCarthy was "being truthful" and that he really believed Jackson was an "every down" back and that was the basis of their criticism.

You seem to think it's more important to "stand up for his guy" than to tell the truth, unless you believe that Jackson IS an every down back?

In any event, I don't understand the need for your sarcasm. Could you enlighten me?

[Bretsky]

My view on the run only reinforces my opinion of Lynch before and after the trade

Undoubtedly better than Brandon Jackson

Could have helped our team for sure

Debateable if he was worth what TT would have had to give up

[Patler]

lynch is not a homerun threat and that was not a homerun

that was like a single with 7 or 8 errors on the plays resulting in a score

he showed a hell of a lot of heart on the run, but about 10 guys missed tackles, others just gave up (porter), and when was the last time you saw our qb and a o-lineman 70 yards downfield blocking?

now jamaal charels, he just had a homerun

Good description, Red; although I would call it a double with errors allowing him to score. He did break decent tackle attempts at the line of scrimmage, and his stiff-arm on the DB was a thing of beauty. I'll give him a double for those! :lol:

Other than that he high stepped about four half-hearted dives at his feet and stayed within a wedge of blockers.

[get louder at lambeau]

Brandon Jackson's longest run this year was 4 yards longer than that, and it included a stiff arm and people falling at his feet. But that doesn't count. Only Lynch's counts.

[rbaloha1]

Proven that he can't cut it in Buffalo.

What were his stats in Buffalo? Did he gain pro bowl status?

Good on you if think Starks is the answer.

[Patler]

What were his stats in Buffalo? Did he gain pro bowl status?

Good on you if think Starks is the answer.

His Pro Bowl selection was truly an odd one. He got in as an injury replacement, and I can't help but wonder how many others declined. He was tied for 13th in rushing that year. Quite low for a Pro Bowl player.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Lynch is average. Dude has one good run after sucking for the better part of 2-3 years, and now he's the second coming? Even yesterday, he was averaging well under 4 yards/carry until that run. Good for him. He's very ordinary and I wouldn't have given up the 3rd round pick it would have taken to get him. Here's what we've done with our last 4 third round picks:

Drafted Morgan Burnett. Too early to tell, but it looks like he has a shot at being a good safety.
Used it to trade up to get Clay Matthews.
Drafted Jermichael Finley.
Drafted James Jones.

I wouldn't trade any of these moves to get Lynch (except for maybe Burnett, but it's too early to tell on that).

[Patler]

You may have forgotten:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YynXhHy0o7o

[Scott Campbell]

What were his stats in Buffalo? Did he gain pro bowl status?




He got demoted in Buffalo - twice.

[get louder at lambeau]

You may have forgotten:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YynXhHy0o7o

That's the one I'm talkin bout!

[rbaloha1]

He got demoted in Buffalo - twice.

So? What about Woodhead and Hillis?

[BallHawk]

Yes. Lets see Starks make a run over 20 yards in the playoffs.

bump.

[Patler]

Yes. Lets see Starks make a run over 20 yards in the playoffs.

First carry!

[rbaloha1]

First carry!

Nice run. Shiftier than I thought. Easily supplants B. Jackson. Always a good pass receiver.

Still wish TT dealt for Lynch.

[red]

First carry!

LOL

bazinga

[rbaloha1]

LOL

bazinga

Starks set a rookie rushing playoff record for yards. Maybe we do not Lynch this season.

[Scott Campbell]

Starks set a rookie rushing playoff record for yards. Maybe we do not Lynch this season.

Excellent point. :)

[mission]

funny thread

a few of us were right

[esoxx]

Yeah, it's really hilarious.

[retailguy]

He stuck up for one of his guys in public. Imagine that. Fire his ass.



I think they were saying that they thought McCarthy was "being truthful" and that he really believed Jackson was an "every down" back and that was the basis of their criticism.

You seem to think it's more important to "stand up for his guy" than to tell the truth, unless you believe that Jackson IS an every down back?

In any event, I don't understand the need for your sarcasm. Could you enlighten me?


Still looking for an answer Vince. Was McCarthy telling the truth, or was he just "sticking up for his guy" and bullshitting us? I really want to know if I can believe McCarthy when he talks to me, or if I have to ask someone what he really means.

[Scott Campbell]

Still looking for an answer Vince. Was McCarthy telling the truth, or was he just "sticking up for his guy" and bullshitting us? I really want to know if I can believe McCarthy when he talks to me, or if I have to ask someone what he really means.


I'd always assume he's saying what he needs to say.

[Fritz]

Really, Lynch makes one long run and there are people who bump this thread to "remind" everyone what a mistake TT made not trading for him?

I think Bretsky's comment was fair - he makes an assessment, and while I don't agree with his conclusion (I don't think Lynch is worth a third), I do think he's trying to make a fair assessment.

[vince]

rg I couldn't possibly care less about what you're looking for. if you keep coming after me you will get used to looking for answers. no offense of course.

[retailguy]

I'd always assume he's saying what he needs to say.

Yeah. Precisely.

Vince is a big one to back his point with direct quotes from the team, or from the coach. Yet, when someone else points to a direct quote, we've got to "put it in context".

I have no problem with either perspective, but "both" doesn't work for me.

In true Vince form, if he ignores it, maybe it goes away? Whatever.

McCarthy isn't the second coming of Christ, but he doesn't deserve to be fired. If he really believes that jackson is an every down back in the NFL, he's a few bricks short of a load on that topic. Why we can't all admit that and move on is beyond me.

[retailguy]

rg I couldn't possibly care less about what you're looking for. if you keep coming after me you will get used to looking for answers. no offense of course.

I explained that in the post above. I'm not "coming after you", merely trying to understand your justifications on this issue.

[retailguy]

Really, Lynch makes one long run and there are people who bump this thread to "remind" everyone what a mistake TT made not trading for him?

I think Bretsky's comment was fair - he makes an assessment, and while I don't agree with his conclusion (I don't think Lynch is worth a third), I do think he's trying to make a fair assessment.

Fritz, I completely agree with this, and I share this point. I was never on board with trading for Lynch. Similarly, for the past two seasons, I've not been on board with "jackson is an every down back" either.

To take a quote from the coach ought to be a point we can debate, and ought to be a statement that one can use to build an opinion. If not, hell, there is no point in discussing anything.

[Joemailman]

MM never said Brandon Jackson is a good every down back.

[retailguy]

MM never said Brandon Jackson is a good every down back.

I remember the quote. It was a question about being an every down back in the NFL. He said he was. (I remember raising my eyebrows and saying "whatever")

I'm all on board with "sticking up for your guys". I also believe that you can do that without misleading or being untruthful. I took it the same way the op did, that McCarthy believed it. Don't know the guy, have no idea if it's true or not, and today, don't care, however, I thought it was a fair point for discussion.

[get louder at lambeau]

Well, Jackson did have over 1000 total yards this year. He's not an ideal feature back, but he's not the worst either. Not sure why you're so emotionally invested in him failing, retail, but don't be that guy. He's a Packer, and he had a great TD yesterday.

[retailguy]

Well, Jackson did have over 1000 total yards this year. He's not an ideal feature back, but he's not the worst either. Not sure why you're so emotionally invested in him failing, retail, but don't be that guy. He's a Packer, and he had a great TD yesterday.

I'm not investing in Jackson failing. He is what he is, a great 3rd down back. His blitz pickup is excellent as well as his ability to catch the ball. Running? He looks like he is auditioning for "dancing with the stars" and has done that consistently since his rookie year. In my opinion, that makes him a poor "every down back".

I'm really hopeful that Starks will become what we all hoped Jackson would be - an every down back.

[mraynrand]

This thread blows

[pbmax]

Still looking for an answer Vince. Was McCarthy telling the truth, or was he just "sticking up for his guy" and bullshitting us? I really want to know if I can believe McCarthy when he talks to me, or if I have to ask someone what he really means.

Do you really believe it to be a flaw for a coach to be discreet (or less than forthcoming) about the flaws of his players?

[retailguy]

Do you really believe it to be a flaw for a coach to be discreet (or less than forthcoming) about the flaws of his players?

PB, I don't believe he was just "sticking up for his guy". I think he answered the question honestly, and he believed it. But that wasn't my point.

I saw Vince's response as taking McCarthy's and the OP's point out of context. OP wanted to point out that he believed that McCarthy answered honestly, as did I. Instead, he got ridiculed.

I see Vince respond frequently with quotes from the team and McCarthy to support his views, and if the OP's quote was tainted (or out of context), then shouldn't other quotes be tainted too? If we have to analyze and agree with what the team is saying, I don't see the point in reporting it, or debating it.

I guess it just rubbed me wrong. I see it over and over (not just from Vince), and this time it got the better of me.

[pbmax]

I just think its hard to take any coach's public comments at face value and as the complete truth. They have too many incentives to be less than forthcoming. And it doesn't take much mental flexibility to believe Jackson can handle the every down back role and still recognize that he would be close to replacement level in that role.

So for the OPs original point (I think this was it) that it might have been McCarthy's steadfast belief in Jackson that cost the Packers Lynch, that seems one big leap too many. That, plus the Lynch trade happened after Week 4, when McCarthy had two additional weeks to be underwhelmed by Jackson full time. A period, I think, that saw him give Kuhn a feature role at TB.