Packers drafting RB's

[packers11]

Whats the deal??? Rb's are dime a dozen... Do we need a new scout for RB's??? The past couple of years have been terrible... Why can't the packers draft a RB and get atleast 1k yards. It should not be that hard since they never see a stacked box...

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/positions/_/id/9/year/2012/runningbacks

Look at 3rd round or later... Bunch of players that are an upgrade over Green/Grant...

Speaking of Green, it looks like he is not fully healed or was he not that fast to begin with??? When are we going to see a 30+ yard run... I miss the days of Ahman Green

[Patler]

Speaking of Green, it looks like he is not fully healed or was he not that fast to begin with??? When are we going to see a 30+ yard run... I miss the days of Ahman Green

When? 10/7/2012 against the Colts.

Alex Green for 41:

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap1000000077828/Green-41-yard-run

[run pMc]

Well, GB had no shot at Trent Richardson, and pass rush needed help more than the running game. Tampa traded up to get the Muscle Hamster. The others are role players.
The GB offense is all about the passing game. You'd have to draft someone who is better than Rodgers right now to justify turning the offense into Minnesota Vikings East, and nobody wants to copy those weenies anyway.

M3 has started to platoon his backs more, probably out of necessity. As long as he does that GB will be hard-pressed to have a 1K+ rusher. Grant, who they just signed, was the last one, and he was an afterthought in the 2009 offense. I'm not against having a 1K rusher, I'd like it actually, but I think the last few drafts haven't had a lot TT liked. With the constellations of Cutler-Marshall-Forte, AP, and Stafford-Megatron in the division, it's hard to argue for drafting a RB who might not pan out at the expense of improving the defense.

FWIW, there isn't a single RB ranked in this upcoming draft's listing:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/rankings?year=2013

so either this is another bad year for RB's or the ESPN jerks haven't gotten around to ranking them yet.

[Lurker64]

I think it's less about scouting and more about system focus. Compare the offensive systems of Houston and Green Bay. Houston keys everything off the run, Green Bay keys everything off the pass. You've only got so much time in practice, so whatever you most want to do, you emphasize, and whatever you emphasize is what your players are best at. Houston's not a great passing team, Green Bay's not a great running team.

Regarding the draft, this tend to has the effect where Green Bay appears to value RBs less than other positions, but there's also the fact that generally when there's an RB who would be perfect for Green Bay, this player tends to get picks before it would make sense for Green Bay to select him (or alternatively a player who would be a better pick is generally available in the appropriate slot.)

It's hard to rip TT for passing on Stevan Ridley to take Randall Cobb or passing on Bernard Pierce to take Casey Hayward, even if Ridley and Pierce could have been stars in this offense.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Just take Montee Ball this next draft and be happy.

[Lurker64]

Just take Montee Ball this next draft and be happy.

It's easy to say "they should take a player", since a whole lot of players in the draft would help the Packers but you can't take all of them. So the question is "when do you take him" and "do you take him over all these other guys."

I mean, do you take him in the first round instead of a guy like John Cooper or Barrett Jones who could play Center for 10 years? Do you take him in the 2nd round instead of a guy you could develop into a stud DE like SMU's Margus Hunt? If you wait to the third, is he going to be there?

Falling in love with specific players is the mistake our previous GM made frequently, which resulted in gems like "Trading up in the fourth round to select B.J. Sander."

[Guiness]

It's easy to say "they should take a player", since a whole lot of players in the draft would help the Packers but you can't take all of them. So the question is "when do you take him" and "do you take him over all these other guys."

I mean, do you take him in the first round instead of a guy like John Cooper or Barrett Jones who could play Center for 10 years? Do you take him in the 2nd round instead of a guy you could develop into a stud DE like SMU's Margus Hunt? If you wait to the third, is he going to be there?

Falling in love with specific players is the mistake our previous GM made frequently, which resulted in gems like "Trading up in the fourth round to select B.J. Sander."

Or this past year, do you take him in the 2nd...and give up Casey Hayward's 5 INTs?

[packers11]

run pmc and Lurker that is why I said "3rd round or later" ... I believe RB's are a dime a dozen...

Patler - You know I didn't mean exactly that number...

But lets ponder this stat...

The Green Bay Packers have not had a rusher get over 100 yards in 39 REGULAR SEASON GAMES and counting...

The next team??? Carolina Panthers at 23...

I understand the packers are a pass team first... Hell... I would go to a 80/20 pass/run ratio with the talent they have at RB...

Even a team like the Saints in 2011 who had Drew Brees throw 657 pass attempts still had a couple 100 yard rushers that season...

[RashanGary]

Probably the most annoyed I was with TT was when he gave up the farm to get Clay Matthews, a guy who barely played defense in college football. With that preamble, I move on.

I am really disappointed TT didn't keep Grant.


All off season, MM talked about the running game needing to get the yards that are there and not fumble. Essentially, they were talking about Ryan Grant.

New England does it similarly to what MM wants. They get a back, who's maybe not overtalented, but a guy who can get those 4 yards regularly. Grant did that every year he was here. 2nd and 6 is a good down for us. 3rd and 3 is a good down for us. Like NE, we have more than enough big play firepower, and that firepower goes off with a much louder bang when we have favorable down and distance.

TT did the very opposite as far as how he filled out the RB roster. Starks, a pretty fast guy, big, strong. . . . Can't find a hole. Loses yards, inconsistent. . One good game this year and a few two years ago is hardly something to cream our pants over. But he has high potential. He looks, at times, like he has something special. Unfortunately, our offense is talor made for a back who gets the quick yards, even if he's not a game breaker.

Then there's Alex Green. I'll admit, I loved him at Hawaii. He's had problems hitting the inside runs and gets tackled by pinkies on outside runs. If he could step over a hand, he'd have huge runs. HUGE. If you look at some of the space he's had, it's sick. Tackled every time. He also gets tackled sideways and backwards more than I've ever seen in a RB. I didn't know it was even possible to be such a pussy. High potential though. Great in the open field, fast. . . Has some game breaker qualities.

TT took flyers on big time talent when all we needed was a good back. Look at NE. Our defense is a lot better than theirs. Their offense is a lot better than ours. Why? Consistent, but unspectacular running. Favorable down and distance. Exactly what MM wanted, exactly what RG gave us.

[Patler]

run pmc and Lurker that is why I said "3rd round or later" ... I believe RB's are a dime a dozen...

Patler - You know I didn't mean exactly that number...

But lets ponder this stat...

The Green Bay Packers have not had a rusher get over 100 yards in 39 REGULAR SEASON GAMES and counting...

The next team??? Carolina Panthers at 23...

I understand the packers are a pass team first... Hell... I would go to a 80/20 pass/run ratio with the talent they have at RB...

Even a team like the Saints in 2011 who had Drew Brees throw 657 pass attempts still had a couple 100 yard rushers that season...

No I didn't think you meant any particular number, I thought you meant a long run, and they did have one this year; but that doesn't say much. It was just the one over.

With how little they run the ball to begin with, and the way they now tend to divide carries among several backs, it is hard for any packers runner to go over 100.

[Cheesehead Craig]

It's easy to say "they should take a player", since a whole lot of players in the draft would help the Packers but you can't take all of them. So the question is "when do you take him" and "do you take him over all these other guys."

I mean, do you take him in the first round instead of a guy like John Cooper or Barrett Jones who could play Center for 10 years? Do you take him in the 2nd round instead of a guy you could develop into a stud DE like SMU's Margus Hunt? If you wait to the third, is he going to be there?

Falling in love with specific players is the mistake our previous GM made frequently, which resulted in gems like "Trading up in the fourth round to select B.J. Sander."

Not saying to trade up to take a player over his value. My point with bringing up Ball is that he's a quality, proven talent at a position of great need on the Packers. Fine, replace his name with another proven RB that has a history of making tough runs and not get tackled by someone's pinky.

My point is invest a quality pick for a quality player at the RB position. It's been ignorned for far too long of a time and the offense is showing the lack of a running game this year is adversely affecting it. The league caught up to the Pack with their pass pass pass offense from last year. They need a tough RB and TT needs to get one and likely he'll have to pay for it.

[ThunderDan]

Probably the most annoyed I was with TT was when he gave up the farm to get Clay Matthews, a guy who barely played defense in college football. With that preamble, I move on.

I am really disappointed TT didn't keep Grant.


All off season, MM talked about the running game needing to get the yards that are there and not fumble. Essentially, they were talking about Ryan Grant.

New England does it similarly to what MM wants. They get a back, who's maybe not overtalented, but a guy who can get those 4 yards regularly. Grant did that every year he was here. 2nd and 6 is a good down for us. 3rd and 3 is a good down for us. Like NE, we have more than enough big play firepower, and that firepower goes off with a much louder bang when we have favorable down and distance.

TT did the very opposite as far as how he filled out the RB roster. Starks, a pretty fast guy, big, strong. . . . Can't find a hole. Loses yards, inconsistent. . One good game this year and a few two years ago is hardly something to cream our pants over. But he has high potential. He looks, at times, like he has something special. Unfortunately, our offense is talor made for a back who gets the quick yards, even if he's not a game breaker.

Then there's Alex Green. I'll admit, I loved him at Hawaii. He's had problems hitting the inside runs and gets tackled by pinkies on outside runs. If he could step over a hand, he'd have huge runs. HUGE. If you look at some of the space he's had, it's sick. Tackled every time. He also gets tackled sideways and backwards more than I've ever seen in a RB. I didn't know it was even possible to be such a pussy. High potential though. Great in the open field, fast. . . Has some game breaker qualities.

TT took flyers on big time talent when all we needed was a good back. Look at NE. Our defense is a lot better than theirs. Their offense is a lot better than ours. Why? Consistent, but unspectacular running. Favorable down and distance. Exactly what MM wanted, exactly what RG gave us.

I thought Benson was very effect before he went out.

[Lurker64]

Not saying to trade up to take a player over his value. My point with bringing up Ball is that he's a quality, proven talent at a position of great need on the Packers. Fine, replace his name with another proven RB that has a history of making tough runs and not get tackled by someone's pinky.

My point is invest a quality pick for a quality player at the RB position. It's been ignorned for far too long of a time and the offense is showing the lack of a running game this year is adversely affecting it. The league caught up to the Pack with their pass pass pass offense from last year. They need a tough RB and TT needs to get one and likely he'll have to pay for it.

But there are still guys in this draft I would jump to take who are not running backs, and I would be satisfied with the draft when those selections preclude spending a high pick on a known quantity at RB.

I mean, potentia stud S, potential stud C, potential stud DE, quality WR, or "average starting quality RB"?

[Smeefers]

I would have no problem what so ever if TT drafted O and D line in the first 3 rounds every year.

That being said, our only substantial weakness - when everyone is healthy - is at RB. You might be able to throw in LT, but I think Newhouse is serviceable and I haven't given up on Sherrod yet. Next year they're going to be drafting to replace guys like Woodson and Picket, who are getting a little long in the tooth, but those are guys we still have who can still perform. We don't have anyone who performs on a regular basis at RB. I think proof enough of this was when Benson came in and everyone gave a big sigh of relief and said "now that's what a back is supposed to look like." Some washed up 30+ old back who didn't have a hint of interest from any other team got that kind of response from the fans. All he did was cut once, bruise a guy and fall forward and most fans were in seventh heaven.

I believe our team has been built to be good for years to come, after years and years of putting it together. I think last years draft was proof that we have the ability to go from best player available to best player available that we need. If we reach for a RB who could go early to middle second round with our late first round, I wouldn't mind. It would be nice to get that last need out of the way. Then we can keep on keepin on and actually go back to what got us to where we are, best player available. I'm not saying I would pass on a home run to reach for a RB that can play well, but I'd pass on a ground rule double.

[pbmax]

NE has a better line (Tackles plus Mankins whenever he is healthy) and the Packers have better receivers.

I like the dual TE approach to forcing teams to play nickel and get run on or play base and watch a LB cover a TE.

[LegandofthePack15]

Just take Montee Ball this next draft and be happy.

Ball might be too slow to be a star in the NFL. Then again, they said the same thing about Emmitt Smith. But then again, Smith has been retired for awhile and we have yet seen the next Emmitt Smith.

If you're gonna draft an "overrated" Badger rb, wait for James White. This guy is lightning fast.

Yes, Badger rbs are overrated. When's the last time one had any success in the NFL?

[woodbuck27]

Can you imagine having this fella in Green Bay? A 6th round draft pick.

Alfred Morris:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Morris_(American_football)

The PACKERS deserve a decent RB.

GO PACK GO !

[mraynrand]

Ball might be too slow to be a star in the NFL. Then again, they said the same thing about Emmitt Smith. But then again, Smith has been retired for awhile and we have yet seen the next Emmitt Smith.

You don't see a lot of O-lines like Dallas had in the 90s. Maybe the Redskins are getting there...

[Cheesehead Craig]

But there are still guys in this draft I would jump to take who are not running backs, and I would be satisfied with the draft when those selections preclude spending a high pick on a known quantity at RB.

I mean, potentia stud S, potential stud C, potential stud DE, quality WR, or "average starting quality RB"?

Ah yes, all your options are studs, but a RB is average. Nice argument. :bs:

[pbmax]

Ah yes, all your options are studs, but a RB is average. Nice argument. :bs:

Careful CC, Lurker has already got a Big Board for the draft class of 2015 on his computer. :lol:

Reasonable chance he knows already. In so far as one can in the draft.

[woodbuck27]

Careful CC, Lurker has already got a Big Board for the draft class of 2015 on his computer. :lol:

Reasonable chance he knows already. In so far as one can in the draft.

Great ! Then Lurker64 can inform us of the best possible ROUND FOUR through SIX picks at RB.

[run pMc]

that is why I said "3rd round or later" ... I believe RB's are a dime a dozen...

Yeah, I think the prevailing belief is that you don't have to spend a high pick to get at least a decent RB. Most recently, Alfred Morris and Daryl Richardson are proof. Awfully tough to hit on those, though.
I do think TT is going to have to address WR, OL, and RB in the next draft. That's assuming DD & GJ aren't with the team. Whether he takes a RB in R3 or higher is a complete mystery to me, and with Lattimore hurt I can't think of another high round back.

Either way, I totally agree the running game needs improvement. Watching teams dare GB to run and fail at it is pretty frustrating.

What's the success rate on converting 3rd and 1 with a run this year?

[Lurker64]

Careful CC, Lurker has already got a Big Board for the draft class of 2015 on his computer. :lol:

Reasonable chance he knows already. In so far as one can in the draft.

Well, the thing to keep in mind is that this is not a great class for RBs (or QBs or OTs for that matter). There are no first round calibre RBs this year (what with Lattimore's injury) and someone (hopefully not us) is probably going to end up reaching for an RB in the first round anyway. When you take 2nd round guys in the first round at a position because you "need" one that hurts the quality of the position for the rest of the draft. Best bet would probably be to try to get Lattimore in the fourth round if he's there and wait a year for his knees to heal (a la Michael Bush's broken leg.)

This is a strong year for some things the Packers could use (DL, pass rushers, interior OL, safeties), so most likely the players available at those positions will be stronger in any given round than the weaker positions.

So in round 1, take the best value available at a premium position (running back is not a premium position). In rounds 2 or later, take the best value available at whatever position. If that's a running back, so be it.

But don't take a running back a round or two early because you think you need one, particularly since this is a position where late round and undrafted guys do find success (e.g. Arian Foster, Alfred Morris, Bryce Brown). Just because an RB is good in college doesn't mean he's going to set the NFL on fire anyway, every running back who gets drafted high was good in college but not all of them (e.g. Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, Darren McFadden, Reggie Bush, CJ Spiller, Ryan Matthews, Knowshon Moreno, Jonathan Stewart; all taken in the top 15 picks) have really helped their team that much (even if they might have helped your fantasy team.)

There are no sure things at any position in the draft. You just make your board, and you trust your board and you try to maximize value, in the sense that you want to take the guys who have the highest probability of being good players who help your team.

[woodbuck27]

Hey Lurker64. How about Vontaze Burfect!?

Vontaze Burfict: From Draft Disaster to Cincinnati Bengals Starter

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1363268-vontaze-burfict-from-draft-disaster-to-cincinnati-bengals-starter

Vontaze Burfect Nominated for NFL Rookie of the month in October 2012

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2012/11/1/3586862/bengals-linebacker-vontaze-burfict-nominated-for-nfl-rookie-of-the

Time For Vontaze Burfict To Receive Early Discussion For Rookie Award

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2012/10/25/3551820/vontaze-burfict-defensive-rookie-of-the-year

Vontaze Burfect NFL Stat's 2012 ....Rookie Year

http://www.nfl.com/player/vontazeburfict/2533058/profile

[woodbuck27]

Well, the thing to keep in mind is that this is not a great class for RBs (or QBs or OTs for that matter). There are no first round calibre RBs this year (what with Lattimore's injury) and someone (hopefully not us) is probably going to end up reaching for an RB in the first round anyway. When you take 2nd round guys in the first round at a position because you "need" one that hurts the quality of the position for the rest of the draft. Best bet would probably be to try to get Lattimore in the fourth round if he's there and wait a year for his knees to heal (a la Michael Bush's broken leg.)

This is a strong year for some things the Packers could use (DL, pass rushers, interior OL, safeties), so most likely the players available at those positions will be stronger in any given round than the weaker positions.

So in round 1, take the best value available at a premium position (running back is not a premium position). In rounds 2 or later, take the best value available at whatever position. If that's a running back, so be it.

But don't take a running back a round or two early because you think you need one, particularly since this is a position where late round and undrafted guys do find success (e.g. Arian Foster, Alfred Morris, Bryce Brown). Just because an RB is good in college doesn't mean he's going to set the NFL on fire anyway, every running back who gets drafted high was good in college but not all of them (e.g. Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson, Darren McFadden, Reggie Bush, CJ Spiller, Ryan Matthews, Knowshon Moreno, Jonathan Stewart; all taken in the top 15 picks) have really helped their team that much (even if they might have helped your fantasy team.)

There are no sure things at any position in the draft. You just make your board, and you trust your board and you try to maximize value, in the sense that you want to take the guys who have the highest probability of being good players who help your team.

Nice post Lurker64. Thanks for the insight we need from a Packer fan that has the inside on the NFL Draft.

GO PACKERS !

[Lurker64]

Hey Lurker64. How about Vontaze Burfect!?

Vontaze Burfict: From Draft Disaster to Cincinnati Bengals Starter

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1363268-vontaze-burfict-from-draft-disaster-to-cincinnati-bengals-starter

Vontaze Burfect Nominated for NFL Rookie of the month in October 2012

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2012/11/1/3586862/bengals-linebacker-vontaze-burfict-nominated-for-nfl-rookie-of-the

Time For Vontaze Burfict To Receive Early Discussion For Rookie Award

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2012/10/25/3551820/vontaze-burfict-defensive-rookie-of-the-year

Vontaze Burfect NFL Stat's 2012 ....Rookie Year

http://www.nfl.com/player/vontazeburfict/2533058/profile

Every draft has guys who surprise a lot of people (both positively and negatively). I would point out that the story on Burfict isn't finished yet. Kid played great in 2010 at ASU, and he played like garbage at ASU in 2011. In 2012, for the Bengals he's pretty good. Who knows what's going to happen in 2013? Reportedly he's not the best guy in the locker room when things aren't going well, but things are going well for the Bengals right now.

There's a reason it's best to wait a few years before doing the post-mortem on a draft.

[Bretsky]

It's easy to say "they should take a player", since a whole lot of players in the draft would help the Packers but you can't take all of them. So the question is "when do you take him" and "do you take him over all these other guys."

I mean, do you take him in the first round instead of a guy like John Cooper or Barrett Jones who could play Center for 10 years? Do you take him in the 2nd round instead of a guy you could develop into a stud DE like SMU's Margus Hunt? If you wait to the third, is he going to be there?

Falling in love with specific players is the mistake our previous GM made frequently, which resulted in gems like "Trading up in the fourth round to select B.J. Sander."


Didn't you use this argument for not drafting Brooks Reed in round one ? Just saying........TT would probably take that after seeing ho w it turned out

[woodbuck27]

Every draft has guys who surprise a lot of people (both positively and negatively). I would point out that the story on Burfict isn't finished yet. Kid played great in 2010 at ASU, and he played like garbage at ASU in 2011. In 2012, for the Bengals he's pretty good. Who knows what's going to happen in 2013? Reportedly he's not the best guy in the locker room when things aren't going well, but things are going well for the Bengals right now.

There's a reason it's best to wait a few years before doing the post-mortem on a draft.

I won't disagree with your view here Lucker64. I just wanted to point out that V. Burfect is playing very well in the NFL so far with a team that did give him the opportunity and since TC it's been all positive.

[KYPack]

Every draft has guys who surprise a lot of people (both positively and negatively). I would point out that the story on Burfict isn't finished yet. Kid played great in 2010 at ASU, and he played like garbage at ASU in 2011. In 2012, for the Bengals he's pretty good. Who knows what's going to happen in 2013? Reportedly he's not the best guy in the locker room when things aren't going well, but things are going well for the Bengals right now.

There's a reason it's best to wait a few years before doing the post-mortem on a draft.

Burfict is a clinic on what NOT to do in your senior year if you are a projected #1 pick.

The coaches down there were universally pissed at him and sandbagged the hell out of him when talking to the scouts.

He then had awful interviews and ran a glacial 40 at the combine.

Result?

UDFA, down from a projected #1 pick.

The Bengals got a starting ILB without burning a pick. And they got the one thing every NFL staff craves.

A humble rookie.

This kid is a cocky bitch, but he hasn't opened his yap all year.

He's has been potty trained by that long fall on draft day.

[RashanGary]

I think I'd prefer a star safety.


Giants (Rolle and Phillips)
Packers (Collins)
Saints (Sharper)
Steelers (Polumalu)
Giants (Phillips)
Colts (Bob Sanders in prime)
Steelers (Polumalu)
Patriots (Rodney Harrison)
Patriots (Harrison)
Buccaneers (Lynch)
Patriots (Harrison)
Ravens (Reed)
Rams (Major Exception)
Broncos (Atwater)
Broncos (Atwater)
Packers (Butler)
49ers (major exception)
Cowboys (Darren Woodson)
Cowboys (Darren Woodson)
Redskins (Exception as far as I know)
Giants (Exception as far as I know)
49ers (Ronny Lott)
49ers (Ronny Lott)



By and large, it's a list of who's who among tops safeties at their particular time in the game. For whatever reason, safeties seem to make a huge difference in a defense. In the last 12 years, I don't think one team has won a SB without a probowl safety. The same can't be said about RB. It's almost exactly the opposite. RB has been one of the least important positions the last 12 years.

Elite QB
Elite S
Pass rush

Those seem to be the common themes in SB winning teams as of late.

[denverYooper]

Man, I miss Nick Collins now.

[Lurker64]

I think I'd prefer a star safety.

Couple of good safeties should be slotted about where the Packers pick: Vaccaro out of Texas, Elam out of Florida, Amerson out of NC State (he played CB, but he's a FS in the NFL), McDonald out of USC, and a few other guys could be in the conversation for the Packers on days 1 and 2. There's not the enormous dropoff after the first or second tier of safeties like there was last year, and to be honest I like Vacarro more than I liked Barron last year (who went 7th, largely due to positional scarcity.)

[woodbuck27]

I think I'd prefer a star safety.


Giants (Rolle and Phillips)
Packers (Collins)
Saints (Sharper)
Steelers (Polumalu)
Giants (Phillips)
Colts (Bob Sanders in prime)
Steelers (Polumalu)
Patriots (Rodney Harrison)
Patriots (Harrison)
Buccaneers (Lynch)
Patriots (Harrison)
Ravens (Reed)
Rams (Major Exception)
Broncos (Atwater)
Broncos (Atwater)
Packers (Butler)
49ers (major exception)
Cowboys (Darren Woodson)
Cowboys (Darren Woodson)
Redskins (Exception as far as I know)
Giants (Exception as far as I know)
49ers (Ronny Lott)
49ers (Ronny Lott)



By and large, it's a list of who's who among tops safeties at their particular time in the game. For whatever reason, safeties seem to make a huge difference in a defense. In the last 12 years, I don't think one team has won a SB without a probowl safety. The same can't be said about RB. It's almost exactly the opposite. RB has been one of the least important positions the last 12 years.

Elite QB
Elite S
Pass rush

Those seem to be the common themes in SB winning teams as of late.

Solid observation.

[rbaloha1]

The Packers need to place an emphasis on drafting a big time back just like they did for defensive players this year.

Move up and snag a good one.

[Smidgeon]

Couple of good safeties should be slotted about where the Packers pick: Vaccaro out of Texas, Elam out of Florida, Amerson out of NC State (he played CB, but he's a FS in the NFL), McDonald out of USC, and a few other guys could be in the conversation for the Packers on days 1 and 2. There's not the enormous dropoff after the first or second tier of safeties like there was last year, and to be honest I like Vacarro more than I liked Barron last year (who went 7th, largely due to positional scarcity.)

Music to my ears. Although I'm still hoping McMillian comes on strong.

[mission]

We really need to hit on a RB even if it's a late-round pick. Can't say TT hasn't tried, but "his type" doesn't necessarily translate to the NFL. Look at all the successful types aside from AP -- they just don't share the general stature that TT has looked for.

Alex Green could have been different given his size, but he runs like a 200 lb back. Style just doesn't match his size.

[Pugger]

RBs might be a dime a dozen but the good ones are few and far between. I don't know if this is the best RB class to come out this spring so I don't know if we'll find a real good one in this draft or not.

[woodbuck27]

http://espnwisconsin.com/common/page.php?feed=2&id=5301&is_corp=1

Running to daylight?

By JASON WILDE ... jwilde@espnwisconsin.com

.... with opposing defenses insisting on playing their safeties deep in Cover-2 schemes – a tactic meant to take away the Packers’ downfield passing game while daring the Packers to run against them – the party line that the success of the Green Bay running game is measured more on the quantity of the runs than the quality is no longer valid.

Says who? Quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Fr. LINK

GO PACK GO !