Melvin Gordon [Archive] - PackerRats.com

oldbutnotdeadyet

02-22-2015, 02:11 PM

How can you pass on this guy if he is available? Him, with Lacy and this offense would be impossible to stop.

Would have to give him serious consideration if still available, I just don't think he lasts that long.

Joemailman

02-22-2015, 02:27 PM

It's a passing league, and you have arguably the best QB. I don't think having 2 outstanding RB's is that much better than having 1. And that's assuming Gordon will turn out to be significantly better than outstanding Wisconsin RB's from the past.

Carolina_Packer

02-22-2015, 02:37 PM

He would be the best player available if he lasted until #30, but he likely won't. I don't see him making it past #17 (San Diego) or #24 (Arizona). If they did somehow get Gordon, wow. He compares favorably to Jamaal Charles, and would likely make the Packers quickly forget about DuJuan Harris. Another thought, if he lasts that long, someone might want to jump into the first round and get him and that could be one of the early second round teams, ala Jordy Nelson 2008.

Tony Oday

02-22-2015, 03:14 PM

A guy like Gordon doesn't come around often, I say draft him and have one of the best prospects in years.

gbgary

02-22-2015, 04:50 PM

we need d (ilb or keep cm in the middle and get an olb) in the first rnd!

Guiness

02-22-2015, 05:56 PM

A guy like Gordon doesn't come around often, I say draft him and have one of the best prospects in years.

Lots to be said about "Can't Miss!" prospects, *cough cough* Reggie Bush *cough cough* Trent Richardson.

These guys, if nothing else, is why he's very likely to be there when the Pack picks, and why they should take a pass.

Pugger

02-22-2015, 05:58 PM

we need d (ilb or keep cm in the middle and get an olb) in the first rnd!

If Gordon is still there at #30 and no first round talented LBer is there don't be surprised if Ted takes him. He took Rodgers at #24 in 2005 when QB wasn't a pressing need. But I'll be surprised if Melvin is still there when we pick.

smuggler

02-22-2015, 06:08 PM

Reggie Bush was a good player for a few years. He's just not an all purpose back. Richardson doesn't look too hot...

texaspackerbacker

02-22-2015, 06:14 PM

I'm pleased to see the positive comments about Gordon here. The other forum where I post, a lot of people disparage the idea of drafting Gordon. I see him as being a once in a generation player - a legitimate superstar in the NFL. It will be a damn shame to see him go to anybody but the Packers - which almost certainly will happen.

Rastak

02-22-2015, 07:39 PM

A guy like Gordon doesn't come around often, I say draft him and have one of the best prospects in years.

Gurley's a better prospect, or would be for not his injury and still might go first. That said, Gordon is a monster.

King Friday

02-22-2015, 07:54 PM

Gordon is the best pure runner in the draft...but I would rather see us nab a 3rd down type back with speed and great hands out of the backfield. That is what we need...not another workhorse.

pbmax

02-22-2015, 08:06 PM

Its hard to say there are once in a generation running backs out of Wisconsin, since they all produce like nobody's business in college. But he is the best of the bunch so far.

Patler

02-22-2015, 08:09 PM

If Gordon is there when the Packers are on the clock, TT should absolutely take........the best deal he gets in a trade from someone who needs a running back.

Lacy has shown in two years that he needs carries to be most effective. Getting 10 or so a game won't do it. I think Gordon could be the same. Lacy and Gordon on the same team could be a situation where the total is less than the sum of the parts. I think they might make each other less effective, rather than more effective.

Patler

02-22-2015, 08:16 PM

If Gordon is still there at #30 and no first round talented LBer is there don't be surprised if Ted takes him. He took Rodgers at #24 in 2005 when QB wasn't a pressing need. But I'll be surprised if Melvin is still there when we pick.

I think QB was a pressing need in 2005. Favre was turning 36 and had openly talked about retirement. Providing his replacement wouldn't be a one year deal. It was definitely time to get one. Heck, Sherman admitted the year before that he would have taken Losman in the first round if the Bills hadn't traded up to get him. (We should all send thank-you cards to the Bills. Favors like that should never be forgotten!)

Bretsky

02-22-2015, 08:36 PM

I'm calling Melvin Gordon to Indy
That would be a GREAT FIT for both parties

We could call the combo Luecky Gordon

wpony

02-22-2015, 09:06 PM

Hi I am a Badger fan and a Packer fan and I loved watching Gordon run but last yr he started fumbling way to much every one complained about finly but he has better hands than Gordon at least Gordon can make it up in college in a few plays I am afraid in the pros he might not get that chance and get benched.

smuggler

02-22-2015, 09:07 PM

He won't last to Indy. The Cowpokes pick before them.

Bretsky

02-22-2015, 09:18 PM

If Dallas throws big bucks at Murray they will pass. He might not last to Indy though

smuggler

02-22-2015, 09:52 PM

Cowpokes will throw money at Bryant.

pbmax

02-22-2015, 11:34 PM

hoosier

02-23-2015, 08:32 AM

mraynrand

02-23-2015, 09:16 AM

I'm not sold on Gordon at all. He runs behind a mammoth OL and against a bunch of really slow Big 10 defenses..

Like Ohio State?

mraynrand

02-23-2015, 09:17 AM

If only Trent Richardson were available again at #2 - I'd take him.

Bossman641

02-23-2015, 10:24 AM

Gordon is fantastic but there is no need to have him and Lacy. Bigger needs elsewhere.

ThunderDan

02-23-2015, 10:49 AM

I'm not sold on Gordon at all. He runs behind a mammoth OL and against a bunch of really slow Big 10 defenses. It will be a different story in the NFL, and if he cannot break off the long runs several times a game I'm not sure how much he can add. GB doesn't need a second running back, it needs help on defense, more depth at WR, and if possible a TE who can take attention away from Nelson. Pass on Gordon.

That's what the RB from Auburn said before the Bowl game. He said if Gordon played against SEC Ds he wouldn't have gotten the yardage.

Melvin put up 251 yards against Auburn and had put up 140 against LSU in a half earlier in the year.

pbmax

02-23-2015, 10:50 AM

Bowl game wins are the best.

Cheesehead Craig

02-23-2015, 10:54 AM

He compares favorably to Jamaal Charles, and would likely make the Packers quickly forget about DuJuan Harris.

What's a DuJuan Harris?

As much as I like Gordon, I agree with Patler, take the trade if he's still there. We have bigger needs and frankly, I'm good with Lacy and Starks in the backfield.

MadScientist

02-23-2015, 10:55 AM

If he's there at 30, you pass on him by trading down for someone who really want's him. Worked well when Monte Ball was available.

Pugger

02-23-2015, 11:44 AM

If he's there at 30, you pass on him by trading down for someone who really want's him. Worked well when Monte Ball was available.

The only way you trade down there is if there is no NT or ILB worth taking at #30 left on your board. From all accounts this is a good year for D linemen, especially tackles.

mraynrand

02-23-2015, 11:51 AM

Pugger

02-23-2015, 11:57 AM

There's no way Gordie drops, but if he did, I'd take him in a heartbeat. Lacy=concussions all the time. I see a very short career, maybe three more years, with lots of missed games. Gordie would be a huge upgrade over the Stark plug and would provide the third down dynamism of the refrigerator delivery guy's high school friend.

Another issue with Lacy is his asthma which is aggravated by cold weather. I too think he'd be a major upgrade over Starks. But I don't think he'll be there at 30 either.

Zool

02-23-2015, 12:55 PM

It's pronounced Gore-Dahn

mraynrand

02-23-2015, 01:15 PM

It's pronounced Gore-Dahn

Thanks, LeRoy!

Guiness

02-23-2015, 02:04 PM

Thanks, LeRoy!

So long at A aron gets it right in the huddle

Carolina_Packer

02-23-2015, 03:40 PM

If only Trent Richardson were available again at #2 - I'd take him.

He will be available and at this point is playing like #2.

Bretsky

02-23-2015, 09:44 PM

pbmax

02-23-2015, 10:05 PM

From JSO and Dunne: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/wisconsins-melvin-gordon-delivers-powerful-impression-at-nfl-combine-b99450180z1-293766851.html

So while Ohio State cornerback Doran Grant describes Gordon as "very athletic, very loose," a "long-strider" who can stretch the field any given moment, he also knows he's not unstoppable.

"We just built a wall up front," Grant said, "and made him go east and west and he couldn't get upfield."

Because if there is one catch to Gordon's game, this is it. His propensity to bounce outside. On 19.2% of his runs, according to NFL.com, Gordon was stuffed for zero or negative yards.

smuggler

02-23-2015, 10:19 PM

I don't think our offensive line is the right situation for him.

Patler

02-24-2015, 01:21 AM

This sounds impressive:

In Indianapolis, Gordon measured 6-foot-1, 215 pounds with 32 3/8-inch arms and 9 3/4-inch hands. His 4.52 seconds in the 40 was fifth best at his position. He bench-pressed 225 pounds 19 times. Maybe most telling, his 20-yard shuttle was second (4.07 seconds) and his 60-yard shuttle (11 seconds flat) was the best the event has seen at running back the last 10 years.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/wisconsins-melvin-gordon-delivers-powerful-impression-at-nfl-combine-b99450180z1-293766851.html

Patler

02-24-2015, 01:32 AM

Is this as bad as it sounds?

On 19.2% of his runs, according to NFL.com, Gordon was stuffed for zero or negative yards.

It is a stat I have not seen reported for other backs. There is nothing to compare it to. It sounds bad, though.

smuggler

02-24-2015, 01:46 AM

It's one of five. Sounds about right for an NFL back, but a little concerning for a back running behind a Wisconsin oline against a full spectrum of college-level run defenses....

Patler

02-24-2015, 01:50 AM

It's one of five. Sounds about right for an NFL back, but a little concerning for a back running behind a Wisconsin oline against a full spectrum of college-level run defenses....

That sounds high to me for an NFL back, but, as I wrote above, I have nothing to compare it to.

ThunderDan

02-24-2015, 07:55 AM

Is this as bad as it sounds?

It is a stat I have not seen reported for other backs. There is nothing to compare it to. It sounds bad, though.

There was no QB on the Badgers who could complete a pass with any consistency. If you want to put 8 in the box and force Melvin to bounce outside good QBs in the NFL will audible to a pass and torch the D. Wisconsin couldn't do that.

vince

02-24-2015, 08:03 AM

I hope Gordon has a great career but my sense is that he's over-rated some. He'll be dependent on having a good line to excel in the NFL. Get him some space to get going and he's great. Make him elude a tackler early and he's below average there.

He did have good shuttle times, average 3-cone and a disappointing 40 at the combine. He'll likely improve the 40 at his pro day.

I don't think the Packers will have a chance to draft him, which I'm frankly hoping for because RB is the least of their needs so hopefully someone else drops to them.

Pugger

02-24-2015, 08:03 AM

There was no QB on the Badgers who could complete a pass with any consistency. If you want to put 8 in the box and force Melvin to bounce outside good QBs in the NFL will audible to a pass and torch the D. Wisconsin couldn't do that.

Yes, Melvin (and RB Cory Clement) was basically all Bucky had last year. Besides no QB Wisconsin didn't have a decent WR either. Their QB Stave is horrendous. He is a big kid but throws a poor pass and never looks off his receivers. It was a miracle they won as many games as they did.

Tony Oday

02-24-2015, 08:05 AM

Is there one RB in the NFL that is good behind a crap Oline?

vince

02-24-2015, 08:08 AM

Is there one RB in the NFL that is good behind a crap Oline?
Point taken. I'd take Eddy over most in making someone miss in traffic.

Patler

02-24-2015, 08:17 AM

Is there one RB in the NFL that is good behind a crap Oline?

Eddie Lacy? I know the composition has changed, but three years ago the Packer O-line was not perceived well in either run blocking or pass protection. Now, it seems to be well thought of for both.

Maybe they weren't as bad as some perceived 3-4 years ago?
Maybe they aren't as good as some see them now?
Maybe a guy like Lacy makes the difference?

pbmax

02-24-2015, 08:55 AM

There was no QB on the Badgers who could complete a pass with any consistency. If you want to put 8 in the box and force Melvin to bounce outside good QBs in the NFL will audible to a pass and torch the D. Wisconsin couldn't do that.

That is why its hard to project him. Unless its late game and his team is running out the clock, he won't face 11 in the box with run blitzing like he did versus Ohio State.

Badgers also had tough time with quick D Tackles and gave up a lot of tackles for loss on penetration.

The only way to tell might be to compare him year over year with different interior O line. The Badger O line is not what it once was.

pbmax

02-24-2015, 08:57 AM

Eddie Lacy? I know the composition has changed, but three years ago the Packer O-line was not perceived well in either run blocking or pass protection. Now, it seems to be well thought of for both.

Maybe they weren't as bad as some perceived 3-4 years ago?
Maybe they aren't as good as some see them now?
Maybe a guy like Lacy makes the difference?

I think both Lacy and Starks go forward after contact more often than Gordon, though like Starks (unlike Lacy) he usually doesn't take a direct hit. Actually, Starks isn't a bad comparison for running style. A bit upright, great first step. Gordon is better on the edge though. If MG3 could run the zone one cut like Starks, he will do well.

MG3 has more shake too.

sharpe1027

02-24-2015, 10:59 AM

Is this as bad as it sounds?

It is a stat I have not seen reported for other backs. There is nothing to compare it to. It sounds bad, though.

Not in my book. I can't predict success in the NFL with any accuracy, but I know that this was the worst combination of QB and receiver (TE included) play I have seen from Wisco since Alvarez turned the corner. More importantly, I am willing to bet that the stat is a product of several games where the OL got worked over badly. This year's OL was not one of their best. Granted, they have a pretty high bar from years past.

I don't recall many instances thinking MG missed a hole. I think he will be a good back, but don't expect him to break NFL records. In today's game RBs just don't matter as much as they used to.

sharpe1027

02-24-2015, 11:05 AM

I think both Lacy and Starks go forward after contact more often than Gordon, though like Starks (unlike Lacy) he usually doesn't take a direct hit. Actually, Starks isn't a bad comparison for running style. A bit upright, great first step. Gordon is better on the edge though. If MG3 could run the zone one cut like Starks, he will do well.

MG3 has more shake too.

Starks is a very straight line runner in comparison. MG has outstanding vision and takes great angles in tight spaces. Not sure who has better 40 time, but MG sure looks a lot faster on the field. They do both run upright a bit, but MG seems to get low more often and drive the legs when making contact.

Pugger

02-24-2015, 11:11 AM

Starks' 40 = 4.5

Gordon's 40 = 4.52

Carolina_Packer

02-24-2015, 12:35 PM

Eddie Lacy? I know the composition has changed, but three years ago the Packer O-line was not perceived well in either run blocking or pass protection. Now, it seems to be well thought of for both.

Maybe they weren't as bad as some perceived 3-4 years ago?
Maybe they aren't as good as some see them now?
Maybe a guy like Lacy makes the difference?

And yet, there are games where they can't consistently get a good push up front for Eddie, and he has to do a lot of the work himself. Now, is that the line's fault, or Eddie not always being able to read the holes and cut back lanes consistently?

Do you think a running back can improve his vision, or ability to read and react to running lanes?

texaspackerbacker

02-24-2015, 12:58 PM

Lacy rumbles like a tank once he gets going, but he is a slow starter. He also doesn't have breakaway speed. I see Gordon as a runner with the vision and ability to break tackles of Demarco Murray but with a lot more speed. Any runner is better with a good O Line, obviously. The quality of the O Line makes more difference with a runner like Lacy than with a runner of like Gordon. Bottom line, though, there is no "runner like Gordon" playing football right now. He's the best I've seen since O.J.

MadScientist

02-24-2015, 01:21 PM

Maybe Gordon will be a good one in the NFL, but Wisconsin backs have had too much of a history of being overrated. Still we'll probably get to see him a couple of times a year, in purple.

mraynrand

02-24-2015, 02:02 PM

Bottom line, though, there is no "runner like Gordon" playing football right now. He's the best I've seen since O.J.

that's just silly. There were several running backs in the Big Ten near Gordon's level.

pbmax

02-25-2015, 08:54 AM

Well, Mike Freeman is on board the Gordon train.

1. "Marshawn Gordon"

If there was one thing I heard repeatedly from scouts I trust while covering the NFL Scouting Combine, it was this: The player who isn't a quarterback who can transform an offense, almost overnight, is Wisconsin running back Melvin Gordon.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2375072-mike-freemans-10-point-stance-is-this-draft-prospect-nfls-next-beast-mode

Though I tend to think this is smoke from at least one of his sources. Gordon, even if he is viewed as guaranteed to make it big, is more Murray than Lynch.

Pugger

02-25-2015, 10:55 AM

Is there one RB in the NFL that is good behind a crap Oline?

Not since Barry Sanders. ;-)

Patler

03-05-2015, 06:50 AM

I see Gordon as a runner with the vision and ability to break tackles of Demarco Murray but with a lot more speed. ... Bottom line, though, there is no "runner like Gordon" playing football right now. He's the best I've seen since O.J.

Yet, on talent alone Greg Gabriel at NFP would rate Gordon only the #3 back in the draft. He ranks Gurley #3 only because of the injury, but says he would be the unquestioned #1 but for the injury. As it is, he has Coleman as #1, Gordon #2, Gurley #3

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/the-nfl-drafts-5-best-running-backs/