running backs

[Harlan Huckleby]

Why do the Packer running backs suck so bad? I know Lacy is above average, but he only is available half the time.

Been watching some other teams. Chicago plugs in a backup, Jordan Howard, who is supposed to be nothing special. Boom! Look at Minnesota's backups, Assiata and McKinnon, both are effective. Alfred Morris is pretty decent behind the golden boy there in Dallas, Elliott.

It's not fair, I tell you. It's just not fair.

[King Friday]

Thompson does not value the position of RB...which is probably fine since his selections for the most part have been mediocre at best on the whole.

[Maxie the Taxi]

This past draft was pretty deep in running backs. I truly expected TT to draft one late. I was hoping for Tyler Ervin.

Really, the problem is, I think, TT and/or Stubby really don't have a firm idea of what type RB they want, i.e., a Lacy clone, a scat back, etc.

[beveaux1]

I think the biggest problem has been pass protect. The smaller, quicker 3rd down backs have to be able to blitz pick up first. If you don't trust them to block a blitzer, they can't see the field. It's a lot tougher for a small back to do well at blocking.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think the biggest problem has been pass protect. The smaller, quicker 3rd down backs have to be able to blitz pick up first. If you don't trust them to block a blitzer, they can't see the field. It's a lot tougher for a small back to do well at blocking.

They don't seem to use Starks as a blocker - although maybe he has to stay home on blitzes. Starks doesn't even run pass patterns, he just drifts downfield on pass plays as the check down. Kind of sad how predictable his role is.

There always seems to be a glut of decent running backs; it's the easiest position on the team to fill. Yet all we got is a battered starter and a worthless #2.

[King Friday]

There always seems to be a glut of decent running backs; it's the easiest position on the team to fill. Yet all we got is a battered starter and a worthless #2.

It is a position where very few guys last more than 3-4 years in the league. You almost have to find a RB every year to add to the roster that can contribute as a runner. This is even more true for Green Bay, because you damn well know Ted ain't spending money on any RB equivalent to the top 10-15 at the position or bringing in a free agent...so we will ALWAYS be rotating guys there.

Ted's drafted 2 guys in the last 7 years who have been contributors to the running game. He hasn't brought in anything in free agency over that period either. As a former LB, Ted simply hates RBs even if they are being put on his team.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think the biggest problem has been pass protect. The smaller, quicker 3rd down backs have to be able to blitz pick up first. If you don't trust them to block a blitzer, they can't see the field. It's a lot tougher for a small back to do well at blocking.All true. However, nowadays a quick, pass receiving "3rd down back" doesn't necessarily have to be small or a weak blocker. And then you have to weigh the benefits against the costs. I think a really good pass receiving 3rd down back that can make people miss would improve the team's chances to gain 1st downs, as opposed to one who's primarily a blocker. I'm thinking of James White of the Patriots and a former Badger. He's not a blocker of the caliber of John Kuhn, but he could help us immensely in 3rd and long, especially if we need to beat an all out blitz.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The party line is that they have two 3rd down backs, Cobb & Montgomery. I call bullshit.

[texaspackerbacker]

I suppose this is a bad time to mention it - after a good week last week, but I'd say the reason the Packers get less benefit out of Lacy and Starks than the Vikings do out of their couple of journeymen and the Bears maybe with Howard as well as a lot of other teams with pretty much no name RBs is our O Line. The exception to that, though, is Ezekiel Elliot, who is the real deal - a rare combination of speed and power and instinctiveness - not to mention the great O Line he has to run behind.

There's a LOT of things I don't like about Ted Thompson, but his tendency to "not value" or at least seldom draft high RBs is one thing I agree with. More often than not, great college RBs are either not so great in the NFL or else burn out quick or both.

I do like the idea of Cobb and/or Montgomery as 3rd down type backs, but it seems like McCarthy hardly ever uses them that way - pass patterns out of the backfield, safety valve, etc.

[Zool]

Asiata and McKinnon were both drafted by the Vikings. Asiata would have a tough time beating Kuhn in a footrace, but McKinnon looks like the real deal.

[pbmax]

Starks blocks a lot. On almost everything but a called screen he checks pass pressure/blitz first then releases for a pass.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Starks blocks a lot. On almost everything but a called screen he checks pass pressure/blitz first then releases for a pass.

He does not block alot. I watched him closely last week on pass plays. I agree he will pick up a blitz if he is in position to catch it. But he quickly makes his way past blockers. Look next week, you can school me if I am wrong.Most passplays he appears to be meandering down field like it's bar time.

[Rutnstrut]

The way Kuhn has looked for the Saints it would have made more sense to let Starks go and keep Kuhn. I know he's a FB, but he could always be an emergency RB. Plus he can block well. They should have kept Kuhn and picked up a young RB. Yet another brain dead move by TT, and stubby.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Releasing Kuhn was a no brainer, not a dead brainer. Kuhn has scored some TDs for New Orleans. Is his overall play still at high level? Maybe so. If so, I still say TT made a reasonable choice by keeping 1 FB. I'm not moved by Kuhn's emergency RB potential. But pretty much everybody and their uncle agrees that Starks has been a dud, they should have gone younger and quicker.

[Patler]

Is everyone forgetting that Starks had his best season in 2015?

601 yards rushing with a 4.1/carry average.
392 yards on 43 receptions for a 9.2/reception average.

Maybe Starks fell off the cliff over the off-season, but from his performance last year he should have been expected to be more than adequate as a backup this year, and a decent receiver out of the backfield. He was good as a receiver in college (127 receptions in 3 years) but never had a lot of opportunities with the Packers until 2015.

Whether the fans like it or not, Cobb and Montgomery WILL be used out of the backfield. So long as that continues, there is no reason for a 3rd RB on the roster if the first two are healthy. If Lacy is out this week, GB probably will sign another RB, but it is a wasted roster spot if the #1 and #2 are healthy so long as Cobb and Montgomery continue being used out of the backfield as they have been. It would be different if the #3 RB was the primary KO or punt return man, or was otherwise a beast on special teams, but that not being the case the #3 RB won't be active on game days anyway. If they need him active due to injuries, they will sign one for the week(s) he is needed.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Maybe Starks fell off the cliff over the off-season,

yes, that's what happened. They should have seen it in preseason and cut him. Not too late to find a better player.

I agree that carrying a #3 is not ideal, but if TT is unwilling to admit his mistake with Starks, then carrying a #3 is better than the situation they have now.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Keeping Montgomery and/or Cobb in the backfield (I seem to remember one snap where they both were there) is cute, but someone please refresh my memory...has anything good ever happened from that set? IMO Montgomery looks out of his element back there and Cobb doesn't have the acceleration he used to have. Neither one of them looks much like Darren Sproles.

[Patler]

yes, that's what happened. They should have seen it in preseason and cut him. Not too late to find a better player.

I agree that carrying a #3 is not ideal, but if TT is unwilling to admit his mistake with Starks, then carrying a #3 is better than the situation they have now.

Preseason didn't prove anything with respect to Starks. It would have been premature to release him based on 15-20 carries in an offense run by a 3rd or 4th string QB behind 2nd string linemen and linemen who are no longer in the NFL. It might even be premature to give up on him completely based on 4 games so far, but they do need to be working on a contingency plan (and I suspect they have).

[Patler]

Keeping Montgomery and/or Cobb in the backfield (I seem to remember one snap where they both were there) is cute, but someone please refresh my memory...has anything good ever happened from that set? IMO Montgomery looks out of his element back there and Cobb doesn't have the acceleration he used to have. Neither one of them looks much like Darren Sproles.

Last year it was a new wrinkle that looked like it had potential. Not so much this year.

Some pre-draft summaries pegged Montgomery as having more potential as a running back than as a WR, but I agree he looks uncomfortable there this year so far.

[RashanGary]

Yeah, maxie, might be good to see Montgomery at rb. We have a lot of WRs. Let's give it a try.

[Bretsky]

I've been asking for a scat back for years; we don't value them.

We had CJ Spiller in for workout after he was cut.

He left GB, went to Seattle, and they closed the deal and signed him

We just have never been deep there.

[King Friday]

Releasing Kuhn was a no brainer, not a dead brainer. Kuhn has scored some TDs for New Orleans. Is his overall play still at high level? Maybe so. If so, I still say TT made a reasonable choice by keeping 1 FB. I'm not moved by Kuhn's emergency RB potential. But pretty much everybody and their uncle agrees that Starks has been a dud, they should have gone younger and quicker.

Ripkowski > Kuhn at this point...he'd have scored 5 TDs for the Saints by now. Considering that 13 yard run he had last week, he should be utilized more in the run game for the Packers.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I've been asking for a scat back for years;


We have one this year, Starks.

("scat" is slang for shit. Anything scatological refers to excrement — urine or feces — especially in a deliberately disgusting way. )

Can you say "scatological"?
https://joeontech.net/images/Fred_Rogers.jpeg

[Anti-Polar Bear]

It's not fair, I tell you. It's just not fair.

Life's not fair.

I have a friend who went to work in a factory straight outta high school. "Nothin' wrong with that," said I. "A working class hero...(see Kap thread in FYI)

[Cheesehead Craig]

So Lacy is 50/50 at best to play and can't play that much anyways, Starks is out indefinitely, so who the fuck is going to be the main RB Sunday?

[Maxie the Taxi]

So Lacy is 50/50 at best to play and can't play that much anyways, Starks is out indefinitely, so who the fuck is going to be the main RB Sunday?Monty. :idea:

[Harlan Huckleby]

Finally, we'll be seeing the full Monty.

[red]

Cobb or Monty will be the main back, which is pathetic

M3 just doesn't like rbs, they take away from the deep passing game

[run pMc]

As a 3rd down back or for screens/swing passes I could see them going with Montgomery. I think Cobb neck injury precludes him from playing RB.
I also think playing them as a RB with runs straight up behind Lang are stupid. They'd need to open up a huge hole in the defense's front for that to make sense, otherwise you're just beating up your WR's.

Hey, maybe they can use Janis as a RB. ;)

[Rutnstrut]

The ONLY bonus of using Cobb/Monte in the backfield is when they get hurt, and they will. Stubby will finally have to play Janis and Abbrederis.

[denverYooper]

Lacy will play. He played most of his first 2 years with an ankle injury and did well.

[denverYooper]

Plus, we've got the Ripper. That guy fucks.

[RashanGary]

The party line is that they have two 3rd down backs, Cobb & Montgomery. I call bullshit.

Shut up

[Harlan Huckleby]

Stick with the meds.

[Pugger]

Ripkowski > Kuhn at this point...he'd have scored 5 TDs for the Saints by now. Considering that 13 yard run he had last week, he should be utilized more in the run game for the Packers.

And Rip might be now with Lacy and Starks hobbling.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Rip at RB would be pathetic. Having to play a little slot receiver at RB would be even more dubious - they aren't built to take that punishment.

One advantage of a third down back is they can credibly fill-in as a featured back in a pinch.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Plus, we've got the Ripper. That guy fucks.

lol

[gbgary]

We have one this year, Starks.

("scat" is slang for shit. Anything scatological refers to excrement — urine or feces — especially in a deliberately disgusting way. )

Can you say "scatological"?
https://joeontech.net/images/Fred_Rogers.jpeg

can you say egg mcmuffin?

https://youtu.be/HsPzJALbR6c

[beveaux1]

Starks ruled out for Cowboys game.

[red]

if eddy is also out or limited, we're done

i know m3 thinks you can win being one dimensional, but if we have/show no running game, the cowboys are gonna pin back their ears and make anton even more jumpy in the pocket then he usually is

and rip or the 2 wr's at rb is not showing a legit second dimension

[Maxie the Taxi]

Must sign Jackson off PS.

[Patler]

Must sign Jackson off PS.

Could be. I wonder who they will release? Hawkins maybe? He seems to have fallen down the pecking order in how they use their DBs.

[pbmax]

So they did not promote Jackson. Its Eddie and a lot of one back Monty/Cobb. Bet its more Monty than Cobb.

[Bretsky]

Could be. I wonder who they will release? Hawkins maybe? He seems to have fallen down the pecking order in how they use their DBs.

Honestly I was worried Abby was going bye bye; he did not play a snap last week

[Guiness]

Have to say I'm surprised at this. Lacy could not finish last game because of the ankle, and they're going into this game without a backup? Cobb/Montgomery in the backfield are a gimmick, and you certainly don't want them doing a blitz pickup. Could Ripkowski carry the load for a half or more?

[Maxie the Taxi]

Demovsky says Starks may be out "several" weeks. We gonna go that long without a real RB backing up Lacy?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Vince Lombardi is turning over in his grave. 7 WRs and 1 RB with a bum ankle.

[Patler]

They can still make roster moves on Sunday.
We might see a RB added and someone released before the game.

[Pugger]

Vince Lombardi is turning over in his grave. 7 WRs and 1 RB with a bum ankle.

We are basically screwed now IMO until we address this position aggresively. We have a gimpy RB, 2 WRs pretending to be RBs and a QB who's accuracy is garbage half of the time. Yippee. :???:

[Harlan Huckleby]

Must sign Jackson off PS.

Action Jackson! Mr. October.

The fuckdoggle watch is on.

[King Friday]

Play action is going to be a real threat this week.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Fuck the run. Throw the rock 60 times a game. The Great Arm of Butte needs the reps to regain his long lost mojo.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Montgomery flashed one good run from the backfield against the Cowboys. I wouldn't be surprised if TT and Stubby have decided to turn Monty into their regular 3rd down RB. It kinda makes sense when you think about it. Monty is kind of a fifth wheel in the receiver corps that has probably one too many positions on the roster (although now if Cobb is hurt that could change).

Anyways, we know Monty can run routes and catch. So why not convert him and save a roster spot? The big questions are: Can Monty cut the mustard as an NFL RB? And if this is the intent of the organization, isn't it kind of a bad time to be experimenting with him? You would think it should have happened in the preseason. Strange.

[gbgary]

tt needs his ass kicked for this inexcusable decision to go with one back today...an injured one at that.

[Maxie the Taxi]

tt needs his ass kicked for this inexcusable decision to go with one back today...an injured one at that.Especially considering that Stubby likes to think of himself as a coach who wants to emphasize the run game.

[pbmax]

Especially considering that Stubby likes to think of himself as a coach who wants to emphasize the run game.

His approach to the run game, from ZBS to number of attempts, to thinking about run game averages, to forgetting about run game until the start of a game or right after half time has always baffled me.

[gbgary]

Packers trade for kc's Knile Davis!
never heard of him.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Packers trade for kc's Knile Davis!
never heard of him.This article says it all: http://kckingdom.com/2016/09/21/kansas-city-chiefs-top-five-trade-partners-for-knile-davis/

[mission]

3.3 ypc and lots of fumbles... awesome. hope we gave up nothing more than a 7th

[Maxie the Taxi]

And then there's this:

Heading into Thursday night's division tilt versus the Chicago Bears at Lambeau Field, Packers fans shouldn't expect a lot from Davis, who has averaged just 3.3 yards per carry for his career. He's got open field speed, but isn't shifty in tight spaces and mediocre in the passing game. Still, Davis is better than not having a running back at all and can help on special teams.

And this:


Combine
Stats:

20 Yard Shuttle4.38 secs
Vertical Jump33.5 inches
3 Cone Drill6.96 secs
Bench Press31.0 reps
Broad Jump121.0 inches
40 Yard Dash4.37 Secs

Strengths

Big-bodied north-south runner. Has a thick lower-body build and runs with enough forward lean to run through arm tackles. Agile enough to spin off tackles inside and hurdle would-be tacklers in the open field. Can use the strength he builds in the weight room to be a physical pass protector, aware enough to hit multiple targets. Provides some receiving skills as a check-down option over the middle and handling good throws in the flat.
Weaknesses

Has a long injury history, missing time or playing hurt in every season of his college career, in addition to the final two years of his of his high school career. Runs a bit top-heavy, gets tripped up easily in space, especially before he gets his head of steam. Inconsistent taking on tacklers at the second level, will try to run around them instead of using his strength. Inconsistent protecting his quarterback, resorts to (and misses) cut blocks. Lack of hip flexibility hurts his ability to adjust to poor throws as a receiver. Was unable to display adequete foot quickness in his final season.

Davis is 5'10", 227 lbs., 25 years old

[Maxie the Taxi]

Davis is basically a faster version of James Starks.

It looks like they see Davis as a possible replacement for Starks (i.e., a backup for Lacy), not a change of pace, 3rd down weapon that can run pass routes and make people miss in the open field.

Meh

[Maxie the Taxi]

I have to say, though, that Davis didn't look all that bad in KC's preseason victory over GB. 14 carries; 58 yds.; 4.1 avg.; Broke a 20 yd. run.; 2 targets; 1 reception for 7 yds.

After that game I was thinking, hmm, that guy might look good in green and gold. So who knows? Like the article said, he's better than nothing.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Who did Thompson cut to make room for Davis? I'd be extremely jolly if Mr. Hyde was traded straight up for Davis.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxUws0A59K8

[Harlan Huckleby]

Davis is basically a faster version of James Starks.

It looks like they see Davis as a possible replacement for Starks (i.e., a backup for Lacy), not a change of pace, 3rd down weapon that can run pass routes and make people miss in the open field.

Meh
What's with the "meh" talk? I don't like your attitude, young man. Sit up straight.

He's a faster and youger version of Starks. What's not to like?

I criticize some of TT's non-moves, but I do trust he can evaluate the available options. This is undoubtedly the best talent to be found with Halloween just around the bend.

This is very good news. Hopefully the new guy can play Starks out of a job.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I have to say, though, that Davis didn't look all that bad in KC's preseason victory over GB. 14 carries; 58 yds.; 4.1 avg.; Broke a 20 yd. run.; 2 targets; 1 reception for 7 yds.

After that game I was thinking, hmm, that guy might look good in green and gold. So who knows? Like the article said, he's better than nothing.

There you go. Always look on the bright side of life.

[Maxie the Taxi]

There you go. Always look on the bright side of life.On the other hand, the last preseason game...Isn't that the NFL schedule's version of Garbage Time? Am I wrong? Did I revert back to curmudgeoness? Do I have to change my avatar back to this?

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/bf/f2/9c/bff29c147aa1e3658ee87c13ff7ddb75.jpg

[Harlan Huckleby]

This is my profile pic on Facebook


https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/27098_1389527588892_1512621_n.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoibCJ9&oh=af225db45551157341f95eb5ebe2f620&oe=5895FA73

[Maxie the Taxi]

This is my profile pic on Facebook


https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/27098_1389527588892_1512621_n.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoibCJ9&oh=af225db45551157341f95eb5ebe2f620&oe=5895FA73What the GD hell is this "Facebook" thing everybody seems to always be talking about???

[hoosier]

Davis did pretty well a few years ago with KC when Jamaal Charles got hurt. A faster Starks (with a little less power) is about right. Probably a conditional 7th.

[Guiness]

I like Knile and am anxious to see what he can do. He played well in a couple of opportunities when Charles was injured, but seems to have fallen down the depth chart. He has good size, speed and strength. At 5'10" and a little heavier he's a lot more compact than Starks and more likely to be able to carry the load.

On the other hand, couldn't we just get Noah Herron? I checked and he is available :-)

[HarveyWallbangers]

Davis has potential, but was always in the doghouse. Not sure if that was just because of the fumbles or issues in pass protection.

[Bossman641]

Yep, he had a few big games in the past but I think fumbling has always held him back. Have to wonder if this means Lacy will be inactive on Thursday. Jackson/Davis as the RB's is scary pass protection wise.

[gbgary]

i'll bet they put starks on ir now.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

What the GD hell is this "Facebook" thing everybody seems to always be talking about???

Facebook is a social media website. It is the brainchild of a pompous Jewish kid while said Jew was attending some fancy university. Originally, Facebook was developed as a communication tool, via this fab, new thing called the Internet, for "elite" kids at "elite" universities the world over. After a while, the Jew realized that he could make a couple of bucks by granting access to anyone with internet access and an email account. Subsequently, the Jew disavowed the "elitism" of Facebook and, after stealing a few things from myspace, took the site mainstream.

Despite all we've been through here at Packerrats, Nutz still refuse to tell me his real name. What he doesn't know is that I am pretty good at deductive reasoning. After some deductions, I've come to the conclusion that Nutz's real name is Peter. Peter Griffin. Sent him a friend request about 3 years ago. Fucker still hasn't accepted my friendship. Apparently, Nutz uped the privacy setting of his facebook page a bit. I can't follow his interesting life.

[Harlan Huckleby]

i'll bet they put starks on ir now.

From your lips to God's ears.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Davis has potential, but was always in the doghouse. Not sure if that was just because of the fumbles or issues in pass protection.

Guy is only 25. Youthful indiscretions.

We know what we got with Starks. As far as pass protection, Starks only rarely stayed in to block, as pbmax will readily verify. (actually, it could be the game I was obsessed with Starks the Giants weren't blitzing much.)


There is a tiny chance that Starks has been worthless thus far due to a nagging knee problem that has been corrected with a cartilage nip and tuck. And butts may fly out of my monkey.

[Rutnstrut]

I think Davis is a good pick up. At least they did something, but I still think they need another RB. It would be nice to let Lacy rest if needed.

[Zool]

The next tackle Starks breaks will be his first. Never seen a RB run so awkwardly as he has this year.

[KYPack]

This is it.

All of us (espec. Harlan) know the dangers inherent when a goofy poster starts outing people with their true names and information on the net. The anti-Semitism is bad enough, but trolling peoples info is big time grounds for banning a poster.

He was banned, now is the time to enforce it before he causes even more shit to rain down.

[Smidgeon]

This is it.

All of us (espec. Harlan) know the dangers inherent when a goofy poster starts outing people with their true names and information on the net. The anti-Semitism is bad enough, but trolling peoples info is big time grounds for banning a poster.

He was banned, now is the time to enforce it before he causes even more shit to rain down.

Trying to figure out if the name reference in that rant was intended to be meta.

But probably not.

http://img05.deviantart.net/bdad/i/2015/193/d/4/peter_griffin__family_guy__29_by_frasier_and_niles-d90zuko.jpg

[Rastak]

This is it.

All of us (espec. Harlan) know the dangers inherent when a goofy poster starts outing people with their true names and information on the net. The anti-Semitism is bad enough, but trolling peoples info is big time grounds for banning a poster.

He was banned, now is the time to enforce it before he causes even more shit to rain down.

Have to agree with you on this KY.

[KYPack]

[QUOTE=Smidgeon;900769]Trying to figure out if the name reference in that rant was intended to be meta.

But probably not.]

A little of that, but more like doxing. Which is strange little scumbags who root around on the net trying to bother people who don't want to be bothered. Like Tank.

He does a little reveal in the post. He spent THREE years trying to scope out who Nutz is? Nutz is cool. Nutz is real. He's a real cool guy and doesn't want to be bugged by a dillweed like Tank.

One of the big reasons this place got started was some goof doxed Harlan on JSO big time. We soon went over to PR to get out of JSO.

Now it's a lot easier than that. We just get rid of the dox artist.

Which would be Tank.

[VegasPackFan]

To me Davis is a younger version of Starks. Good move to basically get a guy 5 years younger to do the same thing.

[Carolina_Packer]

Well, I'll be. TT doesn't sign Don Jackson and actually trades with Dorsey for an established player. I always thought that Davis had potential. The year they gacked the playoff game to Indy after getting a big lead, I thought Davis looked good as a fill in. Hopefully he can find some magic. You read conflicting reports about his pass catching ability out of the backfield. He looks the part. Hopefully he can deliver the goods. You never know with Lacy's bum ankle or Starks being out 4 weeks. Davis will certainly get a good opportunity. I'm rooting for him for sure.

[gbgary]

To me Davis is a younger version of Starks. Good move to basically get a guy 5 years younger to do the same thing.

starks early years here were good. if davis can do that, or better, it will be cool.

[Rutnstrut]

The talking heads on ESPN and NFL network say Lacy will be a longshot to play Thursday.

[gbgary]

The talking heads on ESPN and NFL network say Lacy will be a longshot to play Thursday.

so it's new guy and montgomery. yikes! so we're staring 3-3 in the face.

[King Friday]

Davis isn't overly impressive. I agree with the sentiment that he's a younger Starks. He doesn't have the talent to be a capable #1 RB in the NFL.

He's probably fine to use as a stopgap this season, since we don't have many other choices...but the Packers need to do some serious work at the skill positions this offseason.

[red]

This guy sounds like shit. This is suppose to be one of the easier spots to fill. And we trade for a 3ypa fumbler

[red]

To me Davis is a younger version of Starks. Good move to basically get a guy 5 years younger to do the same thing.

Based on what, just size?

Starks was a beast in college when we drafted him averaging like 7ypc.

This guy is a nothing that had 2 hundred yard games

[Harlan Huckleby]

This guy sounds like shit. This is suppose to be one of the easier spots to fill. And we trade for a 3ypa fumbler

hey, at least wait till Thursday night to say he looks like shit. Get your hopes up a little now, it will make the bitter pleasure all that much greater.

I say the guy has some NFL experience, made a roster - he's already gotta be an upgrade over a PS guy or Jukin James.

[Maxie the Taxi]

hey, at least wait till Thursday night to say he looks like shit. Get your hopes up a little now, it will make the bitter pleasure all that much greater.

I say the guy has some NFL experience, made a roster - he's already gotta be an upgrade over a PS guy or Jukin James.Actually, he only made the roster so KC wouldn't have to release him. The plan was to put him on the roster anticipating that a sucker would show up to trade for him. At least that's the story I heard.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Hey, maybe a sucker will show up for Starks!

KC thought he was worth a roster spot.
TT thought he was better than any PS guy around the league.

Lets give him a chance. In two days we can hang TT in effigy the fist time the guy gets tackled behind line of scrimmage.

[Joemailman]

The guy has good straight ahead speed for a big guy. The knock against him is he's not very shifty in close quarters. And he doesn't break a lot of tackles despite his size. He has returned kickoffs.

[Rastak]

Seemed kind of gimpy but were they trotting him out with an extremely fucked up ankle or did he make it worse?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/10/18/report-lacy-will-miss-several-weeks/

[Maxie the Taxi]

They made it worse. I said during the game I feared that would happen.

By the way, sources tell me that they'll soon sign Don Jackson off the PS.

[pbmax]

Jason Wilde ‏@jasonjwilde 1h1 hour ago
As others reported earlier, #Packers sent #Chiefs a 2018 conditional 7th-round pick for Knile Davis, per #NFL's official transaction wire.

[texaspackerbacker]

Getting him that cheap is definitely a good move. I like the idea of a speed back. Basically, Davis has the time Starks is out to show he is a better player. I think he is and will prove it on the field.

[KYPack]

The guy has good straight ahead speed for a big guy. The knock against him is he's not very shifty in close quarters. And he doesn't break a lot of tackles despite his size. He has returned kickoffs.

One year my fantasy backs were decimated. Jamal Charles was one of 'em and I drafted his back-up. Then I cut the back-up (he was hurt)
and drafted Davis. He immediately had a big game & I had him on the bench. When I played him he was good for about 3 pts. Back to the bench and he puts up a 20 spot. But I watched him some. He has some skills. He's short, very strong, fast, and muscular. He's kinda like Doug Martin, maybe he's the muscle gopher or something. he pretty good at rainbow routes and has decent hands. Running outside? He has real problems getting to the outside. He starts slowly and those fill guys catch him a good bit of the time and stone him. If he can spring wide, he creates problems for the D. He's faster than backers and is a load for any DB to tackle. I disagree with the "not shifty inside" deal. he has quick feet and can jab step one way and hit a gap going like a crazy man

Pass pro? He has issues. He's strong like a bull and can nail the shit out of an inside blitz from an ILB. When blitz pick-up is needed on an outside man like a Ware or Peppers style dude? He's usually physically outgunned. Those tall, long armed buggers just guzzle him. He needs some help, like keep Rodgers in to chip the long tall boys and let Davis pick up the ILB's or circle him out of the backfield. He knows the job and is good at making adjustments.

he didn't fumble much when I had him, maybe that was a later development.

There can be some upside to this kid, lets hope we get more than our fair share.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I like the optimism, KY. We ought to get this settled pre-emptively: IS DAVIS ELIGIBLE FOR THE FUCKDOGGLE???

[ThunderDan]

He is going to be Samkon Gado 2.0.

[ThunderDan]

I like the optimism, KY. We ought to get this settled pre-emptively: IS DAVIS ELIGIBLE FOR THE FUCKDOGGLE???

He is first inline this week if he scores a TD and we win.

[Carolina_Packer]

Does anyone know what became of the Packer's interest in Jhurell Pressley? They must like Don Jackson as much or more than him. Strange, they liked him well enough to sign him to the 53-man right after the Vikings cut him, but as soon as they needed the roster spot, they cut Pressley. That part is understandable for a young guy. What doesn't make sense is when they got short-handed, why didn't they once again show interest? Perhaps in the limited sample-size they had of him, the determined that Jackson was just as promising, but I don't know if they would have signed Jackson like they did Pressley, which is the curious part.

[Smidgeon]

Does anyone know what became of the Packer's interest in Jhurell Pressley? They must like Don Jackson as much or more than him. Strange, they liked him well enough to sign him to the 53-man right after the Vikings cut him, but as soon as they needed the roster spot, they cut Pressley. That part is understandable for a young guy. What doesn't make sense is when they got short-handed, why didn't they once again show interest? Perhaps in the limited sample-size they had of him, the determined that Jackson was just as promising, but I don't know if they would have signed Jackson like they did Pressley, which is the curious part.

They wanted Pressley for the Vikings scouting report.

[Pugger]

This guy sounds like shit. This is suppose to be one of the easier spots to fill. And we trade for a 3ypa fumbler

At this point in the season I can't believe there is a lot to choose from.

[Rutnstrut]

At this point in the season I can't believe there is a lot to choose from.

It should have never gotten to this point. Just another TT fuck up.

[hoosier]

Where is Zac Crockett?

[beveaux1]

It should have never gotten to this point. Just another TT fuck up.

Let me see, the GM is at fault because both RBs get injured and need surgery. Probably true, because we don't have a first round draft pick sitting on the bench and two 3rd rounders that every other team wanted on the practice squad. Also the GMs fault that our top 3 CBs are unavailable because of injury and we don't have a couple of first rounders on the practice squad that we can call up for this very eventuality. Probably should have a Tony Romo type on the bench waiting to play if AR has accuracy issues against Atlanta. The GM also forgot to get that 2nd fast TE during the offseason in case Cook hurts his ankle. Pretty sure that the GM should have picked up 2 all pro WRs so that we could have 9 WRs on the roster in case Abby gets hurt or Davis and Janis don't progress.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Where is Zac Crockett?Crockett is on Injured Reserve list.

[HarveyWallbangers]

John Crockett, former Bison

I wonder who they are targeting to bring back later. Hopefully, either Shields or Lacy will be back. I haven't heard anything about Linsley. He should be getting off the PUP list soon.

[pbmax]

Linsley is practicing.

[gbgary]

ray rice:whist:








:doh:

[red]

what about brandon burks?

he led the team in carries in preseason and is available

[run pMc]

ray rice:whist:








:doh:

LOL yeah. McGinn's "What Price Glory" piece gets dusted off.

[Harlan Huckleby]

never mind (I made a ray lewis joke. )

hard to keep the murderers and wife beaters straight.

[Fritz]

Let me see, the GM is at fault because both RBs get injured and need surgery. Probably true, because we don't have a first round draft pick sitting on the bench and two 3rd rounders that every other team wanted on the practice squad. Also the GMs fault that our top 3 CBs are unavailable because of injury and we don't have a couple of first rounders on the practice squad that we can call up for this very eventuality. Probably should have a Tony Romo type on the bench waiting to play if AR has accuracy issues against Atlanta. The GM also forgot to get that 2nd fast TE during the offseason in case Cook hurts his ankle. Pretty sure that the GM should have picked up 2 all pro WRs so that we could have 9 WRs on the roster in case Abby gets hurt or Davis and Janis don't progress.

What he said.

[Pugger]

Let me see, the GM is at fault because both RBs get injured and need surgery. Probably true, because we don't have a first round draft pick sitting on the bench and two 3rd rounders that every other team wanted on the practice squad. Also the GMs fault that our top 3 CBs are unavailable because of injury and we don't have a couple of first rounders on the practice squad that we can call up for this very eventuality. Probably should have a Tony Romo type on the bench waiting to play if AR has accuracy issues against Atlanta. The GM also forgot to get that 2nd fast TE during the offseason in case Cook hurts his ankle. Pretty sure that the GM should have picked up 2 all pro WRs so that we could have 9 WRs on the roster in case Abby gets hurt or Davis and Janis don't progress.

Yes, why wasn't Ted clairvoyant enough to see all of these injuries last summer?

[Patler]

Montgomery was a high school running back, converted to WR in college.
During the draft some said his NFL future was a running back
MM was dabbling with him in the backfield last year.

Why do so many talk about this as a gimmick now?

[yetisnowman]

Let me see, the GM is at fault because both RBs get injured and need surgery. Probably true, because we don't have a first round draft pick sitting on the bench and two 3rd rounders that every other team wanted on the practice squad. Also the GMs fault that our top 3 CBs are unavailable because of injury and we don't have a couple of first rounders on the practice squad that we can call up for this very eventuality. Probably should have a Tony Romo type on the bench waiting to play if AR has accuracy issues against Atlanta. The GM also forgot to get that 2nd fast TE during the offseason in case Cook hurts his ankle. Pretty sure that the GM should have picked up 2 all pro WRs so that we could have 9 WRs on the roster in case Abby gets hurt or Davis and Janis don't progress.

Yeah except it was known Starks was missing a few weeks, and that Lacy was banged up before the Dallas game. And no moves were made to supplement the roster. So we attempted to play a game with a one legged tailback and two of our 4 best receivers at running back. Lacy is ran into the ground and requires surgery after the game. Of course that is a huge fuckup by TT/MM. No way to sugarcoat that. Your other points are mostly debateable. Obviously not about having 9 receivers on the roster, but our production from TE s , 2nd string running back, and our 5-7 receivers has been pathetic this season even when healthy. Largely what TT has created.

[Rutnstrut]

Yeah except it was known Starks was missing a few weeks, and that Lacy was banged up before the Dallas game. And no moves were made to supplement the roster. So we attempted to play a game with a one legged tailback and two of our 4 best receivers at running back. Lacy is ran into the ground and requires surgery after the game. Of course that is a huge fuckup by TT/MM. No way to sugarcoat that. Your other points are mostly debateable. Obviously not about having 9 receivers on the roster, but our production from TE s , 2nd string running back, and our 5-7 receivers has been pathetic this season even when healthy. Largely what TT has created.

Thanks for saving me the typing. That was a spot on reply.

[beveaux1]

Yeah except it was known Starks was missing a few weeks, and that Lacy was banged up before the Dallas game. And no moves were made to supplement the roster. So we attempted to play a game with a one legged tailback and two of our 4 best receivers at running back. Lacy is ran into the ground and requires surgery after the game. Of course that is a huge fuckup by TT/MM. No way to sugarcoat that. Your other points are mostly debateable. Obviously not about having 9 receivers on the roster, but our production from TE s , 2nd string running back, and our 5-7 receivers has been pathetic this season even when healthy. Largely what TT has created.

Obviously, another RB added to the roster before the Dallas game would have kept Lacy from being "run into the ground". Look at how many carries the 2 new RBs got in the Bears game. I believe that number was 4 or 5. This article talks about what happens when a player gets injured during a game and makes the injury report. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/monday-morning-md-easy-to-just-blame-the-coach/

Condensing, it says he has to be cleared by the medical staff, team management has to be on board, and the player and his agent also have to agree that he's ready to play.

My recollection was that Starks didn't hIt the injury report until Tuesday or Wednesday of Dallas week. He had a personal issue that he had to take care of until Saturday when he had an MRI. He had surgery that evening or Sunday morning. The Packers implemented the Montgomery to RB during the week, and, I believe, would not have used Jackson much during the game had they activated him.

Lacy was cleared to play and aggravated his injury after carrying for almost 70 yds. Tough break, but I don't think it's on the GM.

[Patler]

Yeah except it was known Starks was missing a few weeks, and that Lacy was banged up before the Dallas game. And no moves were made to supplement the roster. So we attempted to play a game with a one legged tailback and two of our 4 best receivers at running back. Lacy is ran into the ground and requires surgery after the game. Of course that is a huge fuckup by TT/MM. No way to sugarcoat that. Your other points are mostly debateable. Obviously not about having 9 receivers on the roster, but our production from TE s , 2nd string running back, and our 5-7 receivers has been pathetic this season even when healthy. Largely what TT has created.

I think you are being a bit naive. It's not as simple as just adding a guy to the roster. Someone has to be removed form the roster to add a player. The inactives for the Dallas game were Shields, Starks, Banjo, Rollins, Cook, Ringo and Murphy. The first five were there because of injury, the last two were healthy scratches, but players the team wants to keep for obvious reasons. At that point, I don't think they were willing to give up on the seasons for their best CB and their best ST performer. With injuries mounting, they were forced into writing them off for the season, but there wasn't a good enough reason to do so then.

The art of roster management is often one of getting by during short stretches without disrupting what you have. Montgomery was a HS running back who was converted to WR in college. Cobb has always taken snaps in the backfield. Hoping to get by with Lacy, Montgomery and Cobb for that game was not wrong, in my opinion.

[vince]

Montgomery had 9 rushes for 60 yards (6.6 ypc) and 10 receptions for 66 yards. I don't know how many receptions and receiving yards came from which position but that's damn good production for a RB or WR - and intriguing flexibility to exploit mismatches to boot. Yeah it sucks that both Lacy and Starks have gone down at the same time but I swear some of you guys aren't happy unless you can bitch about something - real or not. The two workhorses both go down at the same time and they get 126 all-purpose yards from the third guy - while the fourth guy goes down too?

It doesn't get much better than that from a roster management and depth of talent standpoint - and people whine about it because they've pigeon-holed him as a receiver...

He's built like a running back, and we've seen him punish would-be tacklers with the ball in his hands...

Le'Veone Bell - 6'0, 220 4.6 40
Ty Montgomery - 6'0 220 4.55 40
Lesean McCoy - 5'11 208 4.45 40
Melvin Gordon - 6'1 207 4.45 40

I bet if you averaged the measurables of all NFL backs today you'd get Monty's size but a tad less speed and a lot less pass catching ability.

EDIT - This year's rookie running back class at the combine averaged 5'11, 221 lbs. and a 4.56 40.

He's only going to get better as a cut-and-go runner seeing running lanes, and the fact that he's exceptional catching it - for a running back our of the backfield - makes him a potential serious weapon moving forward.

I'd say this hybrid role is here to stay - as long as Monty's around. That's how he's built to be utilized. If he can develop more vision, decisiveness and timing with the line in the run game - early signs suggest he already has a good bit of it (as much or more than Starks) he could add a missing dimension. I'd say he needs a complimentary power runner but he's off to a pretty promising start.

[pbmax]

I do wonder how certain they were about Starks before he left town on personal business. He had surgery soon after getting back, they almost had to know before he left.

So they planned to use Lacy, Cobb and Monty to get through a week, maybe more, until an injury or other development let them bring up Jackson.

[ThunderDan]

At the game against the Giants a few weeks ago I commented to my wife that Monty doesn't look like your typical WR. He looked like a TE to me. He was much thicker than the other greyhounds.

[gbgary]

according to one of the morning sports talk shows on tv, the 9ers are willing to part with some players. carlos hyde anyone? he's out this week but he's had some pretty good stats this year.

[vince]

Carlos Hyde would be a feature back but if he's healthy - and truly available - they'll want a lot - or he's in his walk year. I've heard rumors about Torrey Smith, the one-dimensional receiver but Hyde's a pipe dream that would have numerous teams inquiring. Needless to say, Ted's not getting out in front of that. He just went out and aquired a running back that they need to integrate on the fly.

[Joemailman]

Montgomery had 9 rushes for 60 yards (6.6 ypc) and 10 receptions for 66 yards. I don't know how many receptions and receiving yards came from which position but that's damn good production for a RB or WR - and intriguing flexibility to exploit mismatches to boot. Yeah it sucks that both Lacy and Starks have gone down at the same time but I swear some of you guys aren't happy unless you can bitch about something - real or not. The two workhorses both go down at the same time and they get 126 all-purpose yards from the third guy - while the fourth guy goes down too?

It doesn't get much better than that from a roster management and depth of talent standpoint - and people whine about it because they've pigeon-holed him as a receiver...

He's built like a running back, and we've seen him punish would-be tacklers with the ball in his hands...

Le'Veone Bell - 6'0, 220 4.6 40
Ty Montgomery - 6'0 220 4.55 40
Lesean McCoy - 5'11 208 4.45 40
Melvin Gordon - 6'1 207 4.45 40

I bet if you averaged the measurables of all NFL backs today you'd get Monty's size but a tad less speed and a lot less pass catching ability.

EDIT - This year's rookie running back class at the combine averaged 5'11, 221 lbs. and a 4.56 40.

He's only going to get better as a cut-and-go runner seeing running lanes, and the fact that he's exceptional catching it - for a running back our of the backfield - makes him a potential serious weapon moving forward.

I'd say this hybrid role is here to stay - as long as Monty's around. That's how he's built to be utilized. If he can develop more vision, decisiveness and timing with the line in the run game - early signs suggest he already has a good bit of it (as much or more than Starks) he could add a missing dimension. I'd say he needs a complimentary power runner but he's off to a pretty promising start.

I've been think about this a lot lately. Right now Monty is seen as a WR playing RB, but could he be a full time RB? The biggest question is whether he can learn to make the right cuts on inside runs. If so, you'd have a RB who is really good at catching the ball out of the backfield. Not just one who can catch dump-offs and screens, but one who can run pass patterns.

If both Shields and Lacy are healthy enough to return later this year, the Packers will have to decide which one to activate. How Monty does between now and then could factor into the decision. A lot of people have been thinking that Shields has played his last game as a Packer. Could it be Lacy we won't see again?

[Maxie the Taxi]

Monty at RB is kind of like a poor man's David Johnson. All he lacks is the RB instincts which he will hopefully acquire with more and more reps. A pass-route-running RB for 3rd down and red zone has long been a need for the Packers IMO. I like the idea myself.

[vince]

I think that's his future. Like you said Joe, he'll need to be able to run between the tackles on occasion, but if he can do that to even a serviceable level and learn how to get low behind his pads to keep himself healthy taking a lot more contact with his strength and burst to help him get through the first level, combined with his elusiveness and ability to punish DB's at the second level, AND his ability to run great routes and catch it with YAC - he could cause some real problems for teams to match up. Corners can run with him no problem but it's a different story for LB's, Safeties or even the unfortunate OLB/DE who gets stuck in short coverage at the wrong time. And most cornerbacks don't want to see him coming at them with a head of steam.

I frankly didn't expect him to come back from the ankle surgery as strong as he has. That goes to his work ethic and great physical shape. He probably could bulk up another 5 lbs or so too as long as it's all muscle and not lose any agility in space. Hopefully he can stay healthy taking more hits because he's faster and way more explosive than big backs and way more physical than smaller scat backs. I could see Rodgers having a lot of fun moving him around dictating and exploiting defenses with Monty's versatility.

[vince]

Monty at RB is kind of like a poor man's David Johnson. All he lacks is the RB instincts which he will hopefully acquire with more and more reps. A pass-route-running RB for 3rd down and red zone has long been a need for the Packers IMO. I like the idea myself.
Yeah there aren't many 230 lb. beasts who run 4.3 with agility and can catch. Although I do recall Johnson abusing our ILB's last year. He doesn't run 4.3 but he can abuse LB's like that. Ultimately Monty can be a bit more physical than Johnson but he'll never be quite the home run hitter. Johnson reminds me of Marshall Faulk with their running and receiving skills. The list of guys who can do what Faulk could and Johnson can might end right there.

I'd be ecstatic with if Monty becomes a poor-man's Johnson - with a little more physicality.

[Zool]

Monty runs a little too high to be a 20 carry guy. He's definitely a WR playing RB from what I've seen. Having him and a healthy Lacy is a perfect combo though. When he's lined up in the backfield, all run/pass options are available.

[Freak Out]

Monty runs a little too high to be a 20 carry guy. He's definitely a WR playing RB from what I've seen. Having him and a healthy Lacy is a perfect combo though. When he's lined up in the backfield, all run/pass options are available.

This. We knew he would be good/great if he was healthy. I think it's a bad idea though to work him to hard as a straight up RB...I like the crazy options he brings to the field as a multi-faceted kind of player. Get Davis up to speed and pound with him until Fat Eddie comes back.

[Fritz]

Monty at RB is kind of like a poor man's David Johnson. All he lacks is the RB instincts which he will hopefully acquire with more and more reps. A pass-route-running RB for 3rd down and red zone has long been a need for the Packers IMO. I like the idea myself.

But can one "acquire" instincts? I think that's a contradiction in terms.

And isn't there a reason he was converted to WR? Could it be he just doesn't have that RB vision?

I'd like to be wrong but I am struggling with the above questions.

[vince]

I agree he's never likely to be a feature back and that's not what they want from him. He's not gonna make hay pounding it up the gut with any degree of regularity.

Against Chicago - 9 carries for 66 yards rushing - mostly wide with a plant and go - and 10 receptions for 60 yards. Of those 66 yards rushing, 30 came on one play which you hope to get one of those. The other 8 runs were pretty pedestrian although 4.5 ypc isn't bad. I didn't notice but I bet Ripkowski was in there quite a bit with him. He needs protection with the ball and I doubt they want him protecting Rodgers in there.

19 touches is a pretty good load but the 50/50 run/pass ratio is what I'd say would tend to make him most effective - positioned in the backfield to start most plays but probably ending up on the perimeter as much as anything. He can win more often than not against an awful lot of safeties and if he can get isolated on a linebacker out of the backfield he's gonna make a ton of plays there too. If he can catch a small seam on a screen pass he can bust that open like the kick returner he is. Call him a Wide Receiver, a Running Back, a Wide Back, or a Running Receiver, a Hybrid or whatever. Just put him in position to win and I think he will pretty often. With Lacy and Starks, along with last year's lost season, this direction never came to the fore. Now, out of what might turn out to be fortuitous desperation, I think Monty's real value can be exploited. He's no Julio as a downfield threat obviously, but his strength and speed combo give him a lot of advantages underneath and in space.

This is wild speculation at this point and I've been wildly wrong before so we can check back on this next July, but with what they have now along with another draft/offseason, and particularly the age/wear issues of Starks but also the weight/discipline concerns of Lacy, combined with both of their expiring contracts, I think we may have seen the last of both of those guys. Hopefully Starks can make it back for some spot duty this year yet but I don't think they'll miss him if he doesn't. And Lacy laid up/on crutches for six to eight weeks with a broken ankle? It's hard to see that going well for him... We've seen how the P90X workout and kale binge diet program followed by the Xtended Kung Pao Chicken Fried Rice diet program has worked out already.

[vince]

But can one "acquire" instincts? I think that's a contradiction in terms.

And isn't there a reason he was converted to WR? Could it be he just doesn't have that RB vision?

I'd like to be wrong but I am struggling with the above questions.
Monty has good instincts with the ball in his hand. I don't want to speak for Maxie but he'll have to learn timing, flow and reading how, when and where his blockers are going to create lanes for him as a runner. Sometimes he needs to be patient, other times he needs to smash it through, and other times he'll need to cut backside. He doesn't have that, and it takes time and experience but that's definitely something he can gain with practice and repetition. Some guys never really seem to get it. I think Starks is still below average at it. Monty strikes me as a guy who gets that kind of stuff pretty quickly and has the football ability to leverage his instincts and intelligence.

[ThunderDan]

Monty has good instincts with the ball in his hand. I don't want to speak for Maxie but he'll have to learn timing, flow and reading how, when and where his blockers are going to create lanes for him as a runner. Sometimes he needs to be patient, other times he needs to smash it through, and other times he'll need to cut backside. He doesn't have that, and it takes time and experience but that's definitely something he can gain with practice and repetition. Some guys never really seem to get it. I think Starks is still below average at it. Monty strikes me as a guy who gets that kind of stuff pretty quickly and has the football ability to leverage his instincts and intelligence.

Funny, I always thought Starks was one of the best one cut ZBS runners I had seen.

[vince]

Funny, I always thought Starks was one of the best one cut ZBS runners I had seen.
Yeah just my opinion. I'd say he's had some periods where he's had really good rhythm cutting it up and he always hits it hard when he does. I think he's had just about as many periods when he seems to get into a funk missing the cutback and bouncing out to the sideline too often for no gain, or similarly getting the dropsies on screens during those same periods.

When he hits it I agree he slashes through, runs hard and covers a lot of ground with his long strides. I think sometimes he gets thinking too much (dropping passes, missing reads/adjustments blocking, not having a good sense of where the strength of the defense is and/or what their doing in run pursuit, etc. That has hurt his effectiveness at times.

That's the stuff that high football IQ guys excel at I think. Monty's got it IMO. Rodgers has it, (although he has his insecurities too which cause him to hold the ball too long too often) In my opinion, while Starks does have that great one-cut-and-punishing-finish running style that's real effective when he's on, his football IQ is average and at times his decision-making is a little off. Confidence breeds more confidence, and with him, a split second of uncertainty breeds more uncertainty. He's streaky.

Was it the Detroit game where he practically handed the linebacker in front of him the ball late in the game? That's a good example. I don't know what his rushing line looked like that game but I bet it wasn't good. I wouldn't be surprised to find out he missed a blitz pick-up too.

[yetisnowman]

I think you are being a bit naive. It's not as simple as just adding a guy to the roster. Someone has to be removed form the roster to add a player. The inactives for the Dallas game were Shields, Starks, Banjo, Rollins, Cook, Ringo and Murphy. The first five were there because of injury, the last two were healthy scratches, but players the team wants to keep for obvious reasons. At that point, I don't think they were willing to give up on the seasons for their best CB and their best ST performer. With injuries mounting, they were forced into writing them off for the season, but there wasn't a good enough reason to do so then.

The art of roster management is often one of getting by during short stretches without disrupting what you have. Montgomery was a HS running back who was converted to WR in college. Cobb has always taken snaps in the backfield. Hoping to get by with Lacy, Montgomery and Cobb for that game was not wrong, in my opinion.

I just disagree completely. Lacy has had reoccurring ankle issues and was clearly at about 75%. If we can see that in the game immediately. Obviously the staff saw that in practice. Unless we wanted Monty being our feature back,(who by the way is also coming back from a major ankle injury) it seemed pretty poorly planned. Couldn't the roster and gameplan have been managed the same vs Dallas and Chicago? Seems clear the Dallas game aggravated Lacy's injury. Which could have been avoided with a little more caution and discretion....I'm my opinion.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Sign Ray Rice!

[gbgary]

c j spiller back on the market...released by sea.

[Patler]

I just disagree completely. Lacy has had reoccurring ankle issues and was clearly at about 75%. If we can see that in the game immediately. Obviously the staff saw that in practice. Unless we wanted Monty being our feature back,(who by the way is also coming back from a major ankle injury) it seemed pretty poorly planned. Couldn't the roster and gameplan have been managed the same vs Dallas and Chicago? Seems clear the Dallas game aggravated Lacy's injury. Which could have been avoided with a little more caution and discretion....I'm my opinion.

For being "75%" Lacy looked as good as he has at anytime in the last two years. If a RB is cleared to play, you play him as you would. There are always guys who are dinged up. If you adjust the roster or your game plan every time somebody isn't 100%, you would have guys coming and going every week and no consistency in the offense or defense.

Sometime the objective is to get through a game or two as best you can without upsetting the roster. They had contingency plans for getting through without Lacy. I don't think it was a bad decision at that time.

[yetisnowman]

For being "75%" Lacy looked as good as he has at anytime in the last two years. If a RB is cleared to play, you play him as you would. There are always guys who are dinged up. If you adjust the roster or your game plan every time somebody isn't 100%, you would have guys coming and going every week and no consistency in the offense or defense.

Sometime the objective is to get through a game or two as best you can without upsetting the roster. They had contingency plans for getting through without Lacy. I don't think it was a bad decision at that time.

Well I didn't imagine him limping after every play. Sometimes you adjust your gameplan and roster when players are dinged up, and they may or may not play. Look at what Atlanta has done this week with only ONE of there two rbs questionable. Plenty of us questioned the strategy before the game and as the game was going. Trying to "get by" with one injured RB and WRs playing out of position was pretty dangerous and foolish. And it cost us. And if we keep playing Monty like a running back, he will get hurt too.

[Carolina_Packer]

Well I didn't imagine him limping after every play. Sometimes you adjust your gameplan and roster when players are dinged up, and they may or may not play. Look at what Atlanta has done this week with only ONE of there two rbs questionable. Plenty of us questioned the strategy before the game and as the game was going. Trying to "get by" with one injured RB and WRs playing out of position was pretty dangerous and foolish. And it cost us. And if we keep playing Monty like a running back, he will get hurt too.

I don't think we had a roster spot available to just sign a RB to protect Lacy and help cover for Starks who was out for personal reasons, and then suddenly for injury. So, in light of those two points, who would you have cut or sent to IR at the time to make room for temporary help at RB?

[Tony Oday]

c j spiller back on the market...released by sea.

Sign him!

[Maxie the Taxi]

Sign him!I'd rather see Monty, Jackson and Knife Davis get the reps at RB. Spiller would just complicate and already messy situation.

[texaspackerbacker]

Exactly right. We are in a better place right now than when we had RBs with higher expectations and a damn run-first mentality. Give Montgomery the same hole as Lacy, and he generally will get twice as many yards. Yeah, there were those few exceptions where Lacy ran like a wild bull, but they were outweighed by the times he couldn't bounce outside or whatever like Montgomery or hopefully Davis can do.

The key to winning with any of them, though, is to pass pass pass pass then maybe run rarely as a change of pace.

[yetisnowman]

I don't think we had a roster spot available to just sign a RB to protect Lacy and help cover for Starks who was out for personal reasons, and then suddenly for injury. So, in light of those two points, who would you have cut or sent to IR at the time to make room for temporary help at RB?

Maybe one of the receivers that hasn't made a lick of an impact? Janis who can't seem to process and NFL playbook, or Davis who has only fair caught a few punts, or Abbrederis who barely sees the field. .........
oh wait this just in- They released Abbrederis today!!!!
This argument has been thoroughly blown out of the water.
I've never seen an NFL team go into a game with that kind of situation at running back.

[Patler]

I've never seen an NFL team go into a game with that kind of situation at running back.

Oh, heck; sure they have.
As I recall, the Packers played a game with only 1 RB, Tony Fisher, because Greene and Davenport were both out, and they didn't have pseudo RBs at WR. Asked about it afterward, Sherman said they would have gone with all receivers if Fisher got hurt.

[yetisnowman]

Well that team had 3 in the roster, not 2. And if Fisher was injured the previous week and questionable then it would be a more apt comparison. Anyway I'm not trying to belabor the point. But looking at the moves the Packers have made the last few weeks, and looking at what moves other teams make to cover their ass, I think it's fair to say the situation was mishandled. An unnecessary gamble in my opinion.

[Patler]

Things changed a lot in that week. Abbrederis got hurt. Lacy became bad enough that putting him on the shelf for a couple months was acceptable, Banjo reinjured himself again. I think a week earlier they hoped all could factor into the end of the season, as well as Shields. Then there was Rollins injury before the game, and Randall during the game. They got to the point that the injury list was longer than the game day inactive list, so somethings had to be done.

I just don't see a huge risk when they had two other guys who could play out of the backfield. Again, at this far into the season, teams are always taking chances with their rosters.

[Patler]

Well that team had 3 in the roster, not 2. And if Fisher was injured the previous week and questionable then it would be a more apt comparison.

It wouldn't matter if they had 10, if nine were injured and unavailable. They still went into the game with one.
Lacy was cleared to play. That is really all MM needed to concern himself with about Lacy. Dinged up players gut it through all the time.

[red]

has anyone mentioned the failure of our training staff and coaches?

we had a player who was less then 100%, and obviously had an injury that could become worse

it did get worse, and now he might be gone for the year

[run pMc]

They'll need a running game to keep teams honest and for bad weather, but I'm ok with dink and dunk.
Getting 6 yards on 1st down with a dumpoff is still a plus play for the offense, and keeps them in favorable down/distance.

I think Davis/Jackson, Starks, and Ty can probably get them through...but yes, having Lacy would be nice. Starks' injury was bad timing.
They won a SB with Brandon Jackson and James Starks; they aren't SOL at RB yet.

[ThunderDan]

They'll need a running game to keep teams honest and for bad weather, but I'm ok with dink and dunk.
Getting 6 yards on 1st down with a dumpoff is still a plus play for the offense, and keeps them in favorable down/distance.

I think Davis/Jackson, Starks, and Ty can probably get them through...but yes, having Lacy would be nice. Starks' injury was bad timing.
They won a SB with Brandon Jackson and James Starks; they aren't SOL at RB yet.

I agree, we need someone to power the ball. But NE has gone dink and dunk for years now and it has worked but they have Blount to keep the other team honest. Helps to have field stretching TE also. I wish Cook was still healthy.

[gbgary]

has anyone mentioned the failure of our training staff and coaches?

we had a player who was less then 100%, and obviously had an injury that could become worse

it did get worse, and now he might be gone for the year

i mentioned it...said the whole running back situation was tantamount to negligence on tt's part.

[yetisnowman]

It wouldn't matter if they had 10, if nine were injured and unavailable. They still went into the game with one.
Lacy was cleared to play. That is really all MM needed to concern himself with about Lacy. Dinged up players gut it through all the time.

Sorry but this is ridiculous. I'm sure coaches adjust their gameplan and strategy based on the health of their players, even when they are cleared to play. Well the smart ones do. But I guess McCarthy is just expected to know who's active and who's not, as opposed to any nuance or detail involving his best players.

[Patler]

Sorry but this is ridiculous. I'm sure coaches adjust their gameplan and strategy based on the health of their players, even when they are cleared to play. Well the smart ones do. But I guess McCarthy is just expected to know who's active and who's not, as opposed to any nuance or detail involving his best players.

Was there anything Lacy couldn't do? Not from the way he played. He ran as well as he has anytime the last two years. If he was limited in some way, of course the coach would adjust. If not, the you play your regular game.

If the injury was such that playing could be expected to make it worse, that's on the medical staff. Coaches don't, and shouldn't make medical decisions.

[beveaux1]

Was there anything Lacy couldn't do? Not from the way he played. He ran as well as he has anytime the last two years. If he was limited in some way, of course the coach would adjust. If not, the you play your regular game.

If the injury was such that playing could be expected to make it worse, that's on the medical staff. Coaches don't, and shouldn't make medical decisions.

+1

[yetisnowman]

Was there anything Lacy couldn't do? Not from the way he played. He ran as well as he has anytime the last two years. If he was limited in some way, of course the coach would adjust. If not, the you play your regular game.

If the injury was such that playing could be expected to make it worse, that's on the medical staff. Coaches don't, and shouldn't make medical decisions.

He was noticeably limping after the first couple carries. It was a pre-existing injury. Lacy has a history of foot and ankle issues. You continue to act like what happened to Lacy vs Dallas occurred in a vacuum. The staff rolled the dice, had their fingers crossed, held their breath.....and we know the rest. Agree to disagree

[Patler]

He was noticeably limping after the first couple carries. It was a pre-existing injury. Lacy has a history of foot and ankle issues. You continue to act like what happened to Lacy vs Dallas occurred in a vacuum. The staff rolled the dice, had their fingers crossed, held their breath.....and we know the rest. Agree to disagree

I never said it occurred in a vacuum. Probably half the team is nursing an injury of some sort. You can't adjust and compensate for everything. If a RB is cleared to play, the coaches should assume he can be asked to carry the ball, be targeted for passes, and block when required. Lacy wasn't asked to do anything other than that. It's not up to the coach to second guess the medical staff.

Of course they took a chance, just like they did with Cobb, Adams, Bakhtiari and others last year. Just like Rodgers two years ago. Matthews countless times. Lacy other times, too. Lang now. Bulaga many times. Randall this year. Sitton for several years. There was nothing uniquely special about Lacy's situation. In fact, it was almost routine. They had a plan for how to proceed without him.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Of course they took a chance, just like they did with Cobb, Adams, Bakhtiari and others last year.

Not the same thing. A running back, especially a biggin, trying to play on a bad ankle is a very bad bet.

I think yetisnowman thoroughly demolished you in this argument. But that is only because I thoroughly agreed with him to begin with. We call that confirmation bias.

[Patler]

Not the same thing. A running back, especially a biggin, trying to play on a bad ankle is a very bad bet.

I think yetisnowman thoroughly demolished you in this argument. But that is only because I thoroughly agreed with him to begin with. We call that confirmation bias.

So TT and MM are now supposed to make the medical determinations, too? That's ridiculous. What were they supposed to do in your mind, not play Lacy even though he was cleared to play?

You guys are second guessing now based on what happened after the fact.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Ya, hindsight is the pleasure of the fan. I had a bad feeling about Lacy during the game. I would have sat Lacy or any back with a suspect ankle. But especially Lacy, as he is a critical resource to be protected for the season. "Cleared to play" is just the start of the coach's decision, not the final word, IMO.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I agree with Harlan purely because I'm in a bad mood.

[red]

yes, IMO a coach should be able to make that basic kind of medical determination

player is hurt and can make it worse, maybe don't risk him for a couple weeks

LIKE THEY DO WITH EVERY OTHER MINOR FUCKING BUMP OR SCRAPE ON THIS TEAM

how many months have we seen other guys held out because of ankle issues in the past? but not the fattest one out of the group, he says he's good to go, you you let him go

and when he starts limping like crazy out of the gate, clearly hurt, you just leave him in

in horse racing, as soon as a jockey feels any little thing wrong with the horse, he pulls it up to prevent the horse from doing more damage. and the horse would do more damage because its stupid and only knows one thing, to run. maybe fat mike should have prevented his horse from destroying himself and the season

he doesn't call the plays (thats a-rod doing his own thing), he doesn't do anything at practice but stand and watch (zook runs practice and the other coaches yell and make corrections), he can't game plan or make adjustments, if he can't look out for the players, then what the hell is the point of M3?

[red]

Ya, hindsight is the pleasure of the fan. I had a bad feeling about Lacy during the game. I would have sat Lacy or any back with a suspect ankle. But especially Lacy, as he is a critical resource to be protected for the season. "Cleared to play" is just the start of the coach's decision, not the final word, IMO.

i agree with this 100%

just because you can, doesn't mean you should

[pbmax]

i agree with this 100%

just because you can, doesn't mean you should

So which two are you cutting to sign two running backs a week earlier?

[red]

easy, janis and barclay and shouldn't be on this team

at the time we had 7 wr's i think, we only ever use 3. and janis doesn't get it

[Patler]

They would need a 75 man roster to do what some of you want.

If the coaches are going to second guess the medical staff, maybe the docs should make up the game plan.

[pbmax]

easy, janis and barclay and shouldn't be on this team

at the time we had 7 wr's i think, we only ever use 3. and janis doesn't get it

And today would you put Knile Davis at WR?

[red]

And today would you put Knile Davis at WR?

yes, because you need more then 5 wr's

[red]

They would need a 75 man roster to do what some of you want.

If the coaches are going to second guess the medical staff, maybe the docs should make up the game plan.

at least someone would be making game plans

[Harlan Huckleby]

And today would you put Knile Davis at WR?


They did split KD wide on some plays. Odd.

[gbgary]

knile davis released.

[VegasPackFan]

Knile Davis released. Don't understand this move at all.

[Pugger]

Knile Davis released. Don't understand this move at all.

Evidently with Ty coming back and Starks getting close they didn't think this guy was any better than what we already have. Now that Banjo has been released we have 2 open roster spots. I wonder how these will be filled...

[red]

the packers would have owed the chiefs a draft pick if he was on the roster for 3 games

because they cut him after 2, we owe the chiefs nothing

of course, nothing is what this leaves us at RB even if starks is getting healthy

[red]

Evidently with Ty coming back and Starks getting close they didn't think this guy was any better than what we already have. Now that Banjo has been released we have 2 open roster spots. I wonder how these will be filled...

gotta be with more wide recievers

we might go into next week with only 7 on the active roster.

the horror

[gbgary]

again...since we can only bring back one from ir why would it be starks?

[vince]

Starks is not on IR, though I thought I read that he's a few weeks away from returning yet.

[hoosier]

If TT thinks he has the RB position covered with a returning Monty, Johnson and Rip, he is in a state of deknile.

[pbmax]

If TT thinks he has the RB position covered with a returning Monty, Johnson and Rip, he is in a state of deknile.

I'm throwing a flag here. You get to spend Week 9 rooting for the Bears.

[gbgary]

c j spiller still out there.

my bad...thought starks was on ir.

[Patler]

Now that Banjo has been released we have 2 open roster spots. I wonder how these will be filled...

Banjo was on IR, as of last week. No roster spot opening from his release today.

[King Friday]

Bo Jackson is available.

[Tony Oday]

Trading for McFadden?

[jklowan]

sounds like Ryan Mathews is on the outs in Philly. Did we actually give anything up for Kniles? I know it was conditional 7th, but seeing as he was released after 13 snaps did he qualify, anyone got the deets?

[Pugger]

Banjo was on IR, as of last week. No roster spot opening from his release today.

Oh, that's right. But with the release of Knile Davis don't we still have one spot to fill?

[pbmax]

Oh, that's right. But with the release of Knile Davis don't we still have one spot to fill?

Yep.

[Patler]

Oh, that's right. But with the release of Knile Davis don't we still have one spot to fill?

Yup, probably to be filled by Linsley if Tretter is out this week, unless Tretter's knee injury is significant and he goes on IR.

[hoosier]

I'm throwing a flag here. You get to spend Week 9 rooting for the Bears.

I rooted for em in week 8....

[gbgary]

I rooted for em in week 8....

we ALL did.

[gbgary]

Packers signing Joique Bell on monday.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Packers signing Joique Bell on monday.

Old and slow.

Bring back DuJuan Harris!

[pbmax]

Fan: Ted never makes a trade, I swear. So boring. Sign somebody!!!

TT: *signs someone*

Fan: Wow, he sucks. Nice move, Ted. Senile idiot.

[Bretsky]

Fan: Ted never makes a trade, I swear. So boring. Sign somebody!!!

TT: *signs someone*

Fan: Wow, he sucks. Nice move, Ted. Senile idiot.


I'm not sure where you stand exactly on the Turtle but lately you seem like you want to defend him at all costs. Is that where you are at ?

[gbgary]

here's an opinion on him...
http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/packers-free-agency-2016-news-reports/2016/2/18/11047736/packers-free-agency-running-backs-joique-bell-matt-forte

[pbmax]

I'm not sure where you stand exactly on the Turtle but lately you seem like you want to defend him at all costs. Is that where you are at ?

He is better than all but one team's personnel department. Its his coach I am very worried about.

[pbmax]

DuJuan Harris was supposed to get a start today. Because the guy in front of him was injured.

[Bretsky]

He is better than all but one team's personnel department. Its his coach I am very worried about.


You grade him a hell of a lot higher than I would.
I do think he's above average so not calling for his firing.
But don't care much if he leaves either

[gbgary]

edited for stupidity

[gbgary]

and again...

[gbgary]

and again.

[red]

way to post in the right thread shithead

[gbgary]

...

[gbgary]

way to post in the right thread shithead

lol...hate it when that happens.

[red]

i do it quite a bit myself

[woodbuck27]

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/green-bay-packers-running-back-joique-bell-sign-110616

According to NFL Network’s Ian Rapoport, the Packers are expected to sign former Lions running back Joique Bell on Monday.

Bell last played for the Bears in 2016, carrying it just three times for six yards before getting cut on Oct. 24.

He was a member of the Lions from 2011 to 2015, rushing for 2,235 yards and 22 touchdowns in that span.

[deake]

Did we sign this guy?

[gbgary]

Did we sign this guy?

not yet...

[Carolina_Packer]

Ripkowski, Kerridge and Bell...Wishbone?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

It's fucking Thursday already, and Bell's still not signed. Why? Three explanations.

1. Tweets about his Monday signing are false.
2. Thompson's incompetent.
3. Packers changed their mind.

I am betting #2.

[pbmax]

It's fucking Thursday already, and Bell's still not signed. Why? Three explanations.

1. Tweets about his Monday signing are false.
2. Thompson's incompetent.
3. Packers changed their mind.

I am betting #2.

Starks is healthy. Jackson on roster.

Bell went home after his workout on Tuesday. RapSheet was wrong that the Packers had committed to sign him last week. Seemed strange at the time, since they don't do that except in the most extreme cases of FA (Peppers, Woodson). But he did work out and went on his way.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

He is better than all but one team's personnel department.

Top NFL GMs:

1. Belichick
2. Elway
3. Schneider
4. Newsome

Polar Bear's better than all but Belichick? That's farce.

[gbgary]

Top NFL GMs:

1. Belichick
2. Elway
3. Schneider
4. Newsome


mckensie in oak has done a great job i think.
is that daniel schneider...the laughing stock of wash several years ago?

[pbmax]

Top NFL GMs:

1. Belichick
2. Elway
3. Schneider
4. Newsome

Polar Bear's better than all but Belichick? That's farce.

Please list the accomplishments of the Ravens since the Super Bowl. Been worse since Packers appearance. They have less offense than the Packers do.

Elway maybe, needs some time to prove it out. Team looks a little ragged now, but early to judge.

I'll give you Schneider doing well, but is he in charge or is Pete?

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Please list the accomplishments of the Ravens since the Super Bowl. Been worse since Packers appearance. They have less offense than the Packers do.

Elway maybe, needs some time to prove it out. Team looks a little ragged now, but early to judge.

I'll give you Schneider doing well, but is he in charge or is Pete?

Elway already proved that he's a better GM than Thompson. 2 Super Bowls (in a shorter time span) beat a fluke one any day of the week.

Belichick, Elway and Schneider all have debunked the so-called "Draft and Develop" theory. Draft and develop is nothing but a lame for excuse incompetent GMs make to shed light away from their incompetency.

Gotta competently utilize ALL aspects of the game - draft, free agency, trades.

Ron Wolf utilized ALL aspects of the game, and he - competently, as well as egoistically, I must add - turned around a moribund Packer franchise. Don't give me the lame "Wolf did it in another era" excuse. Belichick is doing it extremely well in this era, in case you haven't noticed.

[Patler]

The Thompson era in Green Bay started with the 2005 season, and he has won one SB.
How many has BB won during that time?
How many has Schneider won during that time?
How many has Elway won during that time?
How many has Newsome won during that time?

Where's the love for Kevin Colbert? Jerry Reese?

[George Cumby]

Ron Wolf = FITW

[Harlan Huckleby]

Starks is healthy. Jackson on roster.

At least they got one serviceable back.

Maybe James Starks will return to the roster and be better than he showed all year. It could happen, maybe earlier he played with nagging injury that has been fixed.

[Patler]

At least they got one serviceable back.

Maybe James Starks will return to the roster and be better than he showed all year. It could happen, maybe earlier he played with nagging injury that has been fixed.

Considering that he played only 4 games and had just 24 carries, I'm not sure he had the opportunity to show much, good or bad.

[gbgary]

starks and jackson aren't enough. montgonery really isn't a back. wonder why the Joique Bell thing didn't happen?

[Harlan Huckleby]

starks and jackson aren't enough. montgonery really isn't a back. wonder why the Joique Bell thing didn't happen?

If you're talking numbers, they can't carry more than two bottom-of-the-roster RBs.

Reminds me of that old joke, "The food at that restaurant is hideous, but the portions are generous." When it comes to junky backs, portion control is critical.

[Patler]

starks and jackson aren't enough. montgonery really isn't a back. wonder why the Joique Bell thing didn't happen?

Maybe Montgomery hasn't been a back, but why can't he be one?

[Patler]

Maybe James Starks will return to the roster and be better than he showed all year. It could happen, maybe earlier he played with nagging injury that has been fixed.

I have been hoping you were right in stating the above. In a way, the following is disappointing. Starks claims his knee was giving him no trouble at all, until one day he woke up to find it swollen:


Green Bay Packers running back James Starks said he wasn’t having any problem with his left knee before or during the New York Giants game.

“It wasn't bothering me, even after the game,” Starks said. “I came to practice, ran, nothing was wrong and then woke up on my day off (and) kind of seen swelling. Told the trainers and stuff as soon as I knew, then we just got it checked out.

“It was kind of like it was messed up so I got it taken care of.”

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/story/sports/nfl/packers/2016/11/10/notebook-knee-injury-surprised-starks/93625844/

[pbmax]

^ Might have been giving him more problems than was obvious. If it had no sudden or catastrophic injury, might have been getting slowly worse for some time.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Most likely Starks just done got old.

I'm OK with Action Jackson, at least he hits a hole and goes forward. Whatever Starks can give is a bonus.

[red]

i thought we were signing javid best on monday

whatever happened there?

[Pugger]

starks and jackson aren't enough. montgonery really isn't a back. wonder why the Joique Bell thing didn't happen?

Starks and Jackson is better than nothing. Monty is okay but you're right, he really isn't a RB.

[Pugger]

i thought we were signing javid best on monday

whatever happened there?

He's slower than Starks and James is coming back anyway?

[Patler]

Monty is okay but you're right, he really isn't a RB.

Why not?

[Harlan Huckleby]

Why not?

He doesn't look like a low-to-ground, low center of gravity guy that can deal with hits and flailing arms inside the tackles. Does he have thick legs and hips? He does look effective with a little bit of space - draws, pitchs. He is OK as wingback in the shotgun.

Maybe I am seeing him through biased eyes, having set him as a slot WR in my head. He is OK as a role player out of backfield - effective even.

[Patler]

He doesn't look like a low-to-ground, low center of gravity guy that can deal with hits and flailing arms inside the tackles. Does he have thick legs and hips? He does look effective with a little bit of space - draws, pitchs. He is OK as wingback in the shotgun.

Maybe I am seeing him through biased eyes, having set him as a slot WR in my head. He is OK as a role player out of backfield - effective even.

Several of the predraft evaluations said he might end up as a runningback instead of a WR. Last year one of the reporters in preseason remarked that he looked out of place with the thinner, leaner WRs and was mistaken for a RB by reporters that didn't know him. He's listed at 6'0", 216. Starks is 6'2", 218. I saw Montgomery on one of the Packer talk shows a couple weeks ago, he looked thick and muscular. There was talk last year of using him as a legitimate runner when they started using him in the backfield before his injury.

I suspected at the end of training camp that one of the reasons they had so many WRs on the final roster and just two RBs was that they intended to use Montgomery as more than just a gimmick in the backfield. I don't think his tranistion to RB was just because of the injuries to Lacy and Starks.

I thought he already looked more runningback-like last week. 25-30 carries a game? Probably not, but maybe 10-15 carries.

[Fritz]

He really doesn't seem to me to be good enough to become a full-time running back, unless you imagine him as the third-down back we've been clamoring for. He doesn't seem to find holes very well and seems to go down pretty easily, though not as easily as Cobb.

[pbmax]

No reason he can't be a combo RB/WR like Sproles.

If he can block a lick, its the perfect job. Stick him where you get instant mismatch.

[Patler]

He doesn't seem to find holes very well and seems to go down pretty easily, though not as easily as Cobb.

He seemed better last week than the first week. He broke tackles, and carried DBs a bit. He even showed patience finding holes. I expect him to get better with experience.

[gbgary]

The Green Bay Packers claimed former Seattle Seahawks running back Christine Michael off waivers

[pbmax]

The Green Bay Packers claimed former Seattle Seahawks running back Christine Michael off waivers

Hope I am wrong, but that kid has been all hype and no production so far. Seahawks replaced him with Thomas Rawls as soon as they could.

[gbgary]

Hope I am wrong, but that kid has been all hype and no production so far. Seahawks replaced him with Thomas Rawls as soon as they could.

picking this guy up really makes me think Shields will be guy they take off ir.

[Freak Out]

No reason he can't be a combo RB/WR like Sproles.

If he can block a lick, its the perfect job. Stick him where you get instant mismatch.

I like Monty coming out of the backfield. He can run, run screens, shift out to a WR position...tons of options. Can he throw?

[Rutnstrut]

Hope I am wrong, but that kid has been all hype and no production so far. Seahawks replaced him with Thomas Rawls as soon as they could.

Really what can it hurt at this point? If he flops, they are no worse off.

[gbgary]

I like Monty coming out of the backfield. He can run, run screens, shift out to a WR position...tons of options. Can he throw?

cobb can but I don't think we've seen it. mm is saving it for the perfect time.

[pbmax]

Really what can it hurt at this point? If he flops, they are no worse off.

Lots of injuries, someone's backup gets released. Michael is the 3rd RB, one more than previous.

[Tony Oday]

We did good the last time we got a Sea RB, Ahman Green :)

[gbgary]

Really what can it hurt at this point? If he flops, they are no worse off.

Packers have to get lucky sometime with a situation like this. maybe this is that time. our o-line is much better than sea's.

[gbgary]

Jackson put on ir after knee injury today.

[red]

Lol

[Pugger]

Hope I am wrong, but that kid has been all hype and no production so far. Seahawks replaced him with Thomas Rawls as soon as they could.

But at this point, what do we have to lose?? If he doesn't work out big freaking deal. If he does, good for us.

[beveaux1]

But at this point, what do we have to lose?? If he doesn't work out big freaking deal. If he does, good for us.

Very true.