Michael Turner

[Tony Oday]

Why not? Proven stud back that can play with the best of them. Ok bad thing is that he would cost at least a 1st rounder and i think SD would do that because they run the risk of getting nothing for him next year.

Why dont we trade our 1st rounder down as far as possible and get an extra prcik and then work a sign and trade for him?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't think they'd be able to get him for a late 1st round pick.

[wist43]

Apparently TT thinks he's ok at RB... I think that's delusional - this years RB situation is starting to look like the OL situation from 2 years ago.

TT seems to be showing modest interest in treating a couple of nickel backs to dinner (Walker and James), but other than that, I don't expect that we'll see any FA signings in GB b/4 the draft.

[wist43]

I don't think they'd be able to get him for a late 1st round pick.

I think they could get him for a 1st round pick; but, really, does anyone really think that TT is going to give up a pick, AND, pay big $$$....

No way.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Do the deal, give up our 1st and 3rd, why take a chance on something unproven and just go ahead and get Turner?

Imagine a Turner/Morency combo in the ZBS...

[Brando19]

I would love to trade our first rounder for Michael Turner. I think he's a proven back in the league, opposed to gambling and not knowing what you're getting in the draft. However, if we trade our first rounder for Turner, that almost kills the deal with Moss because I doubt TT is willing to give up very many picks.

[falco]

If thats the case, we would have been 100 times better trading for McGahee...

Turner's not worth our 1st and 3rd.

[Tony Oday]

If thats the case, we would have been 100 times better trading for McGahee...

Turner's not worth our 1st and 3rd.

Do you even watch football?

[wist43]

What are you guys smoking???

NO WAY does TT give up a 1st round pick... he wouldn't give up a 1st round pick for Peyton Manning.

Like I said, and sadly I think this is correct, he thinks he's fine at RB... all that crap about "build from within". While I agree with that in general, if you have nothing from "within", you had better look from "without".

[Tony Oday]

I view him trading the 1st round pick is basically drafting a stud RB which Turner is. So thats building from within ;)

[TennesseePackerBacker]

I would love to trade our first rounder for Michael Turner. I think he's a proven back in the league, opposed to gambling and not knowing what you're getting in the draft. However, if we trade our first rounder for Turner, that almost kills the deal with Moss because I doubt TT is willing to give up very many picks.

we pick up one of the good recievers remaining at our 2nd pick, our offense is better by leaps and bounds. Then just add secondary depth, and overall defensive draft via the FA and the later rounds.

Turner would get us a lot closer to the playoffs then a rookie.

[falco]

I would love to trade our first rounder for Michael Turner. I think he's a proven back in the league, opposed to gambling and not knowing what you're getting in the draft. However, if we trade our first rounder for Turner, that almost kills the deal with Moss because I doubt TT is willing to give up very many picks.

we pick up one of the good recievers remaining at our 2nd pick, our offense is better by leaps and bounds. Then just add secondary depth, and overall defensive draft via the FA and the later rounds.

Turner would get us a lot closer to the playoffs then a rookie.

Yeah, he certainly got the chargers a lot closer than the patriot and colts made it with their rookie rbs.

[Tony Oday]

I would love to trade our first rounder for Michael Turner. I think he's a proven back in the league, opposed to gambling and not knowing what you're getting in the draft. However, if we trade our first rounder for Turner, that almost kills the deal with Moss because I doubt TT is willing to give up very many picks.

we pick up one of the good recievers remaining at our 2nd pick, our offense is better by leaps and bounds. Then just add secondary depth, and overall defensive draft via the FA and the later rounds.

Turner would get us a lot closer to the playoffs then a rookie.

Yeah, he certainly got the chargers a lot closer than the patriot and colts made it with their rookie rbs.

again have you ever seen him play?

[wist43]

Doing it TT's way is the long term approach... TT couldn't care less about the playoffs in the short term.

Of course given that Favre will be gone in a year or two, the long term doesn't look good either.

[falco]

again have you ever seen him play?

what does that have to do with my point??? I'm just saying that probably the two bests in the NFL last year had rookie running backs carrying their weight. Turner may be better than any RB in this years draft class, but only time will tell.

[Tony Oday]

Actually he would be better than most starters in the NFL.

[Guiness]

Agreed Oday. IMO he's better than picking a back near the end of the first round, because you know Turner won't bust, and he still has the same potential as a guy right out of college.

I'd say he's in the same situation as Matt Schaub, but that's not true, he's in a worst situation - the guy in front of him is better than him! I guess the only thing I think I can compare it to is those couple of years Young sat behind Montana.

[Brando19]

I would love to trade our first rounder for Michael Turner. I think he's a proven back in the league, opposed to gambling and not knowing what you're getting in the draft. However, if we trade our first rounder for Turner, that almost kills the deal with Moss because I doubt TT is willing to give up very many picks.

we pick up one of the good recievers remaining at our 2nd pick, our offense is better by leaps and bounds. Then just add secondary depth, and overall defensive draft via the FA and the later rounds.

Turner would get us a lot closer to the playoffs then a rookie.

Yeah, he certainly got the chargers a lot closer than the patriot and colts made it with their rookie rbs.

Well I believe the Patriots and Colts have experienced excellent QB's and I don't think Michael Turner plays every down because of a man named Ladanian Tomlinson.

[Packnut]

Doing it TT's way is the long term approach... TT couldn't care less about the playoffs in the short term.

Of course given that Favre will be gone in a year or two, the long term doesn't look good either.

It appears to me Thompson has Harlan and Jones sold on the "slow but steady approch". Either Thompson is the dumbest GM in football, or he's already gotten assurances that he'll get another 3 or 4 years to build through the draft. Nothing else would explain what is going on or I should say not going on.

Although if you really think about it, he's gambling everything on Rodgers. All the draft picks in the world don't mean shit in the NFL without a quality QB. I thinks it's "poetic justice". Rodgers was his first pick- one that I still believe was wrong so the fact that Rodgers will determine Teddy's path is very appropriate..........

[Packnut]

Oh yeah, our first rd pick would be well worth Turner, but draft picks to Thompson are like drugs to an addict! :lol: :lol: :lol:

[OS PA]

Considering the Patriots want to trade their two first rounders for our first in order to draft Reggie Nelson it would make sense to drop down a few slots for 2 first round picks and trade the 2nd first rounder for Turner, but that will never happen.

[wist43]

Doing it TT's way is the long term approach... TT couldn't care less about the playoffs in the short term.

Of course given that Favre will be gone in a year or two, the long term doesn't look good either.

It appears to me Thompson has Harlan and Jones sold on the "slow but steady approch". Either Thompson is the dumbest GM in football, or he's already gotten assurances that he'll get another 3 or 4 years to build through the draft. Nothing else would explain what is going on or I should say not going on.

Although if you really think about it, he's gambling everything on Rodgers. All the draft picks in the world don't mean shit in the NFL without a quality QB. I thinks it's "poetic justice". Rodgers was his first pick- one that I still believe was wrong so the fact that Rodgers will determine Teddy's path is very appropriate..........

I agree... he is banking everything on Rodgers.

He may be able to build a decent team around Rodgers, but the offense is so QB dependent that a mediocre QB = a medicore offense; hence, my advocacy for a power scheme.

I'll give him some credit though - I never would have thought that, as of 2 years ago, they'd even have a shot to "win now", while Favre was still playing. He has at least upgraded the roster to the point where I could see, if he added the right pieces, they could at least be competitive in the putrid NFC.

Of course, he let one of those pieces walk (Green)... and he apparently thinks he can win with the OL he has - those guys were awful last year - even at the end of the year they were still having trouble blocking 4 with 7... pathetic.

He also seems to think he can win with his current stable of RB's... delusional.

[LL2]

I like Turner, and have followed him since he was at NIU, but not for a 1st and a 3rd. If we do not go RB in the first two rds I would like to see GB draft his successor at NIU Garrett Wolfe in the 3rd or 4th rd.

[LEWCWA]

Turner is a stud? Come on the guy seems to have some talent, but a stud? Not even close to worth first round pick... the guy is going to walk next year!

[falco]

Turner is a stud? Come on the guy seems to have some talent, but a stud? Not even close to worth first round pick... the guy is going to walk next year!

You're a moron!! DONT YOU EVEN WATCH FOOTBALL! This guy is the next Gale Sayers / Walter Payton / Barry Sanders! I can totally tell that because I watched him come off the bench and rack up like 200 yards once. And no, I'm not talking about Najeh Davenport versus the Rams. Thats a totally different situation... :roll:

Oh, and Matt Schaub, with the 2 games he's started in the last 3 years and his wonderful 69.2 QB rating, is the next Tom Brady.

We should just trade all our draft picks this year and next for those two guys.

[pack4to84]

Considering the Patriots want to trade their two first rounders for our first in order to draft Reggie Nelson it would make sense to drop down a few slots for 2 first round picks and trade the 2nd first rounder for Turner, but that will never happen.
You might be on to something here. TT could pull this off but it will not happen until draft day because Pats want there player to be there for it to happen. Give SD the 28 pick. Draft Olson with 24th pick.

[LEWCWA]

Sayers/Payton/Sanders all in one huh! If that were the case they would be looking to trade LT. Now who sounds like a moron! You sir are a dumbass!

[LEWCWA]

I do think he is a good back, but he really hasn't done a thing and could be had for much less than a #1 pick. He is gone next year and the bolts will get nothing for him....DUMBASS!

[falco]

if you read the whole thread you would see I was being sarcastic...poking fun at those who labeled him a stud and said I was stupid for not thinking he was worth a #1.

[Partial]

I think he is a good running back, but not for a first and a third. He is certainly the benefactor of a good offensive line and a tired defense trying to stop him after focusing on LT. He's still good, though.

I'd give up a third for him.

[LEWCWA]

I do apologize, since your obviously not a DUMBASS!

[Tony Oday]

I think he is a good running back, but not for a first and a third. He is certainly the benefactor of a good offensive line and a tired defense trying to stop him after focusing on LT. He's still good, though.

I'd give up a third for him.

He isnt worth a 1st and a thrid thats why do a trade sign where we lock him in to a nice contract, agree upon it and then trade for him with a first rounder.

Sure he hasnt carried the load for a team but he has shown that he has the speed, the vision and toughness to be a good back, in the NFL. He actually has experience and tons up upside unlike ANY RB in teh draft he has actually played in th NFL and shown he can run against pro Defenses.

[Bretsky]

I do apologize, since your obviously not a DUMBASS!


Stop giving people my label :wink:

I might give up a 2nd for Turner, but nothing more.
Well, unless they'd take Ferguson for a diet pepsi.........wait, I'd buy them the diet pepsi for taking the Fraud

[MadtownPacker]

I do apologize, since your obviously not a DUMBASS!Well maybe not on this subject but Im sure there is hardcore proof somewhere...

HELL NO to Turner for anything more then a 3rd. He is fast and has some moves but he aint no LT.

[KYPack]

Turner is a a talented player, but a change of pace guy and return man.

I can't believe anyone would give a first round pick for the guy.

We need an everydown back.

A Michael Turner is a luxury this team can't afford.

With our thin rosters, our spec team blocking might never give Turner any more openings for him to run thru.

No sense shopping for dessert, we need some meat and potatoes, a stud, every down RB.

[wist43]

I think Turner can be an every down back... he's certainly better than Morency.

Can't give up a 1 and 3 for him though.

[Patler]

I think Turner can be an every down back... he's certainly better than Morency.

Can't give up a 1 and 3 for him though.

How can you possibly have seen Turner enough to conclude that he is "certainly better than Morency"? Have you seen enough of his 150 carries over the last 3 years for San Diego to reach such a conclusion. Heck, having seen probably most if not all of Morency's carries this year I still can't say with any certainty what HE is capable of, let alone Turner.

What you have is a guess or a feeling about the relative abilities of each, but it is just that, and "certainly not a certainty". :lol: :lol:

[falco]

I think Turner can be an every down back... he's certainly better than Morency.

Can't give up a 1 and 3 for him though.

How can you possibly have seen Turner enough to conclude that he is "certainly better than Morency"? Have you seen enough of his 150 carries over the last 3 years for San Diego to reach such a conclusion. Heck, having seen probably most if not all of Morency's carries this year I still can't say with any certainty what HE is capable of, let alone Turner.

What you have is a guess or a feeling about the relative abilities of each, but it is just that, and "certainly not a certainty". :lol: :lol:

Patler you must be a dumbass just like me. 150 carriers isn't enough to know that he is a stud running back???

[Patler]

I think Turner can be an every down back... he's certainly better than Morency.

Can't give up a 1 and 3 for him though.

How can you possibly have seen Turner enough to conclude that he is "certainly better than Morency"? Have you seen enough of his 150 carries over the last 3 years for San Diego to reach such a conclusion. Heck, having seen probably most if not all of Morency's carries this year I still can't say with any certainty what HE is capable of, let alone Turner.

What you have is a guess or a feeling about the relative abilities of each, but it is just that, and "certainly not a certainty". :lol: :lol:

Patler you must be a dumbass just like me. 150 carriers isn't enough to know that he is a stud running back???

Ya, I guess I am! :cry: :cry:

If the carries were all in one season, maybe. But they are scattered over 3 seasons.
If we got to see each and every carry of both backs, maybe. But most of us have seen Turner only in a handful of carries, and many of us may have never seen him carry at all. To be honest, I don't know if I have ever seen him carry or not. I don't remember, so if I did he certainly made no lasting impression.

There is a funny thing about backup running backs, especially ones subbing for a great back. They often catch the defense relaxing a bit, because the stud is out. When they become the feature back they are never quite as good as they were as the backup.

[Bretsky]

I think Turner can be an every down back... he's certainly better than Morency.

Can't give up a 1 and 3 for him though.

How can you possibly have seen Turner enough to conclude that he is "certainly better than Morency"? Have you seen enough of his 150 carries over the last 3 years for San Diego to reach such a conclusion. Heck, having seen probably most if not all of Morency's carries this year I still can't say with any certainty what HE is capable of, let alone Turner.

What you have is a guess or a feeling about the relative abilities of each, but it is just that, and "certainly not a certainty". :lol: :lol:

Patler you must be a dumbass just like me. 150 carriers isn't enough to know that he is a stud running back???

Ya, I guess I am! :cry: :cry:

If the carries were all in one season, maybe. But they are scattered over 3 seasons.
If we got to see each and every carry of both backs, maybe. But most of us have seen Turner only in a handful of carries, and many of us may have never seen him carry at all. To be honest, I don't know if I have ever seen him carry or not. I don't remember, so if I did he certainly made no lasting impression.

There is a funny thing about backup running backs, especially ones subbing for a great back. They often catch the defense relaxing a bit, because the stud is out. When they become the feature back they are never quite as good as they were as the backup.


I enjoy watching the Chargers and have seen him quite a bit in junk duty and fill in duty.

My impression of Morency is he's a 3rd down back and or complimentary back. My impression of Turner is he's a better player than Vernon Morency.

No idea if he can carry the load, but I'd have a strong preference of him over Vernon Morency.

[Patler]

My impression of Morency is he's a 3rd down back and or complimentary back.


I don't think of Morrency as a so-called 3rd down back at all. He does not catch the ball easily, and more importantly doesn't pass protect well. Those are the primary skills I think are needed in a "3rd down back." Along with that he needs to be very solid in knowing his assignments as the play unfolds. I think Herron fits the requirements for a "3rd down back" better than Morency does. I think of Morrency more as the alternate to the featured back. The so-called change of pace back, providing the primary back is more of a power-running, bigger type back.

[falco]

I made the point earlier that Turner's stats are very similar to Najeh Davenport's over his first three years.

Davenport saw limited action, but point up very decent numbers. Like Turner, he backed up a star runner, and like Turner he came off the bench in a game to put up massive yardage.

But there was no market for Davenport (even though Peter King single handedly tried to make one every week). He ended up being cut and signed a poor contract with Pittsburgh.

Until these guys show what they can do week in and week out they are a big question mark.

[Bretsky]

Turner has blazing speed and makes people miss; stats aside IMO those two guys are not similar in ability IMO.

Agree that Turner is a question mark, but he's one I'd like to have on GB for the right price.

[Bretsky]

My impression of Morency is he's a 3rd down back and or complimentary back.


I don't think of Morrency as a so-called 3rd down back at all. He does not catch the ball easily, and more importantly doesn't pass protect well. Those are the primary skills I think are needed in a "3rd down back." Along with that he needs to be very solid in knowing his assignments as the play unfolds. I think Herron fits the requirements for a "3rd down back" better than Morency does. I think of Morrency more as the alternate to the featured back. The so-called change of pace back, providing the primary back is more of a power-running, bigger type back.

Ya, you are right. I'm just not yet convinced he's a solid compliment back yet.
I was hoping for a Ahman Green...Travis Henry.....Chris Brown and Lynch combo to be honest.

[Tony Oday]

I am saying Trade our current 1st for the Pats two firsts send one pick to the Chargers for Turner.

I have seen most of his games, via NFL Ticket. He is not a Davenport in that he doesnt have the up and down running style that gets you hurt playing in the NFL. he has moves of both a RB and return man and can out run a Favre laser.

He will be a stud in this league

[Brando19]

I am saying Trade our current 1st for the Pats two firsts send one pick to the Chargers for Turner.

I have seen most of his games, via NFL Ticket. He is not a Davenport in that he doesnt have the up and down running style that gets you hurt playing in the NFL. he has moves of both a RB and return man and can out run a Favre laser.

He will be a stud in this league

I really really really really like this idea.

[wist43]

The bottom line is - neither Morency or Herron is a feature back.

Silverstein, in the JS today said, "the Packers would be the laughing stock of the league" if they went into the season with their current backfield... I agree.

Morency is a dancer/slasher that can't, or won't, lower his shoulder... he goes down far too easy. Herron lacks the skills to be a feature back.

Unless a feature back comes free, or TT swings a trade (LOL), or they take someone like Bush or Irons in the 2nd round??? The Packers offense will definitely take a step backward this year.

[Patler]

I wouldn't call Morency a dancer, and I think he runs hard for the size he brings out there, which isn't a lot. With just herron and Morency, they would be in trouble, just like in 2005 when Green and Davenport were both done.

I'm not sure you need a "featured back" who can handle 300+ carries himself. I believe you can be successful splitting carries more equally among the top two, so each gets around 200 carries, provided each brings some big play type capability of some sort, whether speed, power or something. I think Morency can produce in that type of situation, but Herron isn't the other one for it. So in one way or another the Packers need another back who is good for around 200 carries. Calhoun might be that type as well, but he isn't what I would like to see paired with Morency. Too similar, with neither being a "complete" back by himself. They would mirror each other, not complement each other.

I also think that a decent (not great) runner or two will be available this summer if the Packers don't get one in the draft.

[falco]

I wouldn't call Morency a dancer, and I think he runs hard for the size he brings out there, which isn't a lot. With just herron and Morency, they would be in trouble, just like in 2005 when Green and Davenport were both done.

I'm not sure you need a "featured back" who can handle 300+ carries himself. I believe you can be successful splitting carries more equally among the top two, so each gets around 200 carries, provided each brings some big play type capability of some sort, whether speed, power or something. I think Morency can produce in that type of situation, but Herron isn't the other one for it. So in one way or another the Packers need another back who is good for around 200 carries. Calhoun might be that type as well, but he isn't what I would like to see paired with Morency. Too similar, with neither being a "complete" back by himself. They would mirror each other, not complement each other.

I also think that a decent (not great) runner or two will be available this summer if the Packers don't get one in the draft.

Just out of curiosity, as I'm not an expert, but are there a lot of backs who take a few years to develop, or is it primarily a position where you make an impact right away?

We hear a lot lately about rookie RB's making big impacts; but how many big name backs took a few years to develop? (I can't think of any, thats why I'm asking)

[Bretsky]

I wouldn't call Morency a dancer, and I think he runs hard for the size he brings out there, which isn't a lot. With just herron and Morency, they would be in trouble, just like in 2005 when Green and Davenport were both done.

I'm not sure you need a "featured back" who can handle 300+ carries himself. I believe you can be successful splitting carries more equally among the top two, so each gets around 200 carries, provided each brings some big play type capability of some sort, whether speed, power or something. I think Morency can produce in that type of situation, but Herron isn't the other one for it. So in one way or another the Packers need another back who is good for around 200 carries. Calhoun might be that type as well, but he isn't what I would like to see paired with Morency. Too similar, with neither being a "complete" back by himself. They would mirror each other, not complement each other.

I also think that a decent (not great) runner or two will be available this summer if the Packers don't get one in the draft.

Just out of curiosity, as I'm not an expert, but are there a lot of backs who take a few years to develop, or is it primarily a position where you make an impact right away?

We hear a lot lately about rookie RB's making big impacts; but how many big name backs took a few years to develop? (I can't think of any, thats why I'm asking)

I'm going to take a stab at this one off rote memory. Of the starting backs in the NFL, here some some who have taken a while to develop

Thomas Jones- He stunk the first couple years with Arizona
Chester Taylor- Backup for several years before getting established
Ahman Green- Holmgren was down on him enough to trade him
Willie Parker- Tutured by Bettis before really stepping it up
Larry Johnson- Was in Vermeil's doghouse before stepping forward; he might have had an immediate impact if she showed a better attitude and was given the chance right away



I WOULD AGREE that RB is a position that many of the top tier RB's have an immediate impact at. Here is a list of backs that had some immeditate success

Lawrence Maroney
Joesph Addai
Willis McGahee
Leon Washington
Edgerrin James
Fred Taylor
Reggie Bush
Duece McCalister
Ladanion Tomlinson
Julius Jones
Clinton Portis
Warrick Dunn
Cadillac Williams
Shaun Alexander
Stephen Jackson

OF SPECIAL MENTION IS NEARLY ALL OF THESE BACKS WERE FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICKS.

[b bulldog]

You forgot the best rookie back in 06, Jones Drew.

[b bulldog]

One negative about R backs is that you know they will hit the wall and when they do, a competent vet would be nice.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think, generally, RBs don't take time to develop. You don't develop running instincts after you get to the professional level. The guys that struggled early and then became good were usually not given an opportunity or were stuck behind crappy OLs.

[Green Bud Packer]

R.B. is one of the few positions that a rookie can have an impact on wins and loses. mac's not worried, i'm not worried.

[b bulldog]

Hopefully the Broncos ZBS trend of having a strong running game with various backs works in GB.

[LEWCWA]

The thing with Turner is he is very intriguing. He would be worth aquiring,but nobody is giving up a first round pick for the guy. He is leaving SD next year and everyone knows it. So if they want to get something for him they will have to trade him for less!

[KYPack]

I wouldn't call Morency a dancer, and I think he runs hard for the size he brings out there, which isn't a lot. With just herron and Morency, they would be in trouble, just like in 2005 when Green and Davenport were both done.

I'm not sure you need a "featured back" who can handle 300+ carries himself. I believe you can be successful splitting carries more equally among the top two, so each gets around 200 carries, provided each brings some big play type capability of some sort, whether speed, power or something. I think Morency can produce in that type of situation, but Herron isn't the other one for it. So in one way or another the Packers need another back who is good for around 200 carries. Calhoun might be that type as well, but he isn't what I would like to see paired with Morency. Too similar, with neither being a "complete" back by himself. They would mirror each other, not complement each other.

I also think that a decent (not great) runner or two will be available this summer if the Packers don't get one in the draft.

Yeah, I think tandems are the wave of the future. But we will need 400 carries out of some combination of backs and Morency had 91 last year. We need 310 more carries out of somebody.

I think it's safe to say, we don't have the troops right now to go into the NFL season. We need a couple more guys who can lug the ball.

[Patler]

Yeah, I think tandems are the wave of the future. But we will need 400 carries out of some combination of backs and Morency had 91 last year. We need 310 more carries out of somebody.

I think it's safe to say, we don't have the troops right now to go into the NFL season. We need a couple more guys who can lug the ball.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I assumed that Morrency would be good for more carries than he had last season. That's why I suggested two backs at 200 carries each, and that we need another good for about 200 carries. If they go for a guy to give 300+ carries to, they are back to the "featured back/spot duty sub" scenario of last year. That's OK, but I'm not sure it is required.

[MJZiggy]

If this question answers itself in training camp, and needs to be addressed, what are our options then? Will someone else's cutdown casualty be able to handle the ZBS?