"NO RUNNING FROM PROBLEM"

[Bretsky]

Thompson can't run from backfield problems
Posted: Aug. 27, 2007

Tom Silverstein
E-MAIL

One could hardly characterize Ted Thompson as a gambler.

The stoic, even-tempered Green Bay Packers general manager would be the last person you'd expect to see at the Mirage casino going all in on a pair of deuces.

But the way he has handled the Packers' running back situation leads one to believe he has a little bit of Johnny Chan inside him. Cool, confident and never ruffled, Thompson decided to stand pat with a backfield only the most cold-blooded of gamblers would hold onto.

Things aren't looking very promising for Thompson right now.

Not with Vernand Morency indefinitely sidelined with a knee injury and hardly in football shape should he be available for the season-opener against Philadelphia Sept. 9. Not with rookie Brandon Jackson, who before thumping his noggin Sunday afternoon, hardly looked like the second-coming of Ahman Green. Not with rookie DeShawn Wynn, who finally made it onto the football field the same day Jackson exited it, rusty as an old gate after missing 18 days with a thigh injury.

These three are the Packers' best hope for having a successful running game, which doesn't bode well for the season. It's very possible coach Mike McCarthy will have to turn to veteran Noah Herron, a reliable but less-athletic option, to be his workhorse, which would hardly be ideal.

Before Thompson reports for his lashings, it is noteworthy to point out that his options during the off-season were limited, especially where free agency and trades were concerned. There were a lot of backs who were on the market, but only a few who were worth paying a significant amount of money.

Jamal Lewis? Bad knees and doesn't fit the system.

Dominic Rhodes? Way too much baggage; suspended for the first four games this year.

Kevan Barlow? Washed up.

Corey Dillon? Ditto.

Travis Henry? An intriguing prospect who has the potential to be very productive in a zone-blocking system. But that's only if his financial worries over allegedly fathering nine children with nine different women don't distract him.

Thomas Jones? The Bears would have never traded him to Green Bay.

Willis McGahee? More of a power back who wouldn't be a great fit for the system.

As you can see, the options for replacing Ahman Green were limited, just as they were when Thompson sought to replace departed guards Marco Rivera and Mike Wahle. You can argue all day whether Thompson should have paid to keep Green, or Rivera and Wahle, for that matter, but the reality is he made what he thought were sound fiscal decisions in both cases.

So, does that let him off the hook for not filling those positions?

Absolutely not. The distressing part for Packers fans is that the running back position is shaping up to be to the 2007 Packers what the guard position was to the 2005 Packers: a total mess.

It is Thompson's responsibility to fill open positions, regardless of the circumstances. It is his job to recognize that Morency has a durability problem, that he probably won't get a shot at drafting California's Marshawn Lynch in the first round and that the options after Lynch weren't all that good.

It's his job to make sure the Packers don't fall into the same hole they did in '05 when they couldn't get anything done because their guards were so bad.

At this point, signing Tennessee free agent Chris Brown wouldn't have been such a bad option. Brown, an unrestricted free agent, was interested in signing with the Packers during the off-season, but talks never got off the ground and he wound up going back to the Titans for very little money.

Through three games, Brown is averaging 5.1 yards per carry and is in a heated race with LenDale White for the starting halfback job. Brown has a reputation for running too high and getting hurt, but at this point he'd look like a pretty good option for the Packers.

Jacksonville's LaBrandon Toefield was available, too. And he'll probably be available after the cutdown to 53. At this point, he'd be a viable option. He's not much of a breakaway threat and he's not going to make anyone forget Green, but he can pound it between the tackles.

Then there's San Diego's Michael Turner. The Chargers took him off the market after they were unable to get the first- and third-round picks they were demanding in a trade and planned on having him back up LaDainian Tomlinson for one more year.

However, had a team such as the Packers kept pounding on the door to try to free Turner - who will become an unrestricted free agent at the end of this season - who knows how far they could have knocked down the price? Now it appears to be a moot point because Turner suffered a high ankle sprain this past weekend and could be out for awhile.

The point is there are always options, even if some of them aren't that great. Thompson chose to stand pat in March and April knowing Morency was his leading candidate to start and the best he could hope for out of the draft was a second-round pick. He did nothing dramatic to change the situation and probably won't do anything from now until the start of the regular season.

As a disciple of former general manager Ron Wolf, the one thing he should have learned is that there are always options.

Before Edgar Bennett became the Packers' workhorse during the Mike Holmgren years, Wolf took shots with John Stephens and Reggie Cobb. When Bennett got hurt and then left in free agency, he got as much as he could out of Aaron Hayden and Darick Holmes. And when Dorsey Levens started to fade, he traded for a fumbler named Ahman Green.

It's possible that Morency will get over his knee injury and be a reliable runner, Jackson will develop into a crafty runner and Wynn will be the power back that complements the others. But the situation hardly looks that promising right now and the running game stands to be as weak as the guard position was two years ago.

This is a bet that Thompson looks like he's going to lose again.

[Bretsky]

The distressing part for Packers fans is that the running back position is shaping up to be to the 2007 Packers what the guard position was to the 2005 Packers\


WIST SAID THIS TODAY; these guys are stealing our info in PR :lol:

[Scott Campbell]

The stoic, even-tempered Green Bay Packers general manager would be the last person you'd expect to see at the Mirage casino going all in on a pair of deuces.




Is this supposed to be a bad thing?

[Badgepack]

During the Titan game, watch their running back Dontrell Moore, who should get cut by the Titans. He's a local kid, so I'd like to see him do well. He's young, nothing flashy, but someone to look at.

[LL2]

They better look at some options in the next week, as I'm sure there will be some decent cuts at the RB position. Looks like Jackson might have some potential, but I think it was foolish of TT not to bring in a decent veteran RB that was available for trade or FA.

[Merlin]

I hear that the Green Bay Vocational Technical College University has a guy who hasn't played football since his Pee Wee days at Paris, France Primary School. 3T may want to take a look at the kid, he may even sign for the league minimum.

[SkinBasket]

I think it was foolish of TT not to bring in a decent veteran RB that was available for trade or FA.

Who would you have brought in? Just curious.

[wist43]

Thompson can't run from backfield problems
Posted: Aug. 27, 2007

Tom Silverstein
E-MAIL

Then there's San Diego's Michael Turner. The Chargers took him off the market after they were unable to get the first- and third-round picks they were demanding in a trade and planned on having him back up LaDainian Tomlinson for one more year.

However, had a team such as the Packers kept pounding on the door to try to free Turner - who will become an unrestricted free agent at the end of this season - who knows how far they could have knocked down the price? Now it appears to be a moot point because Turner suffered a high ankle sprain this past weekend and could be out for awhile.


Turner is who I had the most interest in... young, has done it in the league, has a ton of upside. I always had in mind a 2nd round pick +... I'm sure something could have been hammered out.

Even with the high ankle sprain, I'd still go after Turner. No way will TT offer up any of next years picks though. No way will he offer picks.

We're stuck, I fear.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The stoic, even-tempered Green Bay Packers general manager would be the last person you'd expect to see at the Mirage casino going all in on a pair of deuces.




Is this supposed to be a bad thing?


The writer is not criticisizing TT's image, he's making the point that it contrasts with the gamble he took at RB this year.

But was it really such a gamble from TT's perspective? His job is not anything close to being in jeopardy. TT says he wants and expects to win now, but actually next year or the year after is soon enough for his career. Progress is good enough. More cap room for succeeding years fits his goals to a T.

[retailguy]

I think it was foolish of TT not to bring in a decent veteran RB that was available for trade or FA.

Who would you have brought in? Just curious.

How about Ahman Green?

[Partial]

I think it was foolish of TT not to bring in a decent veteran RB that was available for trade or FA.

Who would you have brought in? Just curious.

How about Ahman Green?

No thanks.

[LL2]

I think it was foolish of TT not to bring in a decent veteran RB that was available for trade or FA.

Who would you have brought in? Just curious.

Certainly not that guy in your picture!

[Carolina_Packer]

http://www.footballsfuture.com/2007/nfl/freeagentsRB.html

This gives you an idea of who was available. Not wonderful by any means. Perhaps they should have overpaid for Michael Turner since the market was so bare, and he was the best option.

I know it can set your organization back to lose draft picks, but it can also set your organization back to struggle at RB and to not have a good running game.

The only other option would have been to make sure we got Marshawn Lynch on draft day.

We'll see...perhaps there is a nugget to be found in free agency, or maybe, just maybe our guys will step up and do something good, if not spectacular.

[retailguy]

http://www.footballsfuture.com/2007/nfl/freeagentsRB.html

This gives you an idea of who was available. Not wonderful by any means. Perhaps they should have overpaid for Michael Turner since the market was so bare, and he was the best option.

I know it can set your organization back to lose draft picks, but it can also set your organization back to struggle at RB and to not have a good running game.

The only other option would have been to make sure we got Marshawn Lynch on draft day.

We'll see...perhaps there is a nugget to be found in free agency, or maybe, just maybe our guys will step up and do something good, if not spectacular.

Look, I don't buy the whole "there was no one available" argument.

Ahman Green was available, we just bicker about "value". Quite honestly, a case could be made that having someone reliable whilst training the new guy to take over is INVALUABLE. Face it, we'd all be feeling much better about 2007 and giving Jackson some adequate time to train if Green were in camp even if we KNEW it was a 2 year deal and there was a trifle of dead money thereafter.

Proper succession planning is crucial to any business, especially in football, where careers end after a single play sometimes.

This is just piss poor planning. (Now watch Jackson scamper for 1300 yards to prove me wrong... ) :roll: :wink:

[Harlan Huckleby]

Face it, we'd all be feeling much better about 2007 and giving Jackson some adequate time to train if Green were in camp even if we KNEW it was a 2 year deal

Maybe I misunderstand what you are saying. But Green proved that he was able to get a longer term deal on the market. Why do you think the Packers could have signed him to a convienent 2-year deal?

I thought letting Green go was a good idea. Now it looks less ingenious. But..... gol darn it, it wasn't MY job to replace Green after letting him go. This stain is on TT, not me!

[retailguy]

Face it, we'd all be feeling much better about 2007 and giving Jackson some adequate time to train if Green were in camp even if we KNEW it was a 2 year deal

Maybe I misunderstand what you are saying. But Green proved that he was able to get a longer term deal on the market. Why do you think the Packers could have signed him to a convienent 2-year deal?

I thought letting Green go was a good idea. Now it looks less ingenious. But..... gol darn it, it wasn't MY job to replace Green after letting him go. This stain is on TT, not me!

we'd have had to sign him to a 3 or 4 year deal, that is what the "dead money" part was about...

[RashanGary]

I think you guys will be pleasantly suprised by the running game.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think you guys will be pleasantly suprised by the running game.

Why didn't you say so sooner - I just made my pessimistic 8-8 prediction.

[RashanGary]

You should be able to see it yourself. Green is a pretty good back but nothing special at this point in his career. The Oline is likely to make big gains in their second year running the ZBS and also with the physical gains of the young players. They'll be improved in the running game despite losing Green. Jackson is already averaging more this year than Green did last year through the preseason by a full yard. It's not like we're going from LT in his prime to junk. Our backs are capable runners but the Oline should be the bigger difference.

[Bossman641]

Turner is who I had the most interest in... young, has done it in the league, has a ton of upside. I always had in mind a 2nd round pick +... I'm sure something could have been hammered out.

Even with the high ankle sprain, I'd still go after Turner. No way will TT offer up any of next years picks though. No way will he offer picks.

Wist, this is a point that you make over and over again. AJ Smith stated before the draft that he was willing to trade Turner for both a 1st and 3rd round pick.

Truthfully, neither of us knows exactly what happened behind closed doors, but I have a hard time believing the Chargers would have traded him for a 2nd round pick, especially a mid 2nd round pick which ours was. Now if you would have given up a 1st rounder for Turner, fine. It just always bugs me when you say "well we coulda got Turner for a 2nd round pick" like it's a fact.

There were 3-4 teams in the running for Turner; the Packers, Bills, and Titans. The Titans supposedly were well in the mix and then the Chargers upped their asking price even more.

Jeff Fisher (April 29):
""It became obvious to us they were not willing to move him," Fisher said. "They wanted the assurance of knowing they had a backup to LaDanian Tomlinson, I think."

A day later, on April 30, the Chargers took Turner off the trading block.
""There’s been a lot of activity concerning Michael over the last several months and continued all the way through the draft," GM A.J. Smith said. "But Norv Turner and I...made the decision that our football team is built for 2007 and Michael Turner will be a part of it."

I just don't see why you think that the Chargers, a SB favorite, would have been willing to give up a very important piece of their team for only a 2nd rounder. They're a fairly young team, but they have a few pieces who are getting up their in years. They know this is their SB run.

From the SD Union-Tribune:
"....Smith doesn't feel urgent to move Turner because he expects to get a third-round compensatory pick when Turner leaves as a free agent next offseason."

[falco]

i'll give you a fair assessment of our running game this year it will be nowhere near as bad retail "the whole board hates me because i'm on the only one who doesn't like TT" guy makes it to be, and nowhere near as good as justin "we aren't cut blocking yet and once we do we'll lead the league in rushing" harrell says we will be.

thats the final word on that. stop bickering.

[RashanGary]

I NEVER said they would be a great running team. I think they'll be an average running team and a good passing team. Overall, I think the offense will rank about 10th. I think that is good enough because our defense can be top 5 and our ST's can be top 10. My excitement is with the overall strength of the TEAM and the arguement I have isn't that they will be GREAT but that they are better than many give them credit. Look it up. I've never said they would be great but I did argue when people said they would be awfull.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

I NEVER said they would be a great running team. I think they'll be an average running team and a good passing team. Overall, I think the offense will rank about 10th. I think that is good enough because our defense can be top 5 and our ST's can be top 10. My excitement is with the overall strength of the TEAM and the arguement I have isn't that they will be GREAT but that they are better than many give them credit. Look it up. I've never said they would be great but I did argue when people said they would be awfull.

I love your optimism bud, but the offense won't crack the top 15 probably. Our running game will have a hard time having any success when teams stack the box on obvious running downs. This in-turn hurts Favre and the passing game by enabling defenses to blitz more and focus on our only offensive playmakers. Hopefully I'm wrong though.

[Joemailman]

The Packers should be able to move the ball. They were 9th in offense last year. I suspect they'll be at least as good this year because the OL and WR positions should be better. The question is whether they can improve their red-zone efficiency, which I believe was at or near the bottom of the league.

[SkinBasket]

I think it was foolish of TT not to bring in a decent veteran RB that was available for trade or FA.

Who would you have brought in? Just curious.

How about Ahman Green?

A. You are not LL2.

B. Green got too much green. At the time, injury was a very real issue, and IMO, still is. Secondly, moving to the ZBS, you don't pay an old guy with a surgically repaired torn up leg to do the job.

[Fritz]

Back in the earlier days of Mike Holmgren, the rushing statistics (it seems to me though I could be wrong) often read something along the lines of "E. Bennett, 16 carries, 64 yards." Nothing earth shaking, but it seemed to get the job done.

Maybe that's how the Packer rushing attack will be this year. Maybe it won't be as powerful as it was in 2003 (man that was fun to watch), but maybe it'll be just efficient enough to git 'r dun.

[falco]

I think we would be a lot better with Green, but I also think that wouldn't have been a good move. Teams like Philly have stayed successful because they knew when to let people go BEFORE they are over the hill and eating up cap space with big salaries. Thompson had a lot of other options, and in hindsight probably should have signed at least somebody. But you couldn't have known we would have had all these injuries.

How come no one has looked into Corey Dillon? I know he's washed up, etc. But couldn't he come in as a stopgap for another year? Or is he that far gone? Forgive me for not being up to date.

[Bretsky]

I think we would be a lot better with Green, but I also think that wouldn't have been a good move. Teams like Philly have stayed successful because they knew when to let people go BEFORE they are over the hill and eating up cap space with big salaries. Thompson had a lot of other options, and in hindsight probably should have signed at least somebody. But you couldn't have known we would have had all these injuries.

How come no one has looked into Corey Dillon? I know he's washed up, etc. But couldn't he come in as a stopgap for another year? Or is he that far gone? Forgive me for not being up to date.


What Phily does so well is have the replacement in place and in grooming before their players leave. I still remember Bobby Taylor and Troy Vincent; both leave the same year and they already have two guys groomed to step right in.

Dillon, I even think he might be beyond his years; I thought Chris Brown, an oft injured player with a lot of talent when healthy, might have been a nice stop gap options to compete with Morency and Jackson. Surely not a long term solution, but worth bringing in to compete. But that's just me. I don't like needing to count on rookies.

[Fritz]

I guess I'm not in favor of bringing in re-treads at this point. If Corey Dillon could put this team over the top, then okay, but at this point I don't think he's the difference between getting into the playoffs or not.

Maybe this is one of those positions we have to just sort of wait on...along with tight end, backup linebacker, and maybe safety.

I think this team, if it stays relatively injury free, could go 9-7. But I think it's still a few players short of being a strong contender.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think this team, if it stays relatively injury free, could go 9-7. But I think it's still a few players short of being a strong contender.

The frustrating part is they may be only two players short.

[Fritz]

I think this team, if it stays relatively injury free, could go 9-7. But I think it's still a few players short of being a strong contender.

The frustrating part is they may be only two players short.

More frustrating if they were two short players.

[falco]

I guess I'm not in favor of bringing in re-treads at this point. If Corey Dillon could put this team over the top, then okay, but at this point I don't think he's the difference between getting into the playoffs or not.

Maybe this is one of those positions we have to just sort of wait on...along with tight end, backup linebacker, and maybe safety.

I think this team, if it stays relatively injury free, could go 9-7. But I think it's still a few players short of being a strong contender.

I'd rather not either Fritz. But if someone like Corey Dillon (who I know very little about) can cover for our deficiency at RB for even a few weeks until people get healthy, it'd be worth a one year contract, as opposed to paying Ahman for five years but only getting two.

Sort of like our situation at guard in 05. It would have been a much better year to have some retreads at guard who didn't put us over the top, but kept us from sucking major ass.

[Fritz]

Good point, Falco. Even if he's only getting the team through the early rough part while Morency recovers and Jackson gets his sea legs, then maybe it's worth a shot.

But in my dark secret fantasy world, DeShawn Wynn comes on like gangbusters (until he gets winded, anyway) and emerges as the back - Najeh Daven without the Poop.

[Harlan Huckleby]

But if someone like Corey Dillon (who I know very little about) can cover

Then stick him at safety! We really could use some depth there too.


what a dumb ass stunt i pulled here.

[Harlan Huckleby]

More frustrating if they were two short players.

What a dumb ass stunt you pulled there.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Najeh Daven without the Poop.

Najeh without the poop is like the ham without the eggs, Laurel without Hardy. Can't have it.

[falco]

Good point, Falco. Even if he's only getting the team through the early rough part while Morency recovers and Jackson gets his sea legs, then maybe it's worth a shot.

But in my dark secret fantasy world, DeShawn Wynn comes on like gangbusters (until he gets winded, anyway) and emerges as the back - Najeh Daven without the Poop.

Speaking of the poop, has he ever gotten his big contract? I'm pretty sure he straggled onto the Steelers after he left here. He wasn't great, but boy he would look good back on our team now. He could put up big games now and then