lynch to the 'hawks

[mission]

So does TT consider signing Julius Jones who is being released by the Seahawks?

He considers everything. Does next to nothing.

[pack4to84]

So does TT consider signing Julius Jones who is being released by the Seahawks?

http://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/statuses/26480470029

He has been released

[ND72]

So does TT consider signing Julius Jones who is being released by the Seahawks?

He considers everything. Does next to nothing.

Jones is a true zone runner...granted he has lost a few steps from where he was, but you have to bring in a vetran guy IMO. We need something.

I am as big a B-Jack fan as they come, but I also am aware enough to know he's a 3rd down back, but a pretty good one at that. I think Jackson would have had about 60 yards last week if not for a HORRIBLE holding call on Finley, but oh well.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I'm thinking the coaches and TT really like Starks and feel comfortable waiting a few more weeks to get him in the lineup rather than giving up a draft pick.

I think you're probably right - just inject fresh legs into the game. I've heard that it takes far less time for a rookie RB to adjust to the pro game and make an impact than a rookie at any other position.

[sharpe1027]

History says TT has no problems bringing in a Vet RB as a stop gap fill.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

I love Starks potential, but who is to say he can stay healthy once he does come back? The kid has a long list of previous injuries.

[pbmax]

Well, I guess he was available.

A current year fourth and a conditional 2012 pick. Traditionally, that pick would be lower than the known pick, it certainly looks reasonable. Even if the Packers would have had to go to a third.

Has anyone heard about whether there was a contract redo as well?

[mission]

seeing on twitter the conditional is a 5/6 depending

geee, pretty steep cost... we're good there.

[Brando19]

Alright Ted...a 2nd round pick for DeAngelo Williams...do it now!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Smidgeon]

Viewpoints like this really frustrate me because they assume that a trend is a mandate:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/17415/fact-and-fiction-of-the-packers-and-lynch

The "Blind Leading the Blind" excerpts:

But anyone with a realistic view of how Packers general manager Ted Thompson operates should not be surprised. ...Thompson has never traded for a starter since he took the job in 2005. ...[I]t's not how he does business. Thompson prefers to use his draft picks to select and develop his own replacements, not to acquire other teams' unwanted parts.

But if you thought Ted Thompson is going to drop his principles, jump out and trade for a starting tailback, you haven't been paying attention. I suppose it could still happen, but there is nothing in his history to suggest it's a real possibility.

Kind of like how TT never trades up in a draft? Or like how he never signs veteran players? This kind of assumption makes my skin crawl. Does he really think Thompson won't turn over every rock to make his team better? He would have had to give up a 3rd--not a 4th--to beat Seattle's pick. He obviously didn't value Lynch at that price. So why is it that "Thompson won't trade for a starter"? Gargh!

[pbmax]

So does TT consider signing Julius Jones who is being released by the Seahawks?

He considers everything. Does next to nothing.

Jones is a true zone runner...granted he has lost a few steps from where he was, but you have to bring in a vetran guy IMO. We need something.

I am as big a B-Jack fan as they come, but I also am aware enough to know he's a 3rd down back, but a pretty good one at that. I think Jackson would have had about 60 yards last week if not for a HORRIBLE holding call on Finley, but oh well.

I think I have seen Lynch twice in the pros (preseason and Week 2) plus maybe one game in college. Would he have worked in the ZBS? Would DeAngelo be that much better?

[ND72]

So does TT consider signing Julius Jones who is being released by the Seahawks?

He considers everything. Does next to nothing.

Jones is a true zone runner...granted he has lost a few steps from where he was, but you have to bring in a vetran guy IMO. We need something.

I am as big a B-Jack fan as they come, but I also am aware enough to know he's a 3rd down back, but a pretty good one at that. I think Jackson would have had about 60 yards last week if not for a HORRIBLE holding call on Finley, but oh well.

I think I have seen Lynch twice in the pros (preseason and Week 2) plus maybe one game in college. Would he have worked in the ZBS? Would DeAngelo be that much better?

My assumption would be yes. Truly MOST NCAA schools use a version of a ZBS, they just tend to have their own wrinkles...like for fact I don't like our wrinkle, because it is usually the backside DT/DE or OLB who is making the tackle in our ZBS...in a true ZBS, you are cutting those guys down, making it difficult for them to make a play. McCarthy prefers those OL guys try to get downfield to make a cut back block.

You'll see a difference sunday with Washington. Our backside OLB & DE's will be getting cut, vs. Washington's guy not being cut.

[Patler]

Viewpoints like this really frustrate me because they assume that a trend is a mandate:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/17415/fact-and-fiction-of-the-packers-and-lynch

The "Blind Leading the Blind" excerpts:

But anyone with a realistic view of how Packers general manager Ted Thompson operates should not be surprised. ...Thompson has never traded for a starter since he took the job in 2005. ... It's not how he does business. Thompson prefers to use his draft picks to select and develop his own replacements, not to acquire other teams' unwanted parts.

But if you thought Ted Thompson is going to drop his principles, jump out and trade for a starting tailback, you haven't been paying attention. I suppose it could still happen, but there is nothing in his history to suggest it's a real possibility.

Kind of like how TT never trades up in a draft? Or like how he never signs veteran players? This kind of assumption makes my skin crawl. Does he really think Thompson won't turn over every rock to make his team better? He would have had to give up a 3rd--not a 4th--to beat Seattle's pick. He obviously didn't value Lynch at that price. So why is it that "Thompson won't trade for a starter"? Gargh!

Not to mention that the statement is just wrong. In 2005 at the end of training camp, TT traded Chris Johnson for Robert Thomas, who had been mostly a starter in St. Louis, and who was immediately put in a starting spot for the Packers.

[Sparkey]

As long as Clifton and Tauscher are the tackles, it really doesn't matter who the rb is on the team.

[Ballboy]

My whole problem with this is that TT said you build with the draft....at what point do you finally realize that the team IS BUILT? Everyone from Santa Claus to Jesus himself is claiming that the Packers are favorites for the Super Bowl, that this team is ready to win now with younger players, getting into their prime and a QB near the top of his game.

Any sport sees that the window for a Championship opens and then closes as quickly as it opened. Our young core will be needing new contracts soon.

TT has failed in addressing the need at RB at this point...he still has time but a week ago many people here were willing to give up a 2nd for Lynch and then find out today he went for a 4th?