Will Eddie Lacy Be On Packer Roster in 2017?

[Rutnstrut]

That's the whole point. Ty Montgomery is now the feature back. McCarthy basically said as much yesterday, and that will only be further enhanced once he actually gets to see all of the game film. Imagine what Ty could look like with an entire offseason to actually work with the OL and coaching staff to work on being a RB. We finally have a RB who can be a dynamic receiving threat out of the backfield.

Since Lacy at best only has a chance at competing for the feature back spot in GB. I'm fairly certain that there is at least one NFL team willing to offer him $5M+/year to be their primary back. He's shown enough during his career to justify another chance somewhere. I just don't see how everyone else in the league is going to completely pass on the guy so that the Packers can retain him at a discount bin price for 1 season.

Monty will not be able to handle the pounding of being a RB on a regular basis. They need to use him sparingly. Lacy and Michael would be a great tandem, with a sprinkling of Monty.

[pbmax]

Monty will not be able to handle the pounding of being a RB on a regular basis. They need to use him sparingly. Lacy and Michael would be a great tandem, with a sprinkling of Monty.

Agree completely with this. Michael looks especially suited to take Starks third down role if he can catch a screen and learn to block.

[King Friday]

Monty will not be able to handle the pounding of being a RB on a regular basis. They need to use him sparingly. Lacy and Michael would be a great tandem, with a sprinkling of Monty.

You are nuts. What evidence do you possibly have that Monty can't handle being a RB? He's 220 pounds! So in your world, you have to be a 260 pound fat slob to be able to "handle the pounding"?

Hope I don't meet your girlfriend.

The point is that the offense needs to change some if Ty is the feature back. He's far more of a danger out of the backfield as a receiver, but I don't think our offense works like that currently. We are designed to be a Lacy led running attack. That will change this offseason. I think Montgomery is absolutely our feature back next year. He's too talented to not get on the field...and we have so many receivers, it only makes sense to use Ty as a back.

Of course...we need capable reserves too. Any RB can get hurt. However, Montgomery seems adept at getting low and avoiding big hits for the most part. He'll gain in that as time goes on as well. I don't see him being a liability in terms of injury as a RB.

[Patler]

Monty will not be able to handle the pounding of being a RB on a regular basis. They need to use him sparingly. Lacy and Michael would be a great tandem, with a sprinkling of Monty.

Agree completely with this. Michael looks especially suited to take Starks third down role if he can catch a screen and learn to block.

I have been asking these questions for a month now, and no one ever answers them:

Why do you think Montgomery can't be a running back like any other regular running back?
Why can't he take the same load?
Why must he be used sparingly?

Is it just because he was called a wide receiver in college?

[pbmax]

I have been asking these questions for a month now, and no one ever answers them:

Why do you think Montgomery can't be a running back like any other regular running back?
Why can't he take the same load?
Why must he be used sparingly?

Is it just because he was called a wide receiver in college?

Because RBs get beat up a lot. Lacy will be cheap. Michael has exceptional speed which Monty does not.

[Zool]

Because RBs get beat up a lot. Lacy will be cheap. Michael has exceptional speed which Monty does not.

With his WR background, why is he not the perfect 3rd down back?

[pbmax]

With his WR background, why is he not the perfect 3rd down back?

He could be, though he too needs to work on blocking. But I want to get Michael's speed on the field.

[King Friday]

Because RBs get beat up a lot. Lacy will be cheap. Michael has exceptional speed which Monty does not.

So Monty can't be a feature RB because "RBs get beat up a lot"? We have to stick with Lacy because he "will be cheap", even though he's the one who is proven to be unable to handle the beating? That's your viewpoint on 2017?

I'm with Patler here...I haven't seen any credible evidence to suggest that Montgomery is incapable of carrying the rock 200+ times a year. This is McCarthy's team, for crying out loud. We aren't giving the ball to anyone 300 times a year anyway. Montgomery's size probably makes him MORE likely to actually last 16 games, because he isn't likely to go searching for contact like bigger backs often do.

[King Friday]

He could be, though he too needs to work on blocking. But I want to get Michael's speed on the field.

I'd rather have Monty's receiving ability than Michael's ability to find an OL's ass crack.

[hoosier]

I could see the Lions making a run at Lacy. They think they're close, with Stafford playing as well as he has, and if you can get someone like Lacy at a decent price, then suddenly you have a running game, and you didn't have to use a draft pick. Hell, the Giants could use him, too.

And there may be enough of him for two teams!

[Zool]

And there may be enough of him for two teams!

I'd take Abdullah over Lacy.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I would see no problem having a Monty and Michael tandem going forward the rest of this season and all of next season out of the backfield. Michael has incredible speed and can be a game changer. Monty has good speed but incredible vision and patience and is decisive in his cuts. He plants his foot and goes forward, no dancing around when he sees the hole.

I too, have seen zero evidence that he can't handle the workload of a RB.

[gbgary]

rb decisions to make. resign Lacy and/or Michael to a 1yr deal, or...only sign one and take one in the second rnd? sweeten Monty's deal? i say keep all three and draft an impact te or wr. it's not like we're a running team to begin with.

[Patler]

Because RBs get beat up a lot. Lacy will be cheap. Michael has exceptional speed which Monty does not.

That response doesn't really answer the questions.

Yes, its a given that RB's get beat up.
Lacy being cheap has nothing to do with whether Montgomery can be used as a regular RB. Michael being faster has nothing to do with whether Montgomery can be used as a regular RB. Either of those factors might impact how much the team choses to use Montgomery, but the suggestions have been that Montgomery is deficient in some way such that he can not be used like a regular RB.

In my opinion, they could chose to use Montgomery as the regular RB just as they have Starks at times in the past.
Montgomery is not just a gimmick back, as some seem to imply.

[pbmax]

That response doesn't really answer the questions.

Yes, its a given that RB's get beat up.
Lacy being cheap has nothing to do with whether Montgomery can be used as a regular RB. Michael being faster has nothing to do with whether Montgomery can be used as a regular RB. Either of those factors might impact how much the team choses to use Montgomery, but the suggestions have been that Montgomery is deficient in some way such that he can not be used like a regular RB.

In my opinion, they could chose to use Montgomery as the regular RB just as they have Starks at times in the past.
Montgomery is not just a gimmick back, as some seem to imply.

So far, Monty seems like he can be used as a regular back. I am willing to stipulate to that based on what he has shown this year. But there are two points to make in addition to that:

1. He does not seem like a typical short yardage banger.
2. He has no adult track record of heavy usage as a RB. So your guess is as good as mine in how he holds up. He had 38 carries in 47 games at Stanford. His high as a pro came yesterday at 16.

The first leads me to want to have Lacy and Ripkowski involved. The second leads me to want someone to develop alongside him.

Additionally, Michael's speed makes we want to find a role for him.