"NO RUNNING FROM PROBLEM"

[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.