You may be right. I don't think the PAckers know what's going to happen yet either. Two factors that will help determine what they do is Favre and Green. If they decide they have a shot at the playoffs then we're probably looking at Favre returning anf that's more likely to lead to a Green deal I would think. Clearly they don't see Green as anything more than short term solution and only if Green is willing to accept a lower deal will that even happen.With that said, I ecpect GAdo to be in the mix. He looked tto good for them to not give him a serious look. I coule very easily see a RBBC with Green, Gado and 1 other guy (Davenport, Fisher, FA or draft) running together to start. If someone gets hot they might ride that train out, who knows?As a Packer fan I've been thinking about this and, this is just a guess, I don't think either Green or Davenport will be back next season. Gado will get some kind of shot and it is possible they will draft someone, or sign a low priced FA (who could turn out to be Ahman or Najeh in the current RB market), but I don't see bringing either current Packer FA RB back as a priority for this team.
But the real answer is right now no one knows given the uncertainty of the Packer FA backs (injures), the uncertainty of Brett's situation, and the early point in the offseason.
The thing is if I'm Ted Thompson, besides being much weathlier and happy with my job, I just can't see hooking my wagon up to Green, even in the short term. Green is getting old, has had declining production and is coming off a pretty serious injury. Sure, if he's cheap then they might see bringing him back as a no risk proposition (and he could be given the quality and quantity of FA RBs).Davenport certainly seemed like he was sliding right in to the Packer RB successor but again as a GM in the second year of your contract do you want to trust that relatively untested Davenport will be the answer or do you want to make your own judgement and bring in your guy -- whoever that is. Similar to Ahman, I would think if the Packers resign Najeh it will be an incentive laden deal.You may be right. I don't think the PAckers know what's going to happen yet either. Two factors that will help determine what they do is Favre and Green. If they decide they have a shot at the playoffs then we're probably looking at Favre returning anf that's more likely to lead to a Green deal I would think. Clearly they don't see Green as anything more than short term solution and only if Green is willing to accept a lower deal will that even happen.
With that said, I ecpect GAdo to be in the mix. He looked tto good for them to not give him a serious look. I coule very easily see a RBBC with Green, Gado and 1 other guy (Davenport, Fisher, FA or draft) running together to start. If someone gets hot they might ride that train out, who knows?
If Gado does well in camp and continues to improve then I fully expect him to be a serious threat to be a long term solution. He needs to work on his blocking, blitz pick up and fumbling in order to do what many consider would be enough to be the FT back.
Gado was pretty effective last season so if Thompson makes any upgrades at all to the offensive line -- and he damn well better -- whoever is starting at RB has a chance to have a good year. That's assuming Favre returns. If Favre retires, it could be a long year for everyone associated with the Green Bay offense.Back to the running game, the Packers have the following options:Zoneblocking seems to make decent RB's into pro-bowlers, but the interior O-Line of Green Bay is in total chaos and until that is shored up, I'm not sure any RB will be effective.
Gado had one lost fumble last year.I am not a GB expert, but I am not understanding all the opinions that Ahman Green is not a viable option. In 2004, he averaged 4.5 yds/carry for 1163 rushing yards and added 40 receptions for 275 yards. He scored 8 TDs with 1438 total yards.
Last year he did not start well, but GB O-Line was in a shambles to start the season and he got hurt early. What was his injury and does anyone have info on his recovery?
If the injury recovery is the problem, then I follw these opinions better, but otherwise I'm not sure I see why Gado is a better option than Green. Gado fumbled even more often than Green.
In a string of three games in November, he had 61 carries and fumbled four times, maybe he lost only one, but four in three consecutive games seemed to me to be a lot.Gado had one lost fumble last year.I am not a GB expert, but I am not understanding all the opinions that Ahman Green is not a viable option. In 2004, he averaged 4.5 yds/carry for 1163 rushing yards and added 40 receptions for 275 yards. He scored 8 TDs with 1438 total yards.
Last year he did not start well, but GB O-Line was in a shambles to start the season and he got hurt early. What was his injury and does anyone have info on his recovery?
If the injury recovery is the problem, then I follw these opinions better, but otherwise I'm not sure I see why Gado is a better option than Green. Gado fumbled even more often than Green.
Ahman Green has been suffering with tendonitis in his right knee as far back as college. He suffered a ruptured tendon in his right quadriceps on 10/23/2005. From what I have read, this type of injury takes at least 9 months to fully recover from and in some cases a good bit longer. Tough situation for a player who will become an unrestricted free agent on March 3.What was his injury and does anyone have info on his recovery?
You make a good point but the reason Gado is a better option likely comes down to money. Green will command more of it. Add the injury issue and Gado is more favorable. Earlier I stated I thought Gado needed to improve. Fumbles is one of the areas he needs to improve on. But remember when Green couldn't hold on? He has had his share of fumbles in the past. If he can correct them so can Gado.I am not a GB expert, but I am not understanding all the opinions that Ahman Green is not a viable option. In 2004, he averaged 4.5 yds/carry for 1163 rushing yards and added 40 receptions for 275 yards. He scored 8 TDs with 1438 total yards.
Last year he did not start well, but GB O-Line was in a shambles to start the season and he got hurt early. What was his injury and does anyone have info on his recovery?
If the injury recovery is the problem, then I follw these opinions better, but otherwise I'm not sure I see why Gado is a better option than Green. Gado fumbled even more often than Green.
I realize that Green will want more money, but the climate for top $ contracts for RBs has diminshed recently and Green is coming off a big injury. Seems that he would be willing to take a one year minimum deal with incentives just to get a chance and GB would still be a likely spot, although Carolina might even be better for him.You make a good point but the reason Gado is a better option likely comes down to money. Green will command more of it. Add the injury issue and Gado is more favorable. Earlier I stated I thought Gado needed to improve. Fumbles is one of the areas he needs to improve on. But remember when Green couldn't hold on? He has had his share of fumbles in the past. If he can correct them so can Gado.I am not a GB expert, but I am not understanding all the opinions that Ahman Green is not a viable option. In 2004, he averaged 4.5 yds/carry for 1163 rushing yards and added 40 receptions for 275 yards. He scored 8 TDs with 1438 total yards.
Last year he did not start well, but GB O-Line was in a shambles to start the season and he got hurt early. What was his injury and does anyone have info on his recovery?
If the injury recovery is the problem, then I follw these opinions better, but otherwise I'm not sure I see why Gado is a better option than Green. Gado fumbled even more often than Green.
I agree, that's the key. If he is willing he will likely be there. There is 1 possible snag however, I read that his thigh injury won't be ready until after training camp. That would mean teams are taking even more risk to sign him. I don't know if GB still wants him but I would think they would be more likely than others considering their relationship. That alos means Green will have no leverage at all. So he's probably going to have to take a less than market deal just to get a shot. Some guys refuse to do that felling like they're not getting enough respect.I realize that Green will want more money, but the climate for top $ contracts for RBs has diminshed recently and Green is coming off a big injury. Seems that he would be willing to take a one year minimum deal with incentives just to get a chance and GB would still be a likely spot, although Carolina might even be better for him.You make a good point but the reason Gado is a better option likely comes down to money. Green will command more of it. Add the injury issue and Gado is more favorable. Earlier I stated I thought Gado needed to improve. Fumbles is one of the areas he needs to improve on. But remember when Green couldn't hold on? He has had his share of fumbles in the past. If he can correct them so can Gado.I am not a GB expert, but I am not understanding all the opinions that Ahman Green is not a viable option. In 2004, he averaged 4.5 yds/carry for 1163 rushing yards and added 40 receptions for 275 yards. He scored 8 TDs with 1438 total yards.
Last year he did not start well, but GB O-Line was in a shambles to start the season and he got hurt early. What was his injury and does anyone have info on his recovery?
If the injury recovery is the problem, then I follw these opinions better, but otherwise I'm not sure I see why Gado is a better option than Green. Gado fumbled even more often than Green.
12/20/2005 Gado tore the medial collateral ligament in his right knee. The good news, however, is that Gado's injury does not require surgery to heal.What was Gado's injury that ended his season?
"Head Coach Mike Sherman said he will miss three to six weeks. It's just rest and rehab for him," Sherman said.www.packers.comWhat is his recovery outlook?
Taylor's contract was one year for $3 million ($2 million in salary and $1 million in signing bonus) with $200,000 in incentives (which he did not achieve).Obviously I think Gado has proved that, at worse, he is a solid backup. I do not want the Pack breaking the bank for a running back, as we are not ready to compete for a playoff spot yet, and I think if Thompson does any spending, it should be on young free agents, entering their prime (hello LeCharles Bentley and Will Witherspoon). Other than that, I think bringing in veterans at low salaries is the way to go again.
On to the running back situation, I think gado is the only certain right now. I have always liked Davenport and Fisher, but these guys cannot stay healthy and should be jettisoned. I would not be opposed to the Pack re-signing Green to a 1 year contract for decent $$$ (much like Chester Taylor last year- 1 yr 4.5 mil). This way he is only on the books for 1 season. At his age, however, I doubt Green would take a 1 year deal, but the market might dictate the terms.
Sounds good. I wouldn't mind Ahmad signing a 1 year deal like that with maybe a little more incentives.Taylor's contract was one year for $3 million ($2 million in salary and $1 million in signing bonus) with $200,000 in incentives (which he did not achieve).Obviously I think Gado has proved that, at worse, he is a solid backup. I do not want the Pack breaking the bank for a running back, as we are not ready to compete for a playoff spot yet, and I think if Thompson does any spending, it should be on young free agents, entering their prime (hello LeCharles Bentley and Will Witherspoon). Other than that, I think bringing in veterans at low salaries is the way to go again.
On to the running back situation, I think gado is the only certain right now. I have always liked Davenport and Fisher, but these guys cannot stay healthy and should be jettisoned. I would not be opposed to the Pack re-signing Green to a 1 year contract for decent $$$ (much like Chester Taylor last year- 1 yr 4.5 mil). This way he is only on the books for 1 season. At his age, however, I doubt Green would take a 1 year deal, but the market might dictate the terms.