Packers RB Update For Week 4 (1 Viewer)

[packersfan]

Use any of these guys at your own risk:

Link

 

[mr. furley]

jeebus they might be w/o Wells

 

[flranger]

jeebus they might be w/o Wells

From the article this is a big statement:McCarthy laughed when asked if Morency, DeShawn Wynn or Ryan Grant would open at running back."We don't have a starter at running back," he said. "We're a running back by committee team, and I foresee us being that way every week."

 

[BeaverCleaver]

jeebus they might be w/o Wells

From the article this is a big statement:McCarthy laughed when asked if Morency, DeShawn Wynn or Ryan Grant would open at running back."We don't have a starter at running back," he said. "We're a running back by committee team, and I foresee us being that way every week."

It really isn't a big statement because it is exactly what has been expected.

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

 

[Brutis]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

It's a major concern and a glaring area of weakness, no doubt about it.

 

[mr. furley]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

So tell us how the GB running game will be able to help them stay strong in the NFC.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Reaching for Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round was reality.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Reaching for Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round was reality.

Everyone and their mother knew Jackson was not an instant starter. Morency was slotted to start but was injured. If you're suggesting ol' Ted should now be predicting the future, then I can't help you.And for what it's worth, there were not other running back options available to them via the draft.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

and you just keep ignoring that their rushing attack stinks and will hurt them if they don't get it fixed.

 

[Aaronstory]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson. No piling on. Just pointing out that there were plenty of options in the offseason and Thompson ignored all of them. Maybe it will work out in the end and if it does I'll be the first one to admit I was wrong. But so far the running game remains a major issue for the Packers and poses a serious threat to undercut what is turning out to be a good season in a wide-open NFC.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Reaching for Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round was reality.

Everyone and their mother knew Jackson was not an instant starter. Morency was slotted to start but was injured. If you're suggesting ol' Ted should now be predicting the future, then I can't help you.And for what it's worth, there were not other running back options available to them via the draft.

Is this where you tell us on what a great pick that Harrell was? The Jackson pick was terrible. Deal with it and move on.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

and you just keep ignoring that their rushing attack stinks and will hurt them if they don't get it fixed.

Nice job on this. Tell me where I said that?What I said was piling on Thompson about the current roster of backs is ignorant. There weren't many options available to upgrade the position. Of course, there a whole legion of fans who think they should've just trade their entire draft to magically fill all the holes on this team.Last year it was the WR group that Ted screwed up. Funny we don't hear anything more about that now that Thompson scored twice with WRs in the second and third round.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

This may be one of the dumbest things I have ever seen on this board.

 

[packersfan]

Last year it was the WR group that Ted screwed up. Funny we don't hear anything more about that now that Thompson scored twice with WRs in the second and third round.

I praised the Jennings pick on draft day in this forum last year. That was right here in reality land too. Imagine that.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Reaching for Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round was reality.

Everyone and their mother knew Jackson was not an instant starter. Morency was slotted to start but was injured. If you're suggesting ol' Ted should now be predicting the future, then I can't help you.And for what it's worth, there were not other running back options available to them via the draft.

Is this where you tell us on what a great pick that Harrell was? The Jackson pick was terrible. Deal with it and move on.

You guys are the best. Where did I say that? If you want to judge players 3 games into their pro careers go ahead. I choose to wait and see.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

and you just keep ignoring that their rushing attack stinks and will hurt them if they don't get it fixed.

Last year it was the WR group that Ted screwed up. Funny we don't hear anything more about that now that Thompson scored twice with WRs in the second and third round.

My bad.....who needs running backs now that Thompson has "scored twice with WRs in the second and third round".

 

[Billy1x]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

As I recall the Patriots won a Super Bowl using a short passing game in place of a running game a few years back. In theory, you need a running game when it gets cold but with the new gloves, Favre's large hands, and arm strength I don't see an issue.You wanna stop the Pack you better load up on corner backs.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson.

So now we're back on the trade scenarios and RFAs. Look, you can agree or disagree with Thompson's approach. But what we do know is that he does not give up draft picks lightly. I'll ignore the Brown comments, because he is not an upgrade. Period. If he was any good, he likely would've landed a deal somewhere else. And Jamal Lewis? Uh, no. Not in my book.

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Reaching for Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round was reality.

Everyone and their mother knew Jackson was not an instant starter. Morency was slotted to start but was injured. If you're suggesting ol' Ted should now be predicting the future, then I can't help you.And for what it's worth, there were not other running back options available to them via the draft.

Is this where you tell us on what a great pick that Harrell was? The Jackson pick was terrible. Deal with it and move on.

You guys are the best. Where did I say that? If you want to judge players 3 games into their pro careers go ahead. I choose to wait and see.

No.....you choose to support Thompson no matter what he does.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Reaching for Brandon Jackson in the 2nd round was reality.

Everyone and their mother knew Jackson was not an instant starter. Morency was slotted to start but was injured. If you're suggesting ol' Ted should now be predicting the future, then I can't help you.And for what it's worth, there were not other running back options available to them via the draft.

Is this where you tell us on what a great pick that Harrell was? The Jackson pick was terrible. Deal with it and move on.

You guys are the best. Where did I say that? If you want to judge players 3 games into their pro careers go ahead. I choose to wait and see.

No.....you choose to support Thompson no matter what he does.

Seriously guys, you're killing me. I didn't like the Harrel pick. Period. But based on Thompson's record in the draft in his time here, I'm willing to wait and see. I scratched my head on that pick as well. But I just don't write guys off 3 games in because I disagreed with the GM.The James Jones pick shocked me as well, but that seemed to work out.

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson.

So now we're back on the trade scenarios and RFAs. Look, you can agree or disagree with Thompson's approach. But what we do know is that he does not give up draft picks lightly. I'll ignore the Brown comments, because he is not an upgrade. Period. If he was any good, he likely would've landed a deal somewhere else. And Jamal Lewis? Uh, no. Not in my book.

Both are significantly better than anybody the Packers have. Again, I'm no fan of Jamal Lewis at all but the fact he'd be a major upgrade shows just how pathetic the Packers' RB situation is. And yes, I do disagree with Thompson's approach when it comes to how he addressed the RB situation this offseason. That's the whole point. There were numerous options available and he ignored them all. Again, maybe that approach will be proven correct and if it is I'll be right here giving him props and saying I was wrong. But so far it clearly was a mistake and although the Packers are 3-0 right now there is a concern (or there sure as hell should be) that the RB situation is going to become a major issue as this season goes along.

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

As I recall the Patriots won a Super Bowl using a short passing game in place of a running game a few years back.

I posted this in another thread. In 2003, the Patriots won the Super Bowl with one of the worst rushing attacks in the league. However, they were No. 1 defensively in points allowed and Top 5 in several other defensive categories. So they were able to offset a poor running game with an exemplary defense. I think the Packers' defense is pretty good obviously but can it be the best in the entire league? That's what may need to happen to offset the pathetic running game.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

and you just keep ignoring that their rushing attack stinks and will hurt them if they don't get it fixed.

Last year it was the WR group that Ted screwed up. Funny we don't hear anything more about that now that Thompson scored twice with WRs in the second and third round.

My bad.....who needs running backs now that Thompson has "scored twice with WRs in the second and third round".

Come on. You cannot possibly fill every need on a team in a given year. It is not possible. That's why all this woulda, coulda, shoulda stuff is just not reality. Thompson rebuilt the linebacking group. Thompson rebuilt the WR group. He'll do the same with RB and TE, of that I'm confident. Who knows, the guys you're writing off right now might turn out to be the answer down the line. Unlike many fans, I'm willing to be patient. This was a roster totally devoid of playmaking talent. It took Mike Sherman years to break it down. It'll take Thompson years to fill all those holes.

 

[Brutis]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

Are you comparing the Packers RBBC to the Cowboys? seriously? lol

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

And to clarify further. There's not one post I made here that stated I was not concerned about the running game from here on out. The only difference is I look at the rest of this team and realize how far Thompson's taken them in the time he's been here. So my issue is not the running backs on the roster as much as it is those people who choose to bash the GM whenever possible.

There's still a lot of work to do in Green Bay, but Ted Thompson has laid down a nice blue print to date.

 

[packersfan]

And to clarify further. There's not one post I made here that stated I was not concerned about the running game from here on out. The only difference is I look at the rest of this team and realize how far Thompson's taken them in the time he's been here. So my issue is not the running backs on the roster as much as it is those people who choose to bash the GM whenever possible. There's still a lot of work to do in Green Bay, but Ted Thompson has laid down a nice blue print to date.

In your opinion. I like what Thompson has done defensively. No question. But the biggest (and arguably the only two) playmakers on offense remain the two he inherited - Favre and Driver.Edited to add - his own head coach laughingly admits he doesn't have a starting running back. That's hardly a raving endorsement for the work Thompson did in addressing the glaring need at the position this offseason.

 

[Aaronstory]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

Are you comparing the Packers RBBC to the Cowboys? seriously? lol

Nope. I'm pointing out the idiocy of saying a team is a pretender because it uses a committee when the Colts just used one to win a Super Bowl...

 

[gianmarco]

So about that Packer's RB update for tomorrow.........

 

[BeaverCleaver]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

Are you comparing the Packers RBBC to the Cowboys? seriously? lol

Nope. I'm pointing out the idiocy of saying a team is a pretender because it uses a committee when the Colts just used one to win a Super Bowl...

Is this where we point out the idiocy of comparing the Indy and Dallas backfields to the Packers?

 

[Brutis]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

Are you comparing the Packers RBBC to the Cowboys? seriously? lol

Nope. I'm pointing out the idiocy of saying a team is a pretender because it uses a committee when the Colts just used one to win a Super Bowl...

Let me clarify for you. Having a RBBC doesnt make you a bad running team like what the Colts had last year and what dallas still has. Having a BAD RBBC like what the Packers have will kill them.

 

[packersfan]

Let me clarify for you. Having a RBBC doesnt make you a bad running team like what the Colts had last year and what dallas still has. Having a BAD RBBC like what the Packers have will kill them.

Precisely. It's not the RBBC situation which is a problem; it's the alarming lack of talent with regards to the RBs who are comprising the RBBC in Green Bay that is the problem.

 

[Brutis]

Let me clarify for you. Having a RBBC doesnt make you a bad running team like what the Colts had last year and what dallas still has. Having a BAD RBBC like what the Packers have will kill them.

Precisely. It's not the RBBC situation which is a problem; it's the alarming lack of talent with regards to the RBs who are comprising the RBBC in Green Bay that is the problem.

I was emabarrassed for Aaronstory that i needed to spell that out for him. What the Packers have isn't even a RBBC, I dont know what the hell that is?

 

[BeaverCleaver]

Let me clarify for you. Having a RBBC doesnt make you a bad running team like what the Colts had last year and what dallas still has. Having a BAD RBBC like what the Packers have will kill them.

Precisely. It's not the RBBC situation which is a problem; it's the alarming lack of talent with regards to the RBs who are comprising the RBBC in Green Bay that is the problem.

I was emabarrassed for Aaronstory that i needed to spell that out for him.

 

[mr. furley]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson. No piling on. Just pointing out that there were plenty of options in the offseason and Thompson ignored all of them. Maybe it will work out in the end and if it does I'll be the first one to admit I was wrong. But so far the running game remains a major issue for the Packers and poses a serious threat to undercut what is turning out to be a good season in a wide-open NFC.

the problem being yah can't just take any RB and slam him in to the system. that goes for every and any team.

 

[mr. furley]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

and you just keep ignoring that their rushing attack stinks and will hurt them if they don't get it fixed.

Last year it was the WR group that Ted screwed up. Funny we don't hear anything more about that now that Thompson scored twice with WRs in the second and third round.

My bad.....who needs running backs now that Thompson has "scored twice with WRs in the second and third round".

Come on. You cannot possibly fill every need on a team in a given year. It is not possible. That's why all this woulda, coulda, shoulda stuff is just not reality. Thompson rebuilt the linebacking group. Thompson rebuilt the WR group. He'll do the same with RB and TE, of that I'm confident. Who knows, the guys you're writing off right now might turn out to be the answer down the line. Unlike many fans, I'm willing to be patient. This was a roster totally devoid of playmaking talent. It took Mike Sherman years to break it down. It'll take Thompson years to fill all those holes.

guys wanted TT to make the Packers a SB contender 1 year after they went 4-12 and Sherman devastated the roster. can't please people like that.

 

[mr. furley]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson.

So now we're back on the trade scenarios and RFAs. Look, you can agree or disagree with Thompson's approach. But what we do know is that he does not give up draft picks lightly. I'll ignore the Brown comments, because he is not an upgrade. Period. If he was any good, he likely would've landed a deal somewhere else. And Jamal Lewis? Uh, no. Not in my book.

Both are significantly better than anybody the Packers have. Again, I'm no fan of Jamal Lewis at all but the fact he'd be a major upgrade shows just how pathetic the Packers' RB situation is. And yes, I do disagree with Thompson's approach when it comes to how he addressed the RB situation this offseason. That's the whole point. There were numerous options available and he ignored them all. Again, maybe that approach will be proven correct and if it is I'll be right here giving him props and saying I was wrong. But so far it clearly was a mistake and although the Packers are 3-0 right now there is a concern (or there sure as hell should be) that the RB situation is going to become a major issue as this season goes along.

Objection, your honor. Speculation.

 

[Ketamine Dreams]

When you have 3 rookies in the rotation it may take a bit to see what they can do. Those 3 are still adjusting to life in the NFL. Morency is a known commodity and played decent last year. Durability is the issue with him. I think they took the shotgun approach and are hoping one of the youngsters develops into something.

 

[mr. furley]

And to clarify further. There's not one post I made here that stated I was not concerned about the running game from here on out. The only difference is I look at the rest of this team and realize how far Thompson's taken them in the time he's been here. So my issue is not the running backs on the roster as much as it is those people who choose to bash the GM whenever possible. There's still a lot of work to do in Green Bay, but Ted Thompson has laid down a nice blue print to date.

In your opinion. I like what Thompson has done defensively. No question. But the biggest (and arguably the only two) playmakers on offense remain the two he inherited - Favre and Driver.Edited to add - his own head coach laughingly admits he doesn't have a starting running back. That's hardly a raving endorsement for the work Thompson did in addressing the glaring need at the position this offseason.

the Pats, Bears, Ravens, etc. have proven that you win big with a strong defense and marginal (at best) talent on offense.not saying i want the Packers to suck running the ball but it can be done. i like the defensive foundation that's being laid down... they have a HoF QB and 3 very strong WR options. that's a lot more than some

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson. No piling on. Just pointing out that there were plenty of options in the offseason and Thompson ignored all of them. Maybe it will work out in the end and if it does I'll be the first one to admit I was wrong. But so far the running game remains a major issue for the Packers and poses a serious threat to undercut what is turning out to be a good season in a wide-open NFC.

the problem being yah can't just take any RB and slam him in to the system. that goes for every and any team.

The bigger problem is that none of the Packers' RBs, with the possible exception of Morency, look like they have the type of talent that would enable them to be even good backups on most other teams. So I'd rather take a chance on talented guys as opposed to throwing crap onto the field who allegedly might "fit the system" better.

 

[packersfan]

And to clarify further. There's not one post I made here that stated I was not concerned about the running game from here on out. The only difference is I look at the rest of this team and realize how far Thompson's taken them in the time he's been here. So my issue is not the running backs on the roster as much as it is those people who choose to bash the GM whenever possible. There's still a lot of work to do in Green Bay, but Ted Thompson has laid down a nice blue print to date.

In your opinion. I like what Thompson has done defensively. No question. But the biggest (and arguably the only two) playmakers on offense remain the two he inherited - Favre and Driver.Edited to add - his own head coach laughingly admits he doesn't have a starting running back. That's hardly a raving endorsement for the work Thompson did in addressing the glaring need at the position this offseason.

the Pats, Bears, Ravens, etc. have proven that you win big with a strong defense and marginal (at best) talent on offense.not saying i want the Packers to suck running the ball but it can be done. i like the defensive foundation that's being laid down... they have a HoF QB and 3 very strong WR options. that's a lot more than some

The Patriots have a Hall of Fame QB and ranked 7th and 13th in the league in rushing in two of their 3 Super Bowl championship seasons. Only once did they run poorly and as I posted earlier that was offset by an exemplary defense. The Bears and Ravens had two of the greatest defenses of all time to offset any offensive weaknesses. Are you trying to tell me this Green Bay defense is one of the greatest of all time?

 

[Aaronstory]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

Are you comparing the Packers RBBC to the Cowboys? seriously? lol

Nope. I'm pointing out the idiocy of saying a team is a pretender because it uses a committee when the Colts just used one to win a Super Bowl...

Is this where we point out the idiocy of comparing the Indy and Dallas backfields to the Packers?

Um, where did I compare the personel?

 

[packersfan]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

Yeah, there were so many options. Let's live in reality, not fantasy football land OK?

Not a problem since I'm grounded quite firmly in reality when it comes to this issue. There were plenty of options that were available in reality and Thompson chose to ignore all of them. And one never knows what an aggressive GM could have come up with that may not have been readily apparent.

Chris Brown, Dom Rhodes, Jamal Lewis, Ron Dayn? Uh, who else? Not one of those is an upgrade over their current roster of backs.But let's just keep piling on Thompson and ingoring the fact that it's HIS players that are now 3-0. This is Ted's team.

Who's ignoring the fact the Packers are 3-0? Not me. I'm quite impressed with what I've seen so far. I just worry that Thompson's refusal to make a serious move at the RB position is going to be a problem this season. And given how good the defense and Favre have been, it could mean the difference between a good season and a potentially great one. As far as the RBs who were available: McGahee was available as was Michael Turner and there were numerous reports that Julius Jones was too.All three would be major upgrades over the crap the Packers have. I'm no fan of Lewis but he'd be a major upgrade too. So would Chris Brown, who the Packers could have gotten for nothing. And if Thompson had been aggressive in the draft, maybe he could've made a strong move up to get Lynch or even Peterson.

So now we're back on the trade scenarios and RFAs. Look, you can agree or disagree with Thompson's approach. But what we do know is that he does not give up draft picks lightly. I'll ignore the Brown comments, because he is not an upgrade. Period. If he was any good, he likely would've landed a deal somewhere else. And Jamal Lewis? Uh, no. Not in my book.

Both are significantly better than anybody the Packers have. Again, I'm no fan of Jamal Lewis at all but the fact he'd be a major upgrade shows just how pathetic the Packers' RB situation is. And yes, I do disagree with Thompson's approach when it comes to how he addressed the RB situation this offseason. That's the whole point. There were numerous options available and he ignored them all. Again, maybe that approach will be proven correct and if it is I'll be right here giving him props and saying I was wrong. But so far it clearly was a mistake and although the Packers are 3-0 right now there is a concern (or there sure as hell should be) that the RB situation is going to become a major issue as this season goes along.

Objection, your honor. Speculation.

True, but show me a single report anywhere that says Thompson tried to acquire one of the RBs I listed. Just one report is all I'm looking for. You know as well as I do that Bob McGinn is one of the best beat writers in the country. Few things get past him and he's been highly critical of Thompson's approach to the offense in the offseason. One would think McGinn would know if Thompson tried to acquire one of those RBs and wasn't able to make it work for one reason or another.

 

[Aaronstory]

"We don't have a starter at running back," he said.

Thanks Ted.

and this is why the Packers are pretenders in the NFC.

The Cowboys use a committee as well. Are they pretenders as well?

Are you comparing the Packers RBBC to the Cowboys? seriously? lol

Nope. I'm pointing out the idiocy of saying a team is a pretender because it uses a committee when the Colts just used one to win a Super Bowl...

Let me clarify for you. Having a RBBC doesnt make you a bad running team like what the Colts had last year and what dallas still has. Having a BAD RBBC like what the Packers have will kill them.

It's sure killing them at 3-0