Rodgers: Bring him ON!!

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Another thing. Lynch has a 4.0 ypc average. Jackson has a 3.9 ypc average.

Cool. They are similar. But equating them based on this is misguided. For example, Emmitt Smith has a 4.2 ypc average. Is he only slightly better? Dumb logic.

So, your point is that stats are not a logical way to compare. Got it.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Lynch has in 1 less year as a pro over 2000 yards more rushing yards than Jackson. He also fumbles about 1 time out of ever 110 times he rushes the ball. Jackson is somewhere around 1 out of 75. Lynch caught 48 balls out of the backfield in 2008.

If you are conviced that Jackson is better, past statistics and performance do not bear out your argument. Lynch would be a great 2nd back in this system and would provide the competition that Jackson needs to stay sharp - and spell him in the times that he needs rest to keep him fresh.

Wait, what? Stats are a good way to judge? Which is it? Total yards, receptions and the like are strong indicators? Seems as though you've completely contradicted your own argument by blowing up the foundation of your point all in the same post.

I'm indifferent on this whole thing. If Jackson can't get it done, then make a move. If he can, then there's no reason to do anything this second. I just wonder how much pining there would be for this guy if he wasn't a first round pick, even though he's now third on the depth chart on one of the worst teams in the NFL.

quote:

Originally posted by chickenboy:
Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers was asked Wednesday what he would say to the Packers if they asked for his opinion about a possible deal for disgruntled Bills running back Marshawn Lynch, Rodgers' former Cal teammate.

"Bring him on," Rodgers said, without hesitation.

Not even with his character knocks? "He's a great player," Rodgers said of Lynch. "And any character issues the team might see, I think in a situation like that, and I think you've seen that with other players across the league, when you give a guy a change of scenery and a guy like that who feels he might have something to prove, and surround him with two guys, (Desmond) Bishop and myself who played with him...I think that can only help him feel comfortable and see a lot of production."

So you interpret that as Rodgers "wants" Lynch?

sure...

what do you interpret?

I would interpret that as, "If they bring him in, that's cool with me"

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:

But if they are trying to get a 1,2 or a 3 and another pick.. then it's too much. But, based on recent trends of trading guys with his history.. i can't imagine he'll go for more than a 3.

The report is that have already turned down an offer of a #3 and player months ago.

There is no urgency for them to move him. What would cause their asking price to come down (assuming he's available at all).

It takes two to tango.

IMHO, if another deal gets done at all it will be closer to the trade deadline.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:

We have 4 TEs and 3 FBs we are in no position to question their affinity for 3 Tbs. They probably will trade one, but they are being smart... they'll drive up the price on a former 1st round pick who has had very good season and is only 24 years old. If we got rid of Lynch for less than a 3rd, people here would be upset too - in their position as a bottow-dweller.

We have 4 TE's 2 FB's, 2 HB's and RB that can (and has) played both positions.

Continually calling Kuhn a FB doesn't make it true. He carried the rock in school, and he's carried it for us.

If this were to have happened last year, I would've been more concerned about Kuhn being the backup/short yardage/4th qtr tailback. Those concerns were put to rest this preseason, which is why I felt comfortable suggesting 5 backs with him as the #3 tailback as well as his timeshare @ FB.

We kept five backs, which is plenty. Some teams only carry four.

Grant went out in the 2nd QTR, and we still rung up 27 on the road in a hostile environment against a good defense in less than ideal playing conditions with our franchise QB having a rare off day.

MM and Philbin both praised Jackson's performance which included an 18 yard run, and Kuhn's TD didn't score itself.

The offense with or without Lynch is going to be just fine.

oh god, now we are labeling Kuhn a HB?


You are really reaching today Coach.

I'm more concerned about what happens when Jackson is hurt. Having nobody there that is capable of replacing him is a big problem.

As the Chikin said.. let's wait till next week and see what happens, they aren't trading in the midst of a game week. I think this deal gets done.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
oh god, now we are labeling Kuhn a HB?


You are really reaching today Coach.

You're the one that's hung up on labels and is reaching, Diggy.

The two running back positions in a pro style offense are commonly called halfback (or tailback) and fullback.

I specifically called him a running back (that can play both positions listed above) and a tailback.

If the term halfback offends you, tailback works for me.

It's the same position no matter what one chooses to call it.

quote:

Originally posted by JJSD:

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Another thing. Lynch has a 4.0 ypc average. Jackson has a 3.9 ypc average.

Cool. They are similar. But equating them based on this is misguided. For example, Emmitt Smith has a 4.2 ypc average. Is he only slightly better? Dumb logic.

So, your point is that stats are not a logical way to compare. Got it.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Lynch has in 1 less year as a pro over 2000 yards more rushing yards than Jackson. He also fumbles about 1 time out of ever 110 times he rushes the ball. Jackson is somewhere around 1 out of 75. Lynch caught 48 balls out of the backfield in 2008.

If you are conviced that Jackson is better, past statistics and performance do not bear out your argument. Lynch would be a great 2nd back in this system and would provide the competition that Jackson needs to stay sharp - and spell him in the times that he needs rest to keep him fresh.

Wait, what? Stats are a good way to judge? Which is it? Total yards, receptions and the like are strong indicators? Seems as though you've completely contradicted your own argument by blowing up the foundation of your point all in the same post.

I'm indifferent on this whole thing. If Jackson can't get it done, then make a move. If he can, then there's no reason to do anything this second. I just wonder how much pining there would be for this guy if he wasn't a first round pick, even though he's now third on the depth chart on one of the worst teams in the NFL.

Stats DON'T tell the whole story. Too many variables. Strength of OL, strength of passing game, offensive play-calling / scheme, etc.

As for the quotes from the Bills GM, I read that as, "we won't trade him for anything but an offer that we can't refuse". IOW, the 3rd rounder won't get it done and whoever wants Lynch will have to overpay. As Coach said, the Bills have zero sense of urgency, nor should they. They are rebuilding. If BJax goes down, now TT is potentially forced to up his offer. I'm not sure of Lynch's contract status, but I'm guessing his deal isn't up after this season, which means the Bills are in no rush to trade him. If no one is biting on Lynch, maybe a deal happens closer to the trade deadline or in the post-season.

Personally, I'd love to have Lynch here this year, but not if we have to overpay. Which is probably why this deal doesn't happen. I'm ok with it either way.

As for Kuhn, I like his potential as an Alstott/Hoover type back. I don't care if he's called a FB or a HB. Kuhn looked good in the pre-season and he looked good on the 2 carries he had last Sunday.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I'm more concerned about what happens when Jackson is hurt. Having nobody there that is capable of replacing him is a big problem.

As the Chikin said.. let's wait till next week and see what happens, they aren't trading in the midst of a game week. I think this deal gets done.

Of course, because you're you.

And you're wrong.

Again.

If Jackson goes down, Kuhn steps in as a single back in some formations or a big tailback in a jumbo package behind Hall or Johnson (with or without two TE's).

Kuhn can block the position, and he can catch the ball.

Please do the rest of us a favor and start holding your breath now waiting for the trade to go down.

quote:

oh god, now we are labeling Kuhn a HB?

The Packers could theoretically put him on the depth chart as a punter, and that wouldn't change what he does.

(Well, NFL rules about uniform numbers aside. But with a uniform number in the 30s, they could say Kuhn is a strong safety.)

Lynch to GB not going to happen on several key accounts.

#1 the Bills will want too much in a trade.
#2 he brings absolutely nothing to the table immediately. Best case, he MAY be a contributor by game 7-8.
#3 he is not Packer People. TT and MM have gone to painstaking lengths to preserve locker room chemistry...bringing in a hired gun at this point reeks of desperation...something TT will never do.

#3. Jackson's worked hard, improved, matured, and kept his mouth shut.

Now he's finally going to get another chance that he's been working towards for three years to show he can be a capable NFL starter, but instead we're supposed to trade for another back before he even gets his shot.

I'm sure that would go over like gangbusters in the locker room. That's also approximately 180 degrees away from the environment the front office and coaching staff has worked very hard to create.

Jackson is going to get his chance. If he isn't able to seize the opportunity, there's still plenty of time to explore other options before the trade deadline.

I'm rooting for him, and I would hope that even those that don't believe he's up to the task legitimately are too.

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:

quote:

Originally posted by El-Ka-AhmanGreen:
1. protect the QB

2. Catch the ball out of the backfield.

3. Don't fumble. (oh, crap)

quote:

Originally posted by Coach:
I'm rooting for him, and I would hope that even those that don't believe he's up to the task legitimately are too.

Definitely.

And good point about the locker room. Although I think that anyone we traded for would be behind Jackson until he proved he could significantly outperform BJax.

quote:

Originally posted by PackFoo:
Lynch to GB not going to happen on several key accounts.

#1 the Bills will want too much in a trade.
#2 he brings absolutely nothing to the table immediately. Best case, he MAY be a contributor by game 7-8.
#3 he is not Packer People. TT and MM have gone to painstaking lengths to preserve locker room chemistry...bringing in a hired gun at this point reeks of desperation...something TT will never do.

Andre Rison wasn't "Packer people" either. If that was a consideration for TT, it would depend on if he thought the veteran leadership---particularly ARod who has a prior relationship---would be able to keep Lynch in check.

I wouldn't rule out TT doing a deal---after all, when he brought in Grant, he did so when our run game was shot and Brent was throwing the ball almost every play.

(And, as I recall, Grant's debut was not stellar---he fumbled the ball in our territory when put in to close out a Viking game, and only a somewhat controversial defensive stand pulled it out for us He didn't really see the field again for a while. He didn't have his first 100 yard game that year until week 8).

quote:

Originally posted by CAPackFan95:
And, really, you're going to deny that Robert Ferguson was not picked as "another final weapon" for Favre?

Ferguson was a Ron Wolf pick in his worst draft ever. It was no secret Sherman was enamored with Chad Johnson and Marcus Stroud from working with them at the Senior Bowl. Wolf got Reynolds and Fergusuon instead.

That draft was as hideous as the 2000 draft was helpful.

Actually, from what I read, Ferguson was Sherman's pick. Sherman had contacts at Texas A&M who told him that Ferguson was da bomb.

Numerous reports said the receiver Sherman absolutely loved was Chad Johnson. He really stood out at the Senior Bowl Practices (Sherman coached that squad) Robert Ferguson happened to be from Texas A&M, but he wasn't Sherman's choice.

The bigger issue is that Ferguson wasn't a bad pick at the time. Of course it was "to get another weapon for Favre". After all, they need to field 2 starting WRs each season, and they were thin at the position. His pick doesn't build the case of appeasing Brett Favre or screwing up in the draft (like giving multiple picks for Sander). Ferguson was picked right where he was projected. He didn't work out. Just like many, many other second round draft picks.

Following Thompson, Lynch and all this, a couple things are clear.

1. Ted values draft picks very high.
2. Ted will add players who can be perceived to be malcontents in certain instances like he did with Woodson (at the time, considered a malcontent who continued to be early in his Green Bay days) and like he tried twice to do with Moss.
3. Buffalo would rather stare at their third string running back while winning 3 games than entertaining a trade. Can't argue with idiots there.

So it's a big longshot of this getting done.

I agree with a lot that has been said. I'd open arms wide to a guy like Lynch coming along. If Aaron Rodgers is OK with it, and states that he and Bishop would help him get along in Green Bay, then great! I also agree that it's hardly the end of the world if they don't acquire him (or any other RB) - the position just doesn't matter like it once did.

However, I don't agree that his possible acquisition at any level can be compared anywhere near the 4 or so years of Sherman screwing up free agency and trading away draft picks for freakin' punters. If Thompson wants to trade a pick, it won't be the end of the Packer future competitiveness. Proposing that, is a big stretch. Ted's ability to build through the draft doesn't get thrown out the door by trading one pick (or even two) for a player he thinks can help at a need position.

And if somehow we had a crystal ball and found out that this trade would win a Super Bowl this season, and somehow cripple the franchises competitiveness for a few seasons to come (an enormous longshot when you have young players like Rodgers, Matthews, Finley, Bulaga, Sitton, Jennings, Raji, etc., to form the core of this team), I'd still be all for it. Winning Super Bowls is rare. I'm happy Andre Rison helped us get over that hump in our need in 1996. This isn't Sherman trying to tweek an aging team to get Brett a win. This would be Thompson tweeking a young, deep team that is poised for longterm success.

Take a deep breath

"Coincidence or not, the Packers offense produced three points in four series against the Eagles with Grant as the primary halfback. On the first four series after Grant was injured, the Packers scored 24 points.

That shows the Packers are capable of scoring without Grant, a talented back with a pair of 1,200-yard seasons to his credit but not necessarily a make-or-break player.

In the pass-happy National Football League, teams don’t need a Pro Bowl running back to advance to the Super Bowl anymore. They don’t even need a 1,000-yard rusher. Five of the last six Super Bowl qualifiers over the past three years didn’t have a runner that gained even 900 yards.

Even if some of that can be attributed to the job-sharing trend among backs, the fact is the Super Bowl hasn’t featured any great runners in recent years.

Reigning champion New Orleans primarily used Pierre Thomas (793 regular-season yards) and Mike Bell (654 yards, 3.8 average), while Super Bowl loser Indianapolis trotted out Joseph Addai (828, 3.8) and Donald Brown (281, 3.6). The year before, the champion Pittsburgh Steelers featured Willie Parker (791, 3.8) and Mewelde Moore (588) against NFC champion Arizona with Edgerrin James (514, 3.9) and Tim Hightower (399, 2.8)."

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:

Ferguson was a Ron Wolf pick in his worst draft ever. It was no secret Sherman was enamored with Chad Johnson and Marcus Stroud from working with them at the Senior Bowl. Wolf got Reynolds and Fergusuon instead.

That draft was as hideous as the 2000 draft was helpful.

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
Numerous reports said the receiver Sherman absolutely loved was Chad Johnson. He really stood out at the Senior Bowl Practices (Sherman coached that squad) Robert Ferguson happened to be from Texas A&M, but he wasn't Sherman's choice.

"Numerous reports"?

Sherman must not have been much of a salesman if he really liked Stroud and Johnson over Reynolds and Fergie, huh?

Or maybe that actually wasn't true:

Are you sure about that, Hersh?

From Cliff Christl's blog:

"There have been so many different versions offered by people in the Packers organization and various writers about the Jamal Reynolds pick in 2001 and whether retiring general manager Ron Wolf or Mike Sherman was mostly to blame that it might be instructive to look back at a story that appeared in The Sporting News in its April 30, 2001 edition. Paul Attner, a writer for the magazine, was given access to the Packers' draft room and wrote a first-hand account. It was emailed to me by one of our readers, Kevin Minshell, after I had recently written a column about how the 2001 draft was still haunting the Packers, more so than any other. What's interesting in Attner's account is that no mention is made of defensive tackle Marcus Stroud, who would have been an ideal pick there, and that the Packers' top two targets in the first round, Reynolds and Koren Robinson, both have been busts to this point.

Here's what Attner wrote:

"Wolf and Sherman were pretty confident that their first-round target - pass-rushing end Jamal Reynolds of Florida State - would still be around when they picked 10th in the first round. But that meant they needed to fix their other major need, receiver, in the second. And they were convinced that Robert Ferguson of Texas A&M would be gone by their present turn in that round. A trade with (Bill) Walsh would move them up six spots in the second, from 16 to 10, and from 18 to 9 in the third, and add a high fourth, where they currently had no choice. It meant giving up one of their three third-round picks in what became a five-for-three transaction. But Wolf knew Sherman, who was having trouble sleeping, would be buoyed by the positives of the deal.

"So four phone calls later, Walsh and Wolf agreed to agree. 'This could do it,' Sherman said to Wolf. Later that night at dinner, Wolf reviewed the 88th trade of his 10 years in Green Bay. 'In order for this to work, we've got to have both Reynolds and Ferguson,' he said. 'Otherwise, this might become the dumbest trade of my career. I could look like an idiot.'



{snip}

"As their first selection draws near, the room becomes quiet. The previous day, Wolf and Sherman had discussed strategy for three hours. Sherman had brought a laminated sheet, filled with 13 possible scenarios the Packers could face when their pick arrived. He had already checked off who he would select in each case. Now he wanted Wolfs thinking. They agreed every time. They expected either Reynolds or receiver Koren Robinson to be available. If both were there, they would go with Reynolds because they needed defensive linemen. If neither was around, they would go with defensive end Andre Carter, then linebacker Dan Morgan. No arguments allowed in Wolf's draft room, not when all the decisionmaking is already final.

It was in The Sporting News, on the Senior Bowl site and on PFW that I read about Sherman liking those guys and a couple other draft sites that I don't remember (who probably nicked it from the other three anyway).

I remember that Sporting News article too (Gretzky was on the cover) and how it talked about Wolf hating teh term "war room". But again, numerous places reported Sherman was hot for Johnson and Stroud. Wolf saying after-the-fact they wanted Reynolds & Ferguson not withstanding.

And the stories say Wolf made the calls and Sherman agreed with him, like he had any choice in the matter. Wolf called the shots and the article stated also that disagreements were already settled before the draft. It's a bit of a stretch to say Sherman was calling the shots, no?

FYI: There was also a good one about the Rhodes draft where they were needling Ray about taking Andy Katzenmoyer, whom Rhoades hated.

And where do you think the Stroud reference came from? Christl obviously also knew of Sherman's interest in him.

Uh huh.

Link by any chance?

I actually remember the article referenced above.

I do not, however, remember reading anything similar to what you describe. Not 100% dispositive by any means, but I had a TSN subscription back then.

Shouldn't be too tough to find a link to what you're describing, right? "Numerous articles" and all.

Attner from TSN who was actually physically present at the time didn't mention any of what you're saying so I guess he either must not be very good at his job or he's lying.

Another possibility is that you don't know what you're talking about and you simply don't have the intellectual honesty/integrity to admit it.

Mike Hunt doesn't want Lynch, does that change anyone's opinion?

Packers better off leaving Lynch in Buffalo Let's see...a team going nowhere won't part with a back who has fallen on the depth chart behind a rookie and an old guy because, well, no one wants to admit they blew it again on a first-rounder. And there's your moral for the Green Bay home opener Sunday, rumors and innuendo aside.

(Note: It's an Insider article.)

Coach- I dont think the majority of Packer nation wants to see 1 of our 3 FBs playing TB. Again, please show me where Kuhn has proven he can carry the rock 15-20 times in the NFL. Do you have Kuhn underwear or something?


Other than your dreams, nothing suggests that this guy is equipped to play that position in any other role other than maybe a 1-2 yard goalline back... that is a big maybe too.

quote:

Originally posted by chickenboy:
Mike Hunt doesn't want Lynch.


(Note: It's an Insider article.)

So it's official. Getting Lynch is a great idea.

quote:

Again, please show me where Kuhn has proven he can carry the rock 15-20 times in the NFL.

Again, show me where Kuhn has to carry the ball that much. What #2 or #3 touches that?

Fail.

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
Numerous reports said the receiver Sherman absolutely loved was Chad Johnson. He really stood out at the Senior Bowl Practices (Sherman coached that squad) Robert Ferguson happened to be from Texas A&M, but he wasn't Sherman's choice.

Just so were are clear on this. Are we talking about the same Mike Sherman that has been reported that he often ignored his own scouts recommendations?

Marcus Stroud's workout.

Coach has already addressed this stuff but...

quote:

oh god, now we are labeling Kuhn a HB?

as others have already pointed out, who the heck cares what you "label" him?

quote:

I'm more concerned about what happens when Jackson is hurt.

I'm more concerned about what happens if you ever get a clue. Or, I'm more concerned about what happens when Rodgers/Woodson/Matthews/Jennings/Collins/Finley/Sitton/Crosby et al is hurt.

quote:

Other than your dreams, nothing suggests that this guy is equipped to play that position in any other role other than maybe a 1-2 yard goalline back... that is a big maybe too.

nothing suggests?!?! really? did you watch the preseason at all? oh, that doesn't count cuz it wasn't against the #1s? I'm more than willing to see what he can do. Are you going to run the same plays you do with Grant? Probably not, but the guy can be productive between the tackles.

calling people out on here is not my MO but that was just too much stupid in one page for me to take.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Coach- I dont think the majority of Packer nation wants to see 1 of our 3 FBs playing TB. Again, please show me where Kuhn has proven he can carry the rock 15-20 times in the NFL. Do you have Kuhn underwear or something?


Other than your dreams, nothing suggests that this guy is equipped to play that position in any other role other than maybe a 1-2 yard goalline back... that is a big maybe too.

Who said he had to carry it 15/20 times a game? I don't think anyone expects that from Kuhn...I mean Jackson only carried it 18 times all of last year so that tells you how much we use our #2 RB.

If Kuhn can average around 25 yards a game that would be huge. If he could average around 4 yards/carry then we would only be giving him the ball like 6 times a game. You don't think he can run the ball 6 times a game? He ran it twice last week and averaged 7.5 yards and the two biggest opportunities to run it in his career have been this past preseason against Seattle and Kansas City. Against Seattle he ran it 6 times for 30 yards (5 average) and 5 times for 20 yards (4 average) against KC. I think it's realistic to say he could run it 6 times for 25 yards on average.

Kuhn only ran for 4500 yards in college also.

I find it funny that there have been battles on this forum about whether or not Grant is an elite back and posters who argued that he was now find it to almost "no big deal" that he is out for the season and replaced by an injury prone backup who hasn't shown a heckuva a lot and a converted fullback.

It's not just you who thinks you know more than everyone else.

Because no matter how you spin it, elite backs aren't the difference on winning the Super Bowl. Having either a good defense and/or a great QB that doesn't turn over the ball are more important the NFL these days.

Think Chicago would part with Forte!?!? Maybe if we can swing a trade?