Steven Jackson signs with the Falcons

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
Benson is actually low risk/low reward. He's always been pedestrian and he hasn't gotten any better, it's just Green Bay's RBs have been so bad he looked half-way decent last year.

He's hardly been pedestrian. He's been a pretty good running back on a bad team for a long time.

The guy ran for 1,251 yards in 13 games in 2009. That's nothing to sneeze at.

quote:

Originally posted by vitaflo:

quote:

Originally posted by bdplant:
I don't get why everybody is so against resigning Benson. He's a cheap, proven back. Where's the downside?

Old RB coming off injury.

Alex Green and James Starks have both been injured, as well. At least Benson has had some success as a running back in the NFL. He's worth at least looking at.

quote:

Originally posted by lambeausouth:

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
Benson is actually low risk/low reward. He's always been pedestrian and he hasn't gotten any better, it's just Green Bay's RBs have been so bad he looked half-way decent last year.

He's hardly been pedestrian. He's been a pretty good running back on a bad team for a long time.

The guy ran for 1,251 yards in 13 games in 2009. That's nothing to sneeze at.

That was a long time ago.

well, i wish jackson the best on continuing to not win a super bowl.

Yet he goes to a team who made it further than Green Bay did, so that little ditty doesn't hold much water.

Yes, he goes to a team that has never won a Super Bowl, hasn't been in a Super Bowl recently, and is owned by the Packers.

quote:

Originally posted by Pack-Man:
That was a long time ago.

You missed the point. The comment was that Benson has always been pedestrian, and I was refuting it. Averaging nearly 100 yards a game is hardly pedestrian, especially when playing in a division with Baltimore and Pittsburgh's defenses.

Benson averaged 3.4 yards a carry. Starks and Green averaged 3.6 and 3.5 respectively.

DuJuan Harris averaged 4.6. Ya'll are clownin' if you think TT isn't ready to give him some more looks. Talk about 'moneyball'. Dude was selling cars in Jacksonville before TT snagged him up.

quote:

Originally posted by Orlando Wolf:

quote:

Originally posted by bubbleboy789:
i'm happy and relieved we didn't sign Jackson. I hope we don't resign Cedric Benson either.

i hope TT lights a fire under the ass of the offensive line so they can open holes no matter who is carrying the rock.

Not sure TT would interfere like that.

I'm not sure the Packers consistent OL woes begin and end with Campen either. I really wish it was that simplistic. Other than Sitton it's been a hodge podge of mediocre to average. And they are Charmin soft. Which might be more a reflection of the offensive philosophy.

quote:

The guy ran for 1,251 yards in 13 games in 2009. That's nothing to sneeze at.

He's had some good seasons, but 2009 was a long time ago and I still am concerned about the turd factor with the guy.

Harris added a spark to the run game late in the year, and I think Alex Green can be a change of pace 3rd down guy because of how he's able to catch the ball out of the backfield. Not sure about Starks- he had a good run of about 8 games and hasn't been heard from since.

My guess is TT sticks with those guys and drafts another back to add to the mix.

Benson and Stark will not be Packers by game 1.

quote:

Originally posted by bdplant:
I don't get why everybody is so against resigning Benson. He's a cheap, proven back. Where's the downside?

Q. Why is he cheap? A. Cause no one wants him.


And perhaps a lot of folks are down on him cause they saw him last yr and determined he is nothing special.

Heck, even decent would be an upgrade. For as much bagging the offensive line takes it is funny how some scrub that one of the worst teams in the league jettisoned even with injuries at the position can come off the street and look better than anyone else already on the roster. If Benson and Starks are on the roster for game one it's a bad sign.

I agree that Benson and Starks are likely not on the opening day roster. It's been mentioned on the forums before. Mike Gillsilee is mighty appealing if he's on the board in Rd4. Just becasue TT hasn't hit it out of the park on a RB doesn't mean you stop trying and overpay a FA. Draft and develop.

Saw a stat that something like 28 of the top 42 all time rushers were drafted in 1st or 2nd rounds....can hit it short term with other guys, but chances that you land a long term stud go up significantly with top round round choice.

Benson was drafted in the 1st round.

Sign Benson.

I say draft somebody. I think Harris has a future but probably not as a feature back. Starks and Green are run of the mill backs.

We laughed at the Bears when they wasted a top pick on Benson. He does not thrill me. Old, slow and not TT's style. Pick coming in round 1 or 2 of the draft.

quote:

Originally posted by Pikes Peak:
Q. Why is he cheap? A. Cause no one wants him.

Seems to me I remember Charles Woodson signing here because nobody else wanted him. Seven years later, he's been an NFL Defensive Player of the Year, and is likely a Hall of Famer.

Nobody wanted Kurt Warner either. He was stocking grocery shelves and playing Arena football.

The NFL scouts and GMs aren't always right.

While I'd love to see a high pick on a RB, I would expect TT to find a RB on day 2 or 3 of the draft.... probably 3.

I'd just love to see a Packers back who can find and hit a hole more like Peter North than Tom Arnold.

If the Packers RBs had as HUGE a hole as Tom Arnold had to "run" through, they would be averaging 2,500 yards/season.

from packers.com


Kevin from Springfield, MO

Q: I'm sure your inbox is just full of anger and sorrow over Steven Jackson signing with the Falcons, but what if the interest was never there on Jackson's side? I think the rumors connecting him (to the Packers) came from Jackson's agent to jump the price a bit.

A: Of course they did. As soon as I heard the Falcons were involved in the Jackson sweepstakes, I knew exactly what was going on. Figure it out. With the Falcons, Jackson would play in a dome for a run-the-ball coach who wants to feature him. Remember this, Atlanta is a mecca for pro athletes. There might be more pro athletes that live in Atlanta than in any other city in America. Literally, a culture of professional athletes has settled into that community.
The only thing left for Jackson's agent to do was to move the price a little higher; that requires a competing team. Free agency is a nasty process. It leverages one team against another. Here's how I choose to view what happened: The Packers' involvement in the Jackson sweepstakes drove the price higher and cost an NFC competitor cap room the Packers will have to spend on several players. Sometimes, it's what you don't do that counts.

We like the guys we have.

This isn't fantasy football.


Draft and develop...

The problem is the guys they have suck. They've thrown draft picks at a couple but none have developed in to anything worth fielding for more than a short stretch.

At RB? I think the guys they have are perfectly capable of producing. The problem is the OLine and the coaching. I don't know if they're not spending enough time on running plays in practice or what it is, but the running lanes simply are not there. I thought it would get better when they replaced Clifton/Tauscher with Newhouse/Bulaga, two younger and stronger players, but it's the same. Doesn't matter who has the ball, they have to fight for yards from the get go...it shouldn't be that way. I think there's also a problem of calling the plays that suit the OLine and RBs.

NFL teams continuously prove that almost any RB can succeed given the right situation. Doesn't matter if you're a 22 year old Alfred Morris out of FAU or a 32 year old Willis McGahee, given the right combination of blocking and scheme, almost any RB can succeed.

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
We like the guys we have.

This isn't fantasy football.


Draft and develop...

That's true, but we don't win the last Super Bowl without Charles Woodson or Ryan Pickett.

We also don't win Super Bowl 31 without Reggie White, Sean Jones, and Santana Dotson.

Draft and develop gets you a good team that is in a position to compete for a championship. Depth is important but you have to get impact players some time. TT hit home runs with Rodgers, Collins, and Matthews, and Woodson turned out to be one of the best free agent signings of all time. Basically Green Bay went from 4 superstar level players to 2 in two years.

For now, I'll give TT the benefit of the doubt. He probably figures he has better odds of getting decent players by keeping the picks he has and trusting his college scouts to find a guy than throwing a bunch of money at 30 year old running backs with a lot of wear on the tires.

No way. Any RB?!?!?

That's why TT places such a high value on them.

The biggest difference between Morris/McGahee and the current crop of Packers backs is vision. The Packers backs simply don't have it. While the creases aren't huge, Green, Starks and Kuhn are myopic clods. Some guy off the street came in and ran better than those guys. The line needs to improve also, but claiming it's all about the line seems rather short-sighted.

And unlike Thompson, Shanahan's crew has a pretty good track record of finding RBs who can actually play.

Trade Rodgers and Matthews for 16 1st round picks.

Green, Saine were drafted as much for their receiving abilities as their running abilities. Starks was a gamble with the injury history. Benson, the feature back with who knows what's in the tank. Green is hurt, Saine is hurt, Benson is hurt. They bring in Harris and he makes some decent headway for a guy selling cars at the beginning of the season.

Is there a complete, dominant back on this team? Maybe, if they can get off the training table. At first glance, I don't think Harris is a feature back but as GD stated, if they actually put together an effective run game plan he may be more than enough to compliment the passing game.

Point being lanes for running and not having Rodgers running for his life and picking turf out of his earhole go hand in hand.

Please stop trying to derail threads.

Why worry about the run game, when the rules are in favor of the passing game. We won the SB with "pedestrian" RB's of Grant and Starks, there is no need to go blow our load on a top RB, they can be found anywhere. The running game, is just there, so games don't become Madden like, with 100 PA/game.

No continuity on line. That's the issue. Whether it's injuries, position changes, players coming/going. That's what needs to change to improve running game and keep franchise off his back.

Please stop trying to derail threads.

quote:

the rules are in favor of the passing game.

no kidding, especially if they defang RBs with their crown of the helmet rule change crap.
as a friend wrote to me:

quote:

After each play is over the ball carrier and would be tackler must curtsy and bow out of respect and then shake hands in a friendly manner to be judged by the replay official or be fined accordingly but only when you are out in space.

quote:

Originally posted by MichiganPacker:

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
We like the guys we have.

This isn't fantasy football.


Draft and develop...

That's true, but we don't win the last Super Bowl without Charles Woodson or Ryan Pickett.

We also don't win Super Bowl 31 without Reggie White, Sean Jones, and Santana Dotson.

yeah, not to mention Eugene Robinson, Desmond Howard, Andre Rison, Keith Jackson, Don Beebe, and Bruce Wilkerson.

quote:

Originally posted by Herschel:
The biggest difference between Morris/McGahee and the current crop of Packers backs is vision. The Packers backs simply don't have it. While the creases aren't huge, Green, Starks and Kuhn are myopic clods. Some guy off the street came in and ran better than those guys. The line needs to improve also, but claiming it's all about the line seems rather short-sighted.

And unlike Thompson, Shanahan's crew has a pretty good track record of finding RBs who can actually play.

I think that's the spot your dead wrong on. I'm not saying the Packer RBs are Pro Bowlers, but if a hole was there I bet they could find it. Those holes aren't there like they have been for McGahee and Morris. You're attributing Shannahan's track record of having successful running games to his ability to scout RBs, I think that's off the mark. Other than mostly good results from Clinton Portis, ever heard of a Mike Shannahan RB having the same success elsewhere? It's a system he can plug almost any RB into and they will be a 1,000 yard rusher. Get the blockers to make the holes and you could get 1,000 yards out of Green, Starks, Kuhn, or Harris.

you hit the nail on the head right there, Grave Diggy Dig. Gotta be able to move people up front. the Packers struggle (mightily) at this, hence the frustration with the run game. people wrongly associate that with an RB problem.