Who's Green Bay's RB next year? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Who's Green Bay's RB next year?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby Kensat30 » Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:43 pm

Najeh couldn't stay healthy as a backup. I think Green Bay's decision in the offseason is gonna rest with Brett Favre's potential retirement.

If Favre returns, the sign someone for the money. If he doesn't I think they either draft somebody high or go on the cheap. In any case, I think they're drafting RB in the middle rounds as insurance.

My money is on Ahman returning for a decent contract. He's been the guy for them for awhile now and I think they reward him. He's not so old that you put him to pasture, I believe he is still under 30 at this ppoint.

If Favre retires though, all bets are off. Might be worth taking that 20/1 longshot on Gado in dynasty formats, although personally I think he's Nick Goings part 2. Highly doubt that the Pack go out and sign someone like Jamal Lewis or Edgerrin James though. They have too may other holes to fill and the franchise is going into rebuilding mode pretty quickly.
Kensat30
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe Writer
Posts: 6427
Joined: 2 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Goatwhacker » Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:41 pm

onnestabe wrote:
Plindsey88 wrote:If I had to call it right now, I think they sign whichever of Jamal Lewis or Chester Taylor the Ravens release and draft Leon Washington with the 37th overall pick.... That's one seriously nice young offense: Taylor/Lewis, Gado, and Washington at RB - coupled with Aaron Rodgers and the young receiving corps of Walker, Chatman, Ferguson, and Thurman (with Donald Driver as the featured veteran)... I think the Packers will be looking pretty good going into the next 5 years....


Is it just me, or did you just describe the Detroit Lions' lineup?

1. Underperforming starting RB
2. Tedford coached QB in a league where Tedford coached QBs have historically been busts (Harrington, Boller, Dilfer)
3. Receivers that have shown flashes of brilliance but are by no means studs (Driver and Walker have been better than Roy Williams and Chuck Rogers, but is that due to their talent or Favre's?)

Not trying to take any jabs at GB fans or Lions fans, for that matter (how could I, as a Saints fan?), it just struck me that the lineup Plindsey is describing has some eerie similarities to Detroit's and no one is saying they are in good shape for the next five years.


The main difference is Detroit has a big QB problem and GB does not, although you make a good point Rodgers may be a bust. I also think GB has a better O-line than DET.

A lot of people were saying how good the DET offense was shaping up to be before the season, it just didn't pan out.
Goatwhacker
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3010
Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Flyover Country

Postby boyz35 » Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:22 pm

I could see GB drafting Bush, Maroney, Williams - one of the hot shots. Don't you think they're crazy if they don't?
boyz35
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 707
Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby sharptongued1 » Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:30 am

boyz35 wrote:I could see GB drafting Bush, Maroney, Williams - one of the hot shots. Don't you think they're crazy if they don't?


No. Runningback is one of those positions that you can find quality later in the draft, and, unlike most positions, through free agency as well.
"Don't let the fear of the time it will take to accomplish something stand in the way of your doing it. The time will pass anyway; we might just as well put that passing time to the best possible use."

Earl Nightingale
sharptongued1
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 186
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Cornbread Maxwell » Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:31 am

sharptongued1 wrote:
Cornbread Maxwell wrote:Ok - I'm going to respectfully disagree that Clifton and especially Traucher are top 10 at their position. Clifton is slightly above avg - but I dont know why you would think Traucher is even close - he's avg on his best day. They may even lose Flanagan this offseason if he decides to test the market.

Apparantly we see two completely different needs regarding the GB OLine. I see one above avg player at LT that they have under contract for next yr - thats it. And as far as drafting players are concerned - as was mentioned before - drafting a T to move him over to G is a common practice in the NFL.


Ok, no offense back, but do you even know what you're talking about? Seriously. I know that this is a fantasy football website and all, but is it too much to expect someone to know real football? What is it about Clifton and Tauscher you don't like? The fact that they give up so few sacks ( a combined zero sacks last year) or that they helped pave the way for the Packers to run roughshod over everyone? Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Willie Roaf, Jonathon Ogden, Chris Samuels are the only guys that I would definitively say are better than Clifton. Outside of Willie Anderson, I wouldn't concede that any right tackle is better in football than Mark Tauscher. It's a forgone conclusion Flanagan is gone in the offseason, which really isn't that huge of a losee considering he's been less effective these past two years.

Why would you draft a tackle, especially one in the first round that can play the left side and try to make him into a guard? For one, you don't know if he can do it in the first place, and secondly, you just spent a first round pick on a guard.


Well - occasionally I do know what Im talking about actually. ;-)

I really appreciate your homerness - but saying things like only Willie Anderson is a better RT than Tauscher isnt exactly how you back up questioning someone elses football IQ. If you want, I can go down the list and tell you all the RTs in the NFL that are easily better than him right now, then I can tell you which I would rather have that may not be better immediately, but will be within a couple years. Tauscher is limited athletically. He plays hard, and is a decent technician, but he certainly isnt going to overpower anyone and his run blocking is pretty weak. He will never be an elite T - he simply doesnt have the athletic ability to be. Right now Id put him around the 10-15 range of RTs and thats about as high as he'll ever get. Guys like Alex Barron and Kenyatta Walker will surpass him within 2 years.

OBTW - # of sacks is one of the worst indicators of talent for OLinemen.

As for why would a team draft an Olinemen in the 1st? I guess because I see it as one of the smartest moves a team can make if the talent is there. Sure it's not nearly as sexy or popular as drafting a RB/QB/WR, but then again football isnt exactly a popularity contest. Im a guy who fully believes that the strength of a team lives and dies in the trenches - both offensively and defensively. Historically, one of the best returns on investment of 1st rd picks have been OLinemen. You ask why draft an Olineman in the 1st - I ask why not?
Cornbread Maxwell
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 5924
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby sharptongued1 » Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:20 am

Cornbread Maxwell wrote:
sharptongued1 wrote:
Cornbread Maxwell wrote:Ok - I'm going to respectfully disagree that Clifton and especially Traucher are top 10 at their position. Clifton is slightly above avg - but I dont know why you would think Traucher is even close - he's avg on his best day. They may even lose Flanagan this offseason if he decides to test the market.

Apparantly we see two completely different needs regarding the GB OLine. I see one above avg player at LT that they have under contract for next yr - thats it. And as far as drafting players are concerned - as was mentioned before - drafting a T to move him over to G is a common practice in the NFL.


Ok, no offense back, but do you even know what you're talking about? Seriously. I know that this is a fantasy football website and all, but is it too much to expect someone to know real football? What is it about Clifton and Tauscher you don't like? The fact that they give up so few sacks ( a combined zero sacks last year) or that they helped pave the way for the Packers to run roughshod over everyone? Walter Jones, Orlando Pace, Willie Roaf, Jonathon Ogden, Chris Samuels are the only guys that I would definitively say are better than Clifton. Outside of Willie Anderson, I wouldn't concede that any right tackle is better in football than Mark Tauscher. It's a forgone conclusion Flanagan is gone in the offseason, which really isn't that huge of a losee considering he's been less effective these past two years.

Why would you draft a tackle, especially one in the first round that can play the left side and try to make him into a guard? For one, you don't know if he can do it in the first place, and secondly, you just spent a first round pick on a guard.


Well - occasionally I do know what Im talking about actually. ;-)

I really appreciate your homerness - but saying things like only Willie Anderson is a better RT than Tauscher isnt exactly how you back up questioning someone elses football IQ. If you want, I can go down the list and tell you all the RTs in the NFL that are easily better than him right now, then I can tell you which I would rather have that may not be better immediately, but will be within a couple years. Tauscher is limited athletically. He plays hard, and is a decent technician, but he certainly isnt going to overpower anyone and his run blocking is pretty weak. He will never be an elite T - he simply doesnt have the athletic ability to be. Right now Id put him around the 10-15 range of RTs and thats about as high as he'll ever get. Guys like Alex Barron and Kenyatta Walker will surpass him within 2 years.

OBTW - # of sacks is one of the worst indicators of talent for OLinemen.

As for why would a team draft an Olinemen in the 1st? I guess because I see it as one of the smartest moves a team can make if the talent is there. Sure it's not nearly as sexy or popular as drafting a RB/QB/WR, but then again football isnt exactly a popularity contest. Im a guy who fully believes that the strength of a team lives and dies in the trenches - both offensively and defensively. Historically, one of the best returns on investment of 1st rd picks have been OLinemen. You ask why draft an Olineman in the 1st - I ask why not?


Last year, yes, only Willie Anderson was a better right tackle than Mark Tauscher. We're not talking about two years from now, five years ago, or thirty years ago. We're dealing with the present. I'm well aware of Tauscher's athletic ability (or lack thereof), but that only takes you so far. Don't believe me? Go ask, well, I don't need to name names. You know there's a ton out there. And I'd say a good indicator of how an offensive lineman played could be measured by three things; amount of sacks given up, amount of penalties committed, and amount of rushing yards to their side of the line. Tauscher graded out very high in all three aspects last year (I believe that he only committed a total of eight penalties).

I'm far from a homer as you'll find, actually. I call'em like I see'em. There's not much to toot about this year for the Packers (the wonderful job Bates is doing with the defense is about it) but to sit there and say that our tackles are, "average to below average" is idiocy. There's no other way to put it. I guess I'm just floored by the whole notion in that I've never heard nothing but praise for these two tackles all across the internet from fans of different teams (no, these by all means aren't Packer related websites either). Then I come on here and am told that our tackles are the problem. You might see where I take exception to that.

Actually I'm the biggest supporter of building up an offensive line as you'll find. As a matter of fact I got into a heated debate that lasted a few days with someone (surprise surprise) who felt the Texans would be better off drafting Reggie Bush than D'Brickashaw Ferguson. The only thing I questioned was:

1) Drafting a guy like Eric Winston, Johnathon Scott, etc. and converting them to guard

2) The Packers need to draft one of these guys in the first, and then putting them inside

The only times, and I'm sure that you'll agree with this, that a tackle drafted high(that's projected to play tackle in the NFL mind you) is pushed inside to play guard is because he can't handle being a tackle at the pro game for whatever reason. Interior lineman are found in the later rounds all the time and have stellar careers.

I completely agree about an offensive line being the foundation for a team with Super Bowl aspirations. That, along with a stout defense, is a sure fire recipe to make a run.
"Don't let the fear of the time it will take to accomplish something stand in the way of your doing it. The time will pass anyway; we might just as well put that passing time to the best possible use."

Earl Nightingale
sharptongued1
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 186
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Cornbread Maxwell » Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:46 am

Ok - let me compromise and say that Clifton is good. I wouldnt call him an elite LT - but just in the tier below. I called him above average originally, and that is faint praise but technically correct.

As for Tauscher, again, we'll have to agree to disagree still. Right now, currently, in todays NFL, I have him right about the 10th best RT in the league - and as I mentioned before - I cant see how he can climb much higher in the future.

Besides - the entire argument isnt whether or not those two are good great or average - its what GB has as its greatest needs. I say their greatest needs are in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Their Oline is a massive problem for them right now - whether or not we agree that they have 2 Ts that dont need to be replaced - they alone arent getting the job done and need help with the Gs and C between them.

You raised two points - one about drafting a T and then converting him to a G - and then why GB needs to do this. Well, didnt GB do this already with Klemm - at least the converting a T to a G? Im of the impression that the majority of OLinemen in the NFL - except for Cs - started out as Ts in college and then were converted to G after they got to the pros. I thought this was a common practice - isnt it?

Now - I can understand if GB used their early pick on a DE or DT - or even a Jimmy Williams as a stud CB (but that really isnt as necessary as when Moss was in the division), but what I cant understand - and I think we are in agreement on - is why on earth they would spend their early pick on a RB when their is such a glut of RBs available in FA this offseason.
Cornbread Maxwell
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 5924
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby sharptongued1 » Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:44 pm

Cornbread Maxwell wrote:Ok - let me compromise and say that Clifton is good. I wouldnt call him an elite LT - but just in the tier below. I called him above average originally, and that is faint praise but technically correct.

As for Tauscher, again, we'll have to agree to disagree still. Right now, currently, in todays NFL, I have him right about the 10th best RT in the league - and as I mentioned before - I cant see how he can climb much higher in the future.

Besides - the entire argument isnt whether or not those two are good great or average - its what GB has as its greatest needs. I say their greatest needs are in the trenches on both sides of the ball. Their Oline is a massive problem for them right now - whether or not we agree that they have 2 Ts that dont need to be replaced - they alone arent getting the job done and need help with the Gs and C between them.

You raised two points - one about drafting a T and then converting him to a G - and then why GB needs to do this. Well, didnt GB do this already with Klemm - at least the converting a T to a G? Im of the impression that the majority of OLinemen in the NFL - except for Cs - started out as Ts in college and then were converted to G after they got to the pros. I thought this was a common practice - isnt it?

Now - I can understand if GB used their early pick on a DE or DT - or even a Jimmy Williams as a stud CB (but that really isnt as necessary as when Moss was in the division), but what I cant understand - and I think we are in agreement on - is why on earth they would spend their early pick on a RB when their is such a glut of RBs available in FA this offseason.


If you relook at my original post, I never said that Green Bay doesn't need offensive line help, I said that they have a quality set of young tackles that are signed long term. I agree completely that their interior line needs help, and I've argued this point many a time with Packer fans who are much more homerish than I, thinking that Scott Wells and William Whitticker are the answer.

Yes, the Packers did sign Klemm this offseason to play left guard, and that has proven to be a monumental failure. He's been relegated to the bench and Scott Wells is now the starter at left guard.

Yes, there are players who played tackle in college that are converted to guard in the pro, but my point that I was trying to make (albeit poorly) was that you don't draft a player that has the ability to play tackle in the NFL and convert him to guard. That to me would seem to be a waste, seeing as how tackle is a more important position than guard. The other point I was trying to make (again, poorly) is that not every player that was a tackle in college can be converted to a guard (for a variety of reasons). Players that did play guard strictly in college and project to guard in the pros usually fall on draft day, and many bargains are had.

If something ridiculous were to happen (Deangelo Williams falling to the 2nd round for instance) I don't want to see the Packers spend an early pick on a runningback. I truly do like what Jim Bates is doing with this defense and it'd be nice to get him some more talent on that side of the ball. In either case, and I know it's cliche', but they lack talent/depth on both sides of the ball so it wouldn't hurt my feelings to see them go BPA.
"Don't let the fear of the time it will take to accomplish something stand in the way of your doing it. The time will pass anyway; we might just as well put that passing time to the best possible use."

Earl Nightingale
sharptongued1
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff

User avatar

Posts: 186
Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 20:26 hours
(and 38 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact