September 26, 2017, 07:54:15 AM

Author Topic: Charles?  (Read 2728 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SSG

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3244
Re: Charles?
« Reply #30 on: March 15, 2017, 11:34:01 AM »
I didn't really say a "Bell Cow" was an 18-20 touch per game RB (or that lacy was in his last 2 injury/ issued filled years), I said that Jamal Charles has shown in his past that he is a capable of being an elite RB with 18-20 touches per game.  I'd imagine everyone has a different definition of what a bell cow is.  If it’s the Bell, Johnson, Elliott, or MCCoy type back, we're barking up the wrong tree IMO.  If it’s a 10-12 quality carry, 5 catch per game RB, maybe Monty can play that roll with some improvements.

We'll have too wait and see IMO.  Given what little promise he showed us in the playoffs, I have my doubt that it's going to be this easy for Monty.  The idea that any strong 220 LB WR can make the transition easy and seamless isn't something I agree with as I'm not sure any of us can name a recent player who went from star college WR to NFL RB with just a flip of the switch.

Right now, Monty is a guy who were are lucky to get 5 or 6 quality, consistent runs from a game.  Last year he lost a ton of snaps that he shouldn't have because he was a huge liability as a blocker.  IMO, I don't believe our offense is at its best when Rip is the only back in the backfield. 

He could turn into a #1 RB but if that doesn't happen our offense is going to suffer because of it.  I don't like taking the risk that we'd need to expect something great from a transition that has never happened in the modern NFL (or to my knowledge it hasn't). 
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 11:35:45 AM by SSG »
Act your age, not your shoe size.

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: Charles?
« Reply #31 on: March 15, 2017, 12:57:04 PM »
I just keep hearing the term bell cow thrown around.  Only one poster has actually put a number to what he felt that meant - 18-20 touches per game.  However, the usage stats for Lacy over the last two seasons don't really bear out those numbers.    Bell cow just seems to be one of those buzz words thrown around but with no real meaning behind it or no real concept as to the number of touches our #1 vs #2 back actually receives.   Just seems like the right thing to say but I'm struggling to see the numbers to back it up.

In your mind does bell cow equate purely to size or actual usage?  Any care to define their use of bell cow?  Normally it's associated with heavy usage - put the offense on this guys back and let him carry us to victory ---  Ezekiel Elliott or LeVeon Bell or David Johnson are undeniably "bell cows", but Lacy's touch stats are less than smaller backs like McCoy, Freeman, Gordon, Doug Martin...   His per game number of carries over his 5 games in 2016 was 21st at 14.2 avg.  In 2015 he was 26th in rushing attempts per game at 12.5.  In 2014 he was 11th at 15.4.   That's only including rushing stats - if you include receiving touches as well his usage numbers plummet as he only had 24 receptions over the last two years combined.  The last time he could accurately be described as our bell cow was 2014 when he had 42 receptions as well as his 15.4 carries.

Lacy had 18+ carries in only 7 of his last 36 regular season games. 
 
Montgomery is big, strong and has some wiggle.  He's 220+ lbs and is solid muscle.  He's bigger than 23 of the 33 RB's at this years Combine yet I think people view him as a dainty little WR, "a bigger Cobb."  Montgomery's thighs are as big as Cobb's waist. Lacy gets touted by some posters for his 5.1 ypc in 2016 - yet Mongomery avg 5.9 ypc and had 97 more yards on only 6 more carries than Lacy, including 3 more TD's.   Montgomery has an entire offseason to prepare to be exclusively a RB - he didn't have that luxury last year.  He made the transition midway through the season with no offseason work or TC to prepare.  By all accounts Ty is a dedicated, intelligent, diligent worker.  He's going to have all offseason to re-make his body as needed for the rigors of the position and blocking techniques.

Montgomery is listed at Packers.com at 216 lbs.

Doesn't sound like much from your listing of 220+, but it could be a significant difference in the RB world.
Also, style of running makes a big difference in durability. Can the RB make people miss so as not to take too many direct hits? Or is their style a put your head down and pound type RB?

A lot of Monty's suspect durability is going to swirl around the speculation as to what MM is going to be asking of him in this offense.

If he's asked to run between the Tackle's quite a bit then I don't believe he will last that long and will be injured.

You can't ask Ripkowski to be the only one who runs between the Tackles...............it's just too telling to the defense as to what's coming.

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 751
Re: Charles?
« Reply #32 on: March 15, 2017, 02:02:45 PM »

In response to cpk
Blount had 11 carries for 31 yards in NE's Super Bowl victory.  But that was way back in Feb

This one dimensional team that is totally screwed went to the NFC Championship game after a long winning streak that included beating a number of top playoff seeds and a must win game on the road.  They beat the NYG and their hot defense at Lambeau and then beat the NFC's #1 seed on the road.   Apparently all done while facing 8 in the box because we didn't have a "bell cow?"   
« Last Edit: March 15, 2017, 02:17:24 PM by ThatGuy284 »

Offline Leader

  • Global Moderator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11266
Re: Charles?
« Reply #33 on: March 15, 2017, 08:17:04 PM »
According to NFL.com, Mr. Charles is not what GB needs.....

Jamaal Charles, running back

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that Charles has been forced to wait to find a serious suitor. He's scheduled to meet with the Seahawks even after the team signed Eddie Lacy, which sounds like a date Pete Carroll was too polite to cancel.

NFL Network's Mike Garafolo reported before free agency that Charles' primary objective was to sign with a Super Bowl contender. Two AFC teams come to mind. The Steelers extracted great value from DeAngelo Williams after he turned 30 and could use a backup to Le'Veon Bell. The Broncos have questions in the backfield because of injuries to C.J. Anderson and the shaky rookie season of Devontae Booker. Charles might have to rely on his vision and patience to wait out the right opportunity. Teams may not want to sign him until after seeing how April's draft, with its loaded class of running backs, pans out.

BEST FIT: Denver Broncos

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 751
Re: Charles?
« Reply #34 on: March 15, 2017, 09:03:40 PM »

We'll have too wait and see IMO.  Given what little promise he showed us in the playoffs, I have my doubt that it's going to be this easy for Monty.  The idea that any strong 220 LB WR can make the transition easy and seamless isn't something I agree with as I'm not sure any of us can name a recent player who went from star college WR to NFL RB with just a flip of the switch.

Right now, Monty is a guy who were are lucky to get 5 or 6 quality, consistent runs from a game.  Last year he lost a ton of snaps that he shouldn't have because he was a huge liability as a blocker.  IMO, I don't believe our offense is at its best when Rip is the only back in the backfield. 

He could turn into a #1 RB but if that doesn't happen our offense is going to suffer because of it.  I don't like taking the risk that we'd need to expect something great from a transition that has never happened in the modern NFL (or to my knowledge it hasn't).

Little promise in the Playoffs?   He did struggle against NYG strong run D but added to his 11 carries with 3 receptions for 41 yards.  The next week he had 11 carries for 47 yards (4.3 yd avg) and 2 TD's along with 6 receptions for 34 yards against Dallas, playing a very significant part in our upset of the NFC's #1 seed on the road and the following week he started off strong with 3 carries for 17 yards (5.7 yd avg) and chipped in another reception until he unfortunately injured his ribs.    Overall I found his results to be quite promising.  His 5.9 ypc avg during the regular season seemed promising (bettering Lacy by 97 yards on only 6 fewer carries)

I'll absolutely concede and wholeheartedly agree Monty has a LOT of work to do as a blocker.  Actually one of the advantages to signing an actual complete TE in FA will be the help that can be provided in pass protection.  Whether that is staying in-line so Monty can run more routes out of the backfield and not be kept as a blocker or whether it's allowing Rip to receive more carries with Bennett or Kendricks acting as effective run blockers in his stead.  I'm also very optimistic that with a full offseason of work at his position he will better understand his techniques

Nobody is saying "any strong 220 lb receiver can make a seamless transition"  C'mon that's a silly specious argument and you're better than that.  There also isn't anyone suggesting we don't need more RB help - whether that's through the draft or a vet FA.   Literally no one feels comfortable with only Monty and Rip as options 1/2.   I just think there's a vacuous argument for a "bell cow" without any real meaning behind the term or without statistical backing of how McCarthy actually wants to use his backs

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 751
Re: Charles?
« Reply #35 on: March 15, 2017, 09:19:31 PM »

Montgomery is listed at Packers.com at 216 lbs.

Doesn't sound like much from your listing of 220+, but it could be a significant difference in the RB world.
Also, style of running makes a big difference in durability. Can the RB make people miss so as not to take too many direct hits? Or is their style a put your head down and pound type RB?

A lot of Monty's suspect durability is going to swirl around the speculation as to what MM is going to be asking of him in this offense.

If he's asked to run between the Tackle's quite a bit then I don't believe he will last that long and will be injured.

You can't ask Ripkowski to be the only one who runs between the Tackles...............it's just too telling to the defense as to what's coming.

Lacy was listed at 234 lbs on the Packer site.   I think that says about all one needs to know

Montgomery weighed in at 221 lbs at his Combine.  That is the weight I used.  I'm sure the Pack had him drop a few lbs to play WR more effectively as Anquan Boldin may be the only effective WR that has played at his listed height/weight.   I'm also sure he'll add a few lbs back this offseason as he prepares his body to be a full-time RB.   I mentioned Monty's "wiggle" as I think it's a big piece of his effectiveness he's had as a punt/kick returner and it clearly showed last season in his play at RB.   He was actually quite effective running between the tackles

Definitely usage matters - as it does for any RB.  Just think people go a little overboard looking at Monty as some brittle little WR trying to make a transition.   I'm also not taking it too far with the belief Monty is the 2nd coming of Touchdown Jesus.   I simply think he's going to be an effective back and can handle a 12-14 carry/reception load per game.   Pair him with another back and Rip that can handle another 10-12 touches per game and I think this offense is rolling once again.

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: Charles?
« Reply #36 on: March 15, 2017, 09:20:12 PM »
I just think there's a vacuous argument for a "bell cow" without any real meaning behind the term or without statistical backing of how McCarthy actually wants to use his backs

I think "bell cow" get's tossed around because people want to believe that (deep down) McCarthy would like to have a Leveon Bell/Zeke Elliott type RB (of course who wouldn't!) who would/could be an every down back and then keep someone as a simple change of pace RB to throw in once in a while to give "a blow" to the starter.

Problem is that not every draft has that kind of RB, and even when they do those RB's get snapped up in the top 5-10 draft picks.