November 22, 2017, 10:17:10 AM

Author Topic: Running Backs in 2017  (Read 19647 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cpk1994

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6299
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #30 on: May 02, 2017, 12:01:59 PM »
I would like to see them sign a veteran. Right now they are one injury away from having nothing but rookies, a recipe that can easily blow up in TT's face.
"Aaron Rodgers is a baaaaaaad man" - Stephen A. Smith

Offline LMG

  • Administrator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4547
  • PackerChatters Site Owner
    • Where are we?
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #31 on: May 02, 2017, 01:22:28 PM »
I fully expect a veteran RB to be signed.
If you are not the lead dog the view never changes.

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #32 on: May 02, 2017, 03:14:12 PM »
At this point I don't see a reason to until roster cuts begin in August and more vet backs may be available. 
Charles is interesting but would they want to make a commitment until after week 1 with his injury history.  I guess the valu of a vet back would be in pass pro but they might just go with Rip in that situation if they had to like last season

Online OneTwoSixFive

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1816
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #33 on: May 02, 2017, 04:15:44 PM »
The only way I see a vet back being signed is if none of the rookies can block, when called on.

RB is a more instinctive position than most to play, and rookies have done well there, more often than any other position.

Also Ted has often trusted his rookies to fill important spots (by which I mean not drafting a vet).
(ricky) "Personally, I'm putting this in a box, driving a stake through its heart, firing a silver bullet into its (empty) head, nailing it shut, loading it into a rocket and firing it into the sun. "

(Pink Floyd) "Set the controls for the heart of the sun"

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3220
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #34 on: May 02, 2017, 04:37:40 PM »
I fully expect a veteran RB to be signed.

I'd be astonished if they signed a vet back.   

The team philosophy is totally D+D. 
Scouting liked three backs enough to spend three precious picks. 

Signing a vet would cause 2/3 of the picks to get cut. 

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3220
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #35 on: May 02, 2017, 04:52:27 PM »
MM in draft presser mentioned envisioning all three picks as 3-down guys. 

Board has often talked about a playmaking 3rd-down guy, but don't think MM wants the specialist.  A thoughtful poster in one of the draft threads noted that by NOT having a specialist, then you can keep the same playbook regardless of an injury or resting a guy.  3-down guys also allow no-huddle. 

Also thought it was interesting how the scouts talked about willams and Jones in terms of receiving.  Jones was catching about 30 balls a season, I think, but Wolf didn't really spin that as being a strength or skill.  Williams, by contrast, caught only one ball last season, but the scout did NOT downplay his receiving aptitude.  (Instead, he noted that Williams hadn't had any drops all season!  Woo hoo, 1 throw and not a single drop!)

Offline JPPlaya

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #36 on: May 02, 2017, 04:53:38 PM »
I fully expect a veteran RB to be signed.

I'd be astonished if they signed a vet back.   

The team philosophy is totally D+D. 
Scouting liked three backs enough to spend three precious picks. 

Signing a vet would cause 2/3 of the picks to get cut.

I agree. I dont expect a veteran back any time soon. They had a vet in Michael and released him to give the young guys more work. RB does not have a huge learning curve. I expect Montgomery plus 2 rookie RBs on the active roster opening day with another on the practice squad. I only see a vet coming in if the rookies fall on their face or injuries hit the position.

Offline Leader

  • Global Moderator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12211
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #37 on: May 02, 2017, 05:03:48 PM »
I'm anxious to see these guys in action. I'm down with Monty - but I'm hopeful Williams can be a reliable "every down" type back - means we've got two of them - and explore Jones's receiving (and evading) skills out of the backfield. The guy can take it downfield. May's is a wild card - a necessary one - unless we want RIP to get all the tough short yardage stuff. Personally, I'd hope Mays could be that guy.

Online scoremore

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1330
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #38 on: May 02, 2017, 05:20:43 PM »
TT just cut 2 guys.  Granted he did draft 3 rooks.  Normally I would argue he'll run with the rooks.  However seems this year he is in cover your butt mode.  If a talented veteran does get cut wouldn't at all shock me if he'd bring him in and let training camp sort it all out.  I see this as play it on the fly kind of thing.  It may happen it may not just depends on who is available and at what price.  Never say never...
« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 05:21:24 PM by scoremore »

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4109
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #39 on: May 02, 2017, 08:16:47 PM »
I fully expect a veteran RB to be signed.

I'd be astonished if they signed a vet back.   

The team philosophy is totally D+D. 
Scouting liked three backs enough to spend three precious picks. 

Signing a vet would cause 2/3 of the picks to get cut.

And yet Ted has signed veteran free agents Davon House, Martellus Bennett, Lance Kendricks, and Jahri Evans this off-season.

O.K. ....... It's not a given that he will, or that he won't, sign a veteran SFA runningback sometime between now and the beginning of the season.

But I wouldn't just dismiss it outright. If the right RB got released by someone, and the price was right, there would be some real value to bring that person in to help mentor and provide leadership (especially in the film & game planning room) to a very young and inexperienced RB group. Let's not forget that Monty has a total of (what?) 11 games under his belt as an NFL runningback??

I'm not saying it's a given, but if it happens, I won't be surprised.

Offline Leader

  • Global Moderator
  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12211
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #40 on: May 02, 2017, 08:51:15 PM »
And yet Ted has signed veteran free agents Davon House, Martellus Bennett, Lance Kendricks, and Jahri Evans this off-season.
O.K. ....... It's not a given that he will, or that he won't, sign a veteran SFA runningback sometime between now and the beginning of the season. But I wouldn't just dismiss it outright. If the right RB got released by someone, and the price was right, there would be some real value to bring that person in to help mentor and provide leadership (especially in the film & game planning room) to a very young and inexperienced RB group. Let's not forget that Monty has a total of (what?) 11 games under his belt as an NFL runningback??  I'm not saying it's a given, but if it happens, I won't be surprised.

It wont be Charles.

"The former Kansas City Chiefs running back signed a one-year contract with the Broncos, the team announced Tuesday. The deal is worth up to $3.75 million, NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport reported."

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000806013/article/jamaal-charles-signs-1year-deal-with-denver-broncos

Offline dannobanano

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4109
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #41 on: May 02, 2017, 09:10:33 PM »
Ya.

Not saying it's a now thing. If I had to guess it would be sometime during TC and pre-season. (said that in a different thread)

There are teams that have several RB's and serious dollars invested in the RB position. If, for some reason, they feel they don't need to crry that much on a 53 man roster, you might see some decent talent end up as SFA's.

Again, not saying it will or won't happen. Just saying that if it does, I won't be surprised if one lands in GB.

Online craig

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3220
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #42 on: May 02, 2017, 10:02:19 PM »
Agree to disagree.  Note also, my "I'd be astonished if they signed a vet" is under the current conditions, in which none of our guys is injured.  If by end of camp two of them are hurt, then my astonishment will vanish.  :)

Offline ThatGuy284

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 754
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #43 on: May 02, 2017, 11:17:30 PM »
If the team is going to add vet players and allocate addtl cash $'s I'd rather they did it at a position like OLB rather than RB. 

Offline cpk1994

  • HOF Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6299
Re: Running Backs in 2017
« Reply #44 on: May 03, 2017, 06:27:08 AM »
I fully expect a veteran RB to be signed.

I'd be astonished if they signed a vet back.   

The team philosophy is totally D+D. 
Scouting liked three backs enough to spend three precious picks. 

Signing a vet would cause 2/3 of the picks to get cut.

I agree. I dont expect a veteran back any time soon. They had a vet in Michael and released him to give the young guys more work. RB does not have a huge learning curve. I expect Montgomery plus 2 rookie RBs on the active roster opening day with another on the practice squad. I only see a vet coming in if the rookies fall on their face or injuries hit the position.
I would rather they sign a vet now, so if the rookies do fall on their face you aren't racing to find a vet back and then having to get them up to speed in your offense in a very short time.
"Aaron Rodgers is a baaaaaaad man" - Stephen A. Smith