Matt Forte anyone?

[Curly Calhoun]

For some reason I read that as "Ryan Grant had his movements" and thought "you have him mixed up with Najeh Davenport"

Oh yes. The pooper. "Da U".

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Lacy and Starks haven't been able to do it but have they been given the chance. It just seems to me that the Packers don't throw to the RB that much. Is it because the RBs can't catch (I don't really think so) or is it because the offense isn't designed for it.

I have no idea why the Packers RBs don't get targeted more. Its always been my feeling that unless your RB flat out can't catch the ball and is a liability when trying to do so you should try to get him the ball as often as possible. I was surprised to see players like Woodhead and Freeman had less than 7 targets a game last year (seemed like it should have been a lot more for some reason) so it might be a stretch to assume any Packer RBs would get that many but if the guy is you main runner why wouldn't you throw to him 4 or 5 times a game.Would Forte's talents as a pass catcher be wasted in Green Bay? With Rodgers at QB your first instinct might be to say no way but if the best passer in the league, or the best passing offense in the league, doesn't throw to the RBs what good does it do to have a great pass catching RB.

As far as Lacy goes I think they may have targeted him more last year but he was so out of shape that they just couldn't. I was expecting much more from in in that category last season.

I like Powell in the passing game but I agree I'm not sure he would be an upgrade over Starks and he would cost more than Starks. The answer to the question of why can' the Packers have an effective pass catching RB is because the Packers don't throw the ball to their RBs all that much. At least that's what it seems like to me. You aren't going to get a RB catching 50 or 60 passes if you only throw 30 or 40 their way. How about instead of a first down run of Lacy into the pile you try throwing him the ball on a swing pattern or something like that.

That said, like I said earlier, I don't think you can look at the 2015 Green Bay Packers passing game and consider it typical of anything.

With Lacy being completely out of shape last season it wouldn´t have made any sense to target him more often in the passing game. Starks was targeted a total of 59 times on 614 snaps, which is a decent number IMO. There´s no doubt in my mind the Packers would find a way to get either Forte or Powell involved in the passing game.

 

[tynimiller]

Lacy I believe has the hands, but until he gets in shape, I agree very little reason to target him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Lacy I believe has the hands, but until he gets in shape, I agree very little reason to target him.

When he was in better shape Rodgers targeted Lacy a total of 59 times in 2014, so I think assume the QB would throw Forte´s or Powell´s way if one of them ends up in green and gold.

 

[tynimiller]

When he was in better shape Rodgers targeted Lacy a total of 59 times in 2014, so I think assume the QB would throw Forte´s or Powell´s way if one of them ends up in green and gold.

I agree. I like the Powell option...I don't see either happening personally but I think Powell would be better served here....however if Starks were to be lost, then I'd think Forte's value is bolstered more than it already would be.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I seriously doubt the Packers would pay Forte the kind of money he could get from other teams. For the Packers, Forte would be a part-time RB while Forte would be a primary back for other teams. No way the Packers pay as much for a part-time RB as other teams pay for a primary RB.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree. I like the Powell option...I don't see either happening personally but I think Powell would be better served here....however if Starks were to be lost, then I'd think Forte's value is bolstered more than it already would be.

I think Powell would be a nice pickup as a back-up RB and most likely wouldn´t cost that much more than Starks.

I seriously doubt the Packers would pay Forte the kind of money he could get from other teams. For the Packers, Forte would be a part-time RB while Forte would be a primary back for other teams. No way the Packers pay as much for a part-time RB as other teams pay for a primary RB.

I´m not convinced any team will offer Forte, who is 30 years old, a contract paying him starter money.

 

[tynimiller]

I think Powell would be a nice pickup as a back-up RB and most likely wouldn´t cost that much more than Starks.



I´m not convinced any team will offer Forte, who is 30 years old, a contract paying him starter money.

I agree on Powell, and I hope no one talks with Forte...and TT says league minimum for a chance at a ring? Forte says "sure". (don't wake me up this is glorious)

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I´m not convinced any team will offer Forte, who is 30 years old, a contract paying him starter money.

It doesn't have to be long term to outbid the Packers. You don't think the 49ers, Lions, etc. would be willing to pay $5 million a year for two years to have Forte lead their rushing game? The Packers would look to Forte as a change of pace guy and 3rd down back. Unless Forte is willing to take a fairly substantial discount to play for the Packers then I just can't see any scenario where the Packers will pay market price for Forte.

 

[sschind]

With Lacy being completely out of shape last season it wouldn´t have made any sense to target him more often in the passing game. Starks was targeted a total of 59 times on 614 snaps, which is a decent number IMO. There´s no doubt in my mind the Packers would find a way to get either Forte or Powell involved in the passing game.

I agree about Lacy I think I said something to that effect. If not I meant to. True about Starks and his number of snaps, I forgot to factor that in. I'm just not convinced having a better pass catching back would automatically mean the Packers would throw more passes to their backs somewhat negating the point of bringing in a pass catching back. Keep Starks, who is a better RB than Powell and would likely be a little cheaper, and throw him the ball more. The best pass catching RBs are not necessarily better pass catchers they just play on teams that throw more passes to the RBs. To me the answer really is that simple.

 

[NelsonsLongCatch]

It doesn't have to be long term to outbid the Packers. You don't think the 49ers, Lions, etc. would be willing to pay $5 million a year for two years to have Forte lead their rushing game? The Packers would look to Forte as a change of pace guy and 3rd down back. Unless Forte is willing to take a fairly substantial discount to play for the Packers then I just can't see any scenario where the Packers will pay market price for Forte.

While I agree with you that the Packers would NEVER pay market price for Forte, I don't think anybody is throwing starter money at him. The Lions drafted Abdullah in the 2nd round last year and the 49er's really like Carlos Hyde. Rob Demovsky recently did an article about how Forte to the Packers makes sense. It's a good read: http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/28003/matt-forte-to-the-packers-makes-sense

 

[Deleted member 6794]

It doesn't have to be long term to outbid the Packers. You don't think the 49ers, Lions, etc. would be willing to pay $5 million a year for two years to have Forte lead their rushing game? The Packers would look to Forte as a change of pace guy and 3rd down back. Unless Forte is willing to take a fairly substantial discount to play for the Packers then I just can't see any scenario where the Packers will pay market price for Forte.

I don´t think any team will bring in Forte to be their leading running back.

 

[Vrill]

I keep seeing Forte linked to us on numerous websites. People saying hes a perfect fit here............

 

[Vrill]

I seriously doubt the Packers would pay Forte the kind of money he could get from other teams. For the Packers, Forte would be a part-time RB while Forte would be a primary back for other teams. No way the Packers pay as much for a part-time RB as other teams pay for a primary RB.

I don't think any team out there would sign Forte to be their #1 back at this point in his career. He's not a 20 carry back anymore, never really was over the last couple years. He'd be signed for platoon duty. Plus, he'll be going to a Super Bowl contender. Most (all?) Super Contenders have a RB or two. Forte isn't going to sign with a scrub team. He's going to be chasing a Super Bowl, which in itself, will mean less money.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I have read quite a few articles on Forte and him being "the perfect fit" in GB. I totally agree, but one of the articles summed it up best at the very end by saying something like "Forte is a great fit for GB, but is GB a great fit for Forte?" We see this every year with FA's...."What a great fit, just the guy the Packers need." Problem is there are many other fan bases and teams saying the same thing and in the end its the Player that gets to pick the team. The Packers would be a "GREAT fit" for Forte if all he wants is a shot at a ring, but there are other teams that can offer him that, so it probably will come down to which of those teams value him the highest ($$$) that will be the perfect fit in Forte's mind.

 

[RepStar15]

I am not buying into the Forte hype. Though he has been a productive back for Chicago for many years now, paying any kind of money for a veteran running back is absurd. Here's a thought, lets beef up the Oline in FA, draft a new back in the 5th round, pray Eddie lacy gets in shape and go from there. If we are entering FA for a RB, Ted Thompson is officially an idiot. If by a grace of God we do enter FA, defense and OL. Typically offensive "weapons" die when they are traded out or picked up on a contract by another team: Jimmy Graham, Demarco Murray, Julius Thomas, Jordan Cameron, Shane Vareen, Percy Harvin to name a few from last year.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

To me, the "Forte Hype" only revolves around what the Packers will be able to do with Starks. I think Starks is a solid #2 back and a compliment to Lacy and the offense that the Packers run. Forte would be the same type of back IMO, but probably a step up from Starks. If all of a sudden Starks is getting "Forte like money" being offered to him, which I doubt, then Forte would be my choice. But if signing Forte instead of Starks costs a lot more money and losing out on an upgrade to TE or ILB via FA's, then I say resign Starks, hope Lacy improves, see where Crockett is in year #2, take your chances on later round back or UDFA's and concentrate your FA $$ on other positions.

 

[Vrill]

Honestly, I'm tired of having nothing but big bruisers running the ball for us. I want a RB with some pop. Who can take it the house from 90-80 yards out. A RB that can line up at WR and get into passing routes. While I like Lacy, I think he needs a backup that can do what I said. Too bad Franklin got injured, he may of been that guy. But I want a Thunder and Lightning combo. Not Thunder and Thunder.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I don't think any team out there would sign Forte to be their #1 back at this point in his career. He's not a 20 carry back anymore, never really was over the last couple years. He'd be signed for platoon duty. Plus, he'll be going to a Super Bowl contender. Most (all?) Super Contenders have a RB or two. Forte isn't going to sign with a scrub team. He's going to be chasing a Super Bowl, which in itself, will mean less money.

OK, I personally think a team like the Ravens might look at Forte and his 4.1 yards per rush on a terrible team last year (a full half yard more than the younger Langford averaged) and his 3+ catches per game and think, "gee, this guy could be relatively cheap on a short term deal". The Colts are another team that could like his presence (actually would seem to be a great fit with that team, what they need and their obvious willingness to sign older players). I'm only saying that for what the Packers would need from Forte, he's probably going to cost more than that production would be worth. Take the money that Forte would cost and spend it on a position of actual need, like dline, ILB, TE.

 

[Vrill]

OK, I personally think a team like the Ravens might look at Forte and his 4.1 yards per rush on a terrible team last year (a full half yard more than the younger Langford averaged) and his 3+ catches per game and think, "gee, this guy could be relatively cheap on a short term deal". The Colts are another team that could like his presence (actually would seem to be a great fit with that team, what they need and their obvious willingness to sign older players). I'm only saying that for what the Packers would need from Forte, he's probably going to cost more than that production would be worth. Take the money that Forte would cost and spend it on a position of actual need, like dline, ILB, TE.

Colts have went through FA RB's like I do underwear recently. The Trent Richardson and Frank Gore projects have been bust city. I suspect they'll draft a RB. Ravens have Forsett and they like him. Forte would split duties there like he would elsewhere. So why not make that elsewhere a Super Bowl contender? (Which is what Forte will be chasing anyway at this point in his career)

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I am not buying into the Forte hype. Though he has been a productive back for Chicago for many years now, paying any kind of money for a veteran running back is absurd. If we are entering FA for a RB, Ted Thompson is officially an idiot.

With Starks being a free agent the Packers will have to add a back-up RB. It doesn't matter if Thompson re-signs Starks or brings in a free agent it should be for a moderate deal.

Honestly, I'm tired of having nothing but big bruisers running the ball for us. I want a RB with some pop. Who can take it the house from 90-80 yards out. A RB that can line up at WR and get into passing routes. While I like Lacy, I think he needs a backup that can do what I said. Too bad Franklin got injured, he may of been that guy. But I want a Thunder and Lightning combo. Not Thunder and Thunder.

Starks is a different back than Lacy capable of pulling off long runs and catching the ball as well.

Take the money that Forte would cost and spend it on a position of actual need, like dline, ILB, TE.

After re-signing Guion and the draft being extremely deep at the position I don't see the need for the Packers to sign a free agent on the DL.

 

[Snoops]

He is gonna go to the patriots they will offer more money and just as good as chance as Green Bay getting to the super bowl plus he'd play more with the patriots I put my money on that even tho Ted will kick the tires on him will come down to money and we won't win

 

[Poppa San]

He is gonna go to the patriots they will offer more money and just as good as chance as Green Bay getting to the super bowl plus he'd play more with the patriots I put my money on that even tho Ted will kick the tires on him will come down to money and we won't win

What if we win by not signing him such as the over 30 falloff is in full stride by mid season?

 

[Sky King]

The guy who comes to mind for me when talking Forte would be Otis Anderson. Heck of a player even at an advanced age. The right guy in the right place could possibly work out.

Based upon Forte's gracious parting comments regarding the Bears and their fans, plus Thompson's aversion to free-agency, it would seem to be an unlikely pairing for him to join the Packers or any other NFC North rival. His legacy with the Bears could remain intact if he pursued a ring elsewhere.

 

[sschind]

Colts have went through FA RB's like I do underwear recently. The Trent Richardson and Frank Gore projects have been bust city. I suspect they'll draft a RB. Ravens have Forsett and they like him. Forte would split duties there like he would elsewhere. So why not make that elsewhere a Super Bowl contender? (Which is what Forte will be chasing anyway at this point in his career)

Not to get personal or anything but I sincerely hope you change your underwear a little more frequently. If not that may explain why you are sitting all alone.