Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
Imagine we draft Jay Ajayi last year. I watched alot of Boise St games and had an idea how good he was. But wow he is really balling out for the Dolphins now! And I believe he went in the 5th RD
Packers expected to sign Joique Bell
- Thread starter InFamous
- Start date
Arthur Squires
Cheesehead
Watching the 49er vs saints till packers play. First 2 plays from scrimmage and Harris catches ball out backfield for 14yds then runs up middle for 7yds. Watching him makes me really wonder why we let hin go.
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
That was 13 days ago... did we NOT need a running back in the last 2 weeks?
Packerlifer
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,782
- Reaction score
- 118
They may have been waiting to see how Knile Davis played out, about Starks' return, Don Jackson' performance. Bell may have been looking at options or his agent working on a deal as well.
melvin dangerr
In it to Win it All
Why not cut starks (when was his last 100yd game) Goodson can go to, Gunther would be next TT upgrade running game get a hard hitting cover safety......
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I don't expect Barclay to be released as with Tretter sidelined for several weeks he's currently the only backup capable of lining up inside.
Hyde isn't as good as Hayward though.
Banjo was released last week.
The Packers don't have any depth at running back and cornerback therefore I don't expect a vetern to be released at one of the positions.
Dirty Sanchez
Cheesehead
Lol how about Linsley and or Tretter.... we still have Barclay lol
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
Why not cut Don Jackson (& re-sign to PS)... he's only gotten 10 touches & 32 yards over last 3 games. Montgomery, Bell & Starks are more than sufficient moving forward. Monty ran for 24 yds. on first touch... and only got to carry 6 more times throughout game... why???
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I agree on platooning Jackson back to the PS, he hasn't shown much on his limited carries. If he gets picked up by another team (doubtful) so be it.
IMO, they went away from Monty running the ball because they fell behind on the scoreboard and after that initial carry, he wasn't able to do much. My bigger question was why they tried to run Cobb out of that formation. The guy is barely able to suit up and then you expose him to some big hits? While lining Cobb or Monty up in the backfield is a nice play on occasion, neither are true running backs and over using them as such, IMO isn't doing your offense any good.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I'm curious about why Montgomery didn't get more carries as well.
It's hard to run more running plays when Rodgers is getting 3 and outs with 20plus yard incompletions lol
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
True, but that happened on a single drive only though.
Yeah My response was a little bit tongue in cheek, but I think it does illustrate where the minds of Rodgers and probably the play callers were though.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
I think when the Packers fell far enough behind and after they had a few failed runs, MM basically tossed the towel in on trying to run. Not saying he should have, just my theory as to why. Could be AR audibled out of a few called run plays as well? While I like the occasional use of Monty running the ball, I don't see it working consistently enough to be relied on more then a 4-5 times a game. Why they handed the ball off to an injured Cobb in the second half is beyond explanation, but then again, maybe they thought the Colts would be as shocked by it as I was.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
It is beyond my comprehension why, after 2 1/2 games running a successful ball control offense, the Packers went back to their old ways as a downfield-first offense until it was too late. And when throwing short early, you'd think R. Rodgers was the only receiver on the field. I mean, how involved do you want to make that guy?
Montgomery's small smattering of snaps out of the backfield, where he's been a valuable component in the ball control passing game was by design and not A. Rodgers going rogue.
This is the first time I have been willing to contemplate McCarthy's departure; I don't think there's a future in banging your head against the wall until either the wall gives or you pass out.
Montgomery's small smattering of snaps out of the backfield, where he's been a valuable component in the ball control passing game was by design and not A. Rodgers going rogue.
This is the first time I have been willing to contemplate McCarthy's departure; I don't think there's a future in banging your head against the wall until either the wall gives or you pass out.
H
HardRightEdge
Guest
Carries and catches out of the backfield. Here's a thought...the plan was to go downfield and they wanted a better blocker back there. I'm grasping at straws, this being a very difficult thing to understand.
D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
I agree that Montgomery shouldn't get 20 carries a game but there's no doubt he should have touched the ball more often against the Colts. It's mind-boggling that the Packers haven't added a traditional running back aside of Jackson while not having Lacy and Starks available for the last three weeks.
It's actually not that mind boggling to me. Who are they going to get? and why? we can all agree that lining it up with a more traditional set of TE's, WR's and RB never worked well for this offense. It's a part I think that is missing, but let's be serious. Outside of Lacy, who couldn't be counted on to finish a drive in a couple years now, or even give us 3 sets of downs in a row, our running game has mostly been a result of our passing game.
Our Offensive line still is not a good blocking unit. At this point, unless we spread them out and use the run out of a mostly passing offense, they are largely going to be wasted downs. It's going to take a quality starting caliber back at this point to run behind this line with any degree of success and that guy isn't available at this point.
Pokerbrat2000
Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Agreed, although, seeing the Chiefs resign Davis leads me to believe that there isn't much out there anymore. If the rumors of Bell being signed end up happening, I am not holding my breath on what he will be able to do in Green Bay. Starks coming back may preclude any signing of Bell but as we have already seen this year, Starks may not do much either. IMO the only real help in the running game is going to have to come from Lacy, if and when he makes it back this year.
Until such time, the Packers just need to accept that they are a passing team and use what they have in Monty, Ripp and Jackson on occasion to keep defenses from strictly playing pass defense.
Curly Calhoun
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2015
- Messages
- 2,154
- Reaction score
- 601
Jermaine Whitehead. Major gaffe on special teams that resulted in Jordan Todman's 99-yard touchdown return.
Snoops
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2014
- Messages
- 1,617
- Reaction score
- 279
What ever came of the bell situation I thought they were signing him haven't heard a thing
ls1bob
Cheesehead
I know. I thought he was supposed to be signed yesterday
Pkrjones
Cheesehead
Earlier reports are that Bell was working out for GB on Monday but not necessarily being signed 
.
.Similar threads
