Packer fan thoughts

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by 14holestogie

My point was there is only so much that the ball can be spread around. I'm not sure Lynch would have had as many chances to score. We score from outside the red zone as much or more as inside the red zone, and we've got 4 from Kuhn and 1 from Raji to go along with the 3 from Starks and Grant.
That's 8 to Lynch's 9.

I wouldn't care if he scores touchdowns or not. I want a guy who can come in and move the chains to protect the lead and protect the defense. But for the sake of, "argument" (nobody of course is arguing) I'd simply counter with these two things:

1. 24 of Rodgers 39 touchdown passes this season have occurred in the red zone (not to mention his two rushing touchdowns)
2. Lynch has scored 9 rushing touchdowns (and one receiving touchdown) on a terrible offense. Not a stretch to think he could exceed those numbers in Green Bay (if needed).

Originally Posted by 14holestogie

Not saying he wouldn't have been an improvement, but there's only so many touches available.

Marshawn Lynch has 225 carries this season. Grant/Starks have a combined 229. I think the Packers would've been able to find a respectable number of touches for him. Further, it was brought up earlier about the salary cap. If the Packers trade for Lynch last season, the Packers aren't paying Grant this season, saving the team a net $1.5 million.

Originally Posted by 14holestogie

Then who's to say what he does to the chemistry of the team. I like what Ted's building from within.

Mr. Thompson's done a wonderful job, but he's far from infallible. He's done a poor job evaluating and drafting defensive line talent (save Raji, who fell in his lap) and hasn't done a lot with the linebacking corps, either. It's also my opinion (again, just my opinion) that he missed the boat with Lynch, which was further evidenced by him spending yet another early pick on a runningback this year (Brandon Jackson and now Alex Green). If anything, he's taken careful note to make sure that he doesn't make the same mistakes his predecessors did; having a stud quarterback but not providing him with weapons or decent protection (see: Favre, Brett).

[14holestogie]

It is odd that we are "arguing" on the precipice of a perfect season.
If it happens, are we going to "argue" we could have been "perfecter"?

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by 14holestogie

It is odd that we are "arguing" on the precipice of a perfect season.
If it happens, are we going to "argue" we could have been "perfecter"?

There's always room for improvement, brother.

But in all reality, this is just an old axe I have to grind with Ted Thompson. I'm a stakeholder now, so next year I'll go up and voice my displeasure in person.

[deaster25]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I wouldn't care if he scores touchdowns or not. I want a guy who can come in and move the chains to protect the lead and protect the defense.

Packers are second in the league in First downs per game.

Originally Posted by Stephen

Marshawn Lynch has 225 carries this season. Grant/Starks have a combined 229.

If Marshawn Lynch was a Packer he wouldn't have anywhere near 225 carries this season. Green Bay is a passing team who has the best receiver corps in the League. I don't understand the obesession with Lynch he is barely a top 10 running back and he is better suited at a team who needs a runing back.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by deaster25

Packers are second in the league in First downs per game.

That's great. Still doesn't detract from my argument. The Packers don't have a runningback (or a collection of runningbacks) that they can hand the ball off to late in the game to chew up the clock and protect the lead/defense. Marshawn Lynch is that kind of back, as he showed (yet again) on Monday night.

Originally Posted by deaster25

If Marshawn Lynch was a Packer he wouldn't have anywhere near 225 carries this season.

I don't know how you can come to that conclusion since Grant/Starks have combined for more attempts this season than Lynch. It's not a stretch to project him having somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 carries at this point in the season. Just to take it a step further, in 2009 when the Packers had a primary back (Grant), he had 282 carries with Rodgers attempting more passes per game than he is on pace for this season. Lynch would've filled that roll perfectly, and done it better than Grant did in 2009.

Originally Posted by deaster25

Green Bay is a passing team who has the best receiver corps in the League.

No argument here.

Originally Posted by deaster25

I don't understand the obesession with Lynch he is barely a top 10 running back

Yeah, because God forbid the Packers have a (young) top ten runningback at their disposal that actually would've saved the team $1.5 million dollars this season. What am I thinking?

Originally Posted by deaster25

and he is better suited at a team who needs a runing back.

I would love to know how Grant/Starks are better suited to this team, when Lynch literally does everything better on the football field than either one.

[deaster25]

Originally Posted by Stephen

I would love to know how Grant/Starks are better suited to this team, when Lynch literally does everything better on the football field than either one.

The facts are that Green Bay mostly only runs the ball when they need to run time off of the clock and so far there has been no problem doing that.

The Packers have scored the most points in the league and are 23rd in the league in plays from scrimmage. Anytime a team can score that fast the other team is going to have more tries to score points therefore are going to.

Last we are Packers fans why complain and argue about what could have been when obviously something is going right nothing should take the focus away from the amazing season that they have had, just enjoy it like the rest of us.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by deaster25

The facts are that Green Bay mostly only runs the ball when they need to run time off of the clock and so far there has been no problem doing that.

They've let teams sneak back into games all season due to the lack of ability to eat up the clock coupled with a porous defense. How many times have they been bailed about by a timely interception with their backs against the wall? Sorry, I'm not nearly as confident as you seem to be in that continuing. At some point, the clock strikes midnight.

Originally Posted by deaster25

The Packers have scored the most points in the league and are 23rd in the league in plays from scrimmage. Anytime a team can score that fast the other team is going to have more tries to score points therefore are going to.

That's why it's vital to have a player of Lynch's caliber (it doesn't even have to be Lynch; but it's vital to have that be part of your arsenal if you're going to call off the dogs like the Packers do) to protect the leads (and the defense) built up by grinding out some first downs on the ground and chewing up the clock. That isn't happening so it is giving teams new life every week.

Originally Posted by deaster25

Last we are Packers fans why complain and argue about what could have been when obviously something is going right nothing should take the focus away from the amazing season that they have had, just enjoy it like the rest of us.

I am enjoying it, but as I said earlier, this is a problem with the organization that I have that stems from last season, and magnified by the fact that they took a runningback with the pick that Buffalo asked for in return. I apologize if I can't/won't blindly follow lockstep and not voice a disagreement when one arises. I watched as Ron Wolf became bulletproof because of assembling a team that made it to two Super Bowls, but yet completely mismanaged the team from the late 90's onward (poor draft selections, poor free agent acquisitions, the handling of Mike Holmgren, poor coaching hirings) up until the time he bumbled the reins over to Mike Sherman.

[14holestogie]

While you bring up a lot of valid points, Stephen, if Starks doesn't get dinged up 6 weeks ago (or if we brought in Lynch and he had gotten hurt), we probably aren't having this conversation. Injuries are a part of the game and while we may not have a deep pool of talent at the running back position, we do have servicable talent. Nobody's totally right or wrong. Now we're debating opinions. Nobody wins that game.

I say we call a truce and you make it up for one of the NWWHerf and we'll arm wrestle.

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by 14holestogie

Now we're debating opinions. Nobody wins that game.

And it's admittedly a petty squabble, but for some reason it's a burr under my saddle.

Originally Posted by 14holestogie

I say we call a truce and you make it up for one of the NWWHerf and we'll arm wrestle.

I've heard about you...

[Volusianator]

The Packers worked out 4 new running backs this week, we NEED a running back.

Originally Posted by deaster25

better suited at a team who needs a runing back.