Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

CW21's 1st Annual Packers Camp Battles Thread
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 788
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think that Green should win the number two spot and I think he can challenge Starks for some carries, if he stays on track with his rehab. From everything I have seen/read he is on track to be ready for at least the start of the season, but a torn ACL recovery time frame is usually 10-12 months, which from reports I have seen he will be just about at the 10 month mark when the season opens. From what I have seen/read is that he hopes to be ready to participate at the start of training camp. If he cannot it might open the door for someone like Saine or Tyler to impress people. Either way I still think Green is number two and if both Saine and Tyler shine maybe we keep 4 runningbacks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MNPackfan32


Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 7819
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a lot of excitement about Alex Green. IMO he wont take carries away from Starks. Green will be a better 3rd down guy than Starks but I am not sure Green can see it good enough to be a better ZBS runner than Starks. I'm not slamming Green but I just think he is somewhat like B-Jax, great in the screen game but lacks the vision to be a true stud running the ball. I hope I'm wrong but that is my gut fealing right now.
_________________



Duff Man wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Josh Sitton, Mike Daniels

Average at best
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank-O


Joined: 20 Jun 2012
Posts: 1109
Location: Wisconsin - Cheeseland
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as my two cents about the RB battle;

James Starks - a hard running, physical type of guy who I think could carry the ball 20-25 times a game if we needed him to. Most think he's not that "good" but he just needs the ball and he gets better with the more touches he gets.

Alex Green - Not getting my hopes up yet with this cat, he's got the size and speed, but does he have the vision and durability? I honestly don't think we'll see a whole lot of him this year as we have Saine who did a decent job with the 3rd down touches.

Brandon Saine - Smart, versatile with a little experience from last year which I think gives him the edge over Green for this season (or the first half anyway). Not going to get anything too special out of him, but I can see him becoming a Brandon Jackson type of player for us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
packers88


Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 2078
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How is Alex Green as a blocker? Also, how would you rank our RBs as blockers?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PackFan4Life


Joined: 05 Dec 2006
Posts: 4064
Location: De Pere, WI
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

packers88 wrote:
How is Alex Green as a blocker? Also, how would you rank our RBs as blockers?


His potential as a blocker and experience in blitz pick ups in a spread offense is one of the reasons TT and Mac wanted him.

My guess is, as pass happy as the Pack offense is, we will see a lot of both Starks and Green. Starks will likely get more carries though. If either one of those two do not produce or are sitting on the sideline hurt, Saine is going to get his reps and a huge opportunity.

I also think Bennet maybe a better prospect for the Packer offense than Tyler.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 3285
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CWood21 wrote:
Color me surprised if we carried 3 QBs this year. That likely means we don't get to take a player whose more likely to contribute to the team.


I would honestly be surprised if we didn't keep 3 QBs this year. It's unlikely they'd be able to keep Coleman on the PS, so unless he falls on his face to the point that the Packers don't want him anymore, you pretty much have to put him on the roster.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pack4life7


Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 3215
Location: Illinois
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
CWood21 wrote:
Color me surprised if we carried 3 QBs this year. That likely means we don't get to take a player whose more likely to contribute to the team.


I would honestly be surprised if we didn't keep 3 QBs this year. It's unlikely they'd be able to keep Coleman on the PS, so unless he falls on his face to the point that the Packers don't want him anymore, you pretty much have to put him on the roster.


With all of the talent this season>

No way we keep anymore than Rodgers and Harrell. This team is just way to stacked.
_________________
Ted brought us Clay

Waldo wrote:

Enter Waldo


Same Old Jay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PackFan4Life wrote:
packers88 wrote:
How is Alex Green as a blocker? Also, how would you rank our RBs as blockers?


His potential as a blocker and experience in blitz pick ups in a spread offense is one of the reasons TT and Mac wanted him.

My guess is, as pass happy as the Pack offense is, we will see a lot of both Starks and Green. Starks will likely get more carries though. If either one of those two do not produce or are sitting on the sideline hurt, Saine is going to get his reps and a huge opportunity.

I also think Bennet maybe a better prospect for the Packer offense than Tyler.


Bennet's a Full Back IIRC. I didn't watch any Winston-Salem games so I can't give an opinion.

I also wouldn't say that TT wanted Green because he was a good blocker in a spread. He has the potential to be a good blocker in the spread, which is a totally different thing. Hawaii played basketball on turf and often had 5 guys running routes. Green was drafted because he has a rare size/speed combo and can catch the ball. He has a ton of experience running draws against spread out defenses, and that's what TT was looking for. Green had probably never seen a FB in his life before he got to GB.

Green as a blocker is interesting because he's got the size to get the job done. He's just not quite right up top yet. That's always the risk when you draft a guy. Plenty of RBs just never commit to blitz pick-up, even though it's something that coaches look for. It's one of those things that if guys don't put in the effort, they're not going to get better. Green has spent his offseason getting his knee right, so he's probably not really had the opportunity to get on the field with the O-Line and practice the protection scheme.

Additionally, so much of blocking is dependent on how the other team likes to blitz. It's hard to get a hold of that without knowing your opponent or how the staff wants to attack their blitz. You've got to fully commit yourself during the week to learning all of the blitzes and understanding what you're going to be seeing. Additionally . . .

Rodgers doesn't really like his RBs blocking, he much prefers that MM calls a scat protection and have the RB give him a checkdown when the blitz is coming. Every back in the league is outmatched when James Harrison is the one blitzing, so Rodgers would rather have the RB run a swing route to the blitzing side. Flynn preferred the same thing, which is how Grant scored on that long catch and run at the beginning of the Lions game. Pro isn't always about squaring off and taking the guys best shot.

I'd rate the RBs on the Packers roster:

1. Tyler
2. Saine
3. Green/Starks

Tyler isn't quite a savant yet, but if you want to carry the ball at USC, you better be able to pick up a blitz. Only Trojan in recent years who couldn't was Bush, and he's a p***y. Tyler is the least familiar with the spread and how MM likes his backs to operate, but on even ground, Tyler's heads and shoulders above everybody else.

Saine's a bit behind Tyler as a blocker. If he'd been on the active roster rather than the Practice Squad he'd probably be farther along but he just wasn't getting the practice reps until after Green went down. Saine's turned himself into a decent blocker, but he shies away from contact a bit too much. Saine's a freak, but is more athlete than football player and probably always will be. It takes more of a sack than Saine's shown to be great in pass pro. Rodgers likes him because the guy can catch a football, and is an outstanding route runner, which plays into what Rodgers wants to do when blitzed.

Green and Starks are the two that are pretty poor. Starks is disappointing because he's had every opportunity in the world to get it together and he just hasn't. He was dreadful against the Giants. At a certain point, you may just have to write Starks off as a blocker. Some guys just don't have it, and are never going to have it upstairs. Starks is reaching that point.

Green is the one that has the most potential on the team, not just as a blocker but as an all around back. He can catch in scat pro. He's got the size to stone guys in standard pro. It just hasn't come together that we've seen. At Hawaii he was a pretty good blocker but was prone to brain farts, and in GB he never really got on the field before he got hurt. In what little we've seen he seemed to have a decent understanding of who he was supposed to block, and that will only improve as he gets more reps.


Last edited by AlexGreen#20 on Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:43 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pack4life7 wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
CWood21 wrote:
Color me surprised if we carried 3 QBs this year. That likely means we don't get to take a player whose more likely to contribute to the team.


I would honestly be surprised if we didn't keep 3 QBs this year. It's unlikely they'd be able to keep Coleman on the PS, so unless he falls on his face to the point that the Packers don't want him anymore, you pretty much have to put him on the roster.


With all of the talent this season>

No way we keep anymore than Rodgers and Harrell. This team is just way to stacked.


I think there are 40 locks on this team and maybe 6 other spots that need to be filled. That leaves 5 spots for which Coleman will be fighting with a dozen other guys. I think this one is too close to call before we get to camp.

Based on the people I've heard from, Coleman should take one of those 5 spots on merit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13857
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sadly, I have core issues with all of them. Some ability on this roster but I sure as hell don't see a bell-cow. Still say Grant is worth picking up the phone for if the price is right.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 788
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AlexGreen#20 wrote:
PackFan4Life wrote:
packers88 wrote:
How is Alex Green as a blocker? Also, how would you rank our RBs as blockers?


His potential as a blocker and experience in blitz pick ups in a spread offense is one of the reasons TT and Mac wanted him.

My guess is, as pass happy as the Pack offense is, we will see a lot of both Starks and Green. Starks will likely get more carries though. If either one of those two do not produce or are sitting on the sideline hurt, Saine is going to get his reps and a huge opportunity.

I also think Bennet maybe a better prospect for the Packer offense than Tyler.


Bennet's a Full Back IIRC. I didn't watch any Winston-Salem games so I can't give an opinion.


Duane Bennett is a running back from Minnesota, Nic Cooper is the fullback from Winston-Salem, not that it changes much, if any, of your break down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
Sadly, I have core issues with all of them. Some ability on this roster but I sure as hell don't see a bell-cow. Still say Grant is worth picking up the phone for if the price is right.


Isn't Grant just another guy that isn't a bell-cow, though?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AlexGreen#20


Joined: 13 Jun 2012
Posts: 5502
PostPosted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 10:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rbens06 wrote:
AlexGreen#20 wrote:
PackFan4Life wrote:
packers88 wrote:
How is Alex Green as a blocker? Also, how would you rank our RBs as blockers?


His potential as a blocker and experience in blitz pick ups in a spread offense is one of the reasons TT and Mac wanted him.

My guess is, as pass happy as the Pack offense is, we will see a lot of both Starks and Green. Starks will likely get more carries though. If either one of those two do not produce or are sitting on the sideline hurt, Saine is going to get his reps and a huge opportunity.

I also think Bennet maybe a better prospect for the Packer offense than Tyler.


Bennet's a Full Back IIRC. I didn't watch any Winston-Salem games so I can't give an opinion.


Duane Bennett is a running back from Minnesota, Nic Cooper is the fullback from Winston-Salem, not that it changes much, if any, of your break down.


That's right. Embarassed

Bennet sucks. All of the drawbacks of Saine's game without being a freak athlete. Just a camp body IMO
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 7928
Location: Titletown for the summer!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 8:51 am    Post subject: Re: CW21's 1st Annual Packers Camp Battles Thread Reply with quote

CWood21 wrote:
This is something I've wanted to do for a little while now, and hopefully I can keep doing this in the future. This is meant just as an informative thread, but I want your feedback, criticism, critiques, and thoughts. Every few days, I'll look at a different camp battle and you let me know what you think. After I'm done, I'll post my final roster predictions.


Backup Quarterback(s)
This might be one of the more under-looked camp battles as Matt Flynn has left for Seattle to pursue a starting quarterback job. On one hand, Graham Harrell likely has the inside track given that he's already worked under Mike McCarthy but B.J. Coleman's impressive abilities make you think about keeping him on the active rosters. Odds are high that the Packers only hold onto two quarterback this year, which could ultimately mean that the Packers prefer the more experienced quarterback over the more toolsy one.

Graham Harrell vs. B.J. Coleman

Graham Harrell

Advantages:
+ Experience in Offense
+ Accuracy


Most would likely view Graham Harrell as the odds on favorite for the backup quarterback after Ted Thompson didn't go out and sign a veteran quarterback to back up Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers, with the exception of the 2010 season, has stayed relatively healthy in recent years and the backup quarterback isn't expected to get a whole lot of snaps outside of blowout situations.

Graham Harrell was a largely criticized quarterback coming out of Texas Tech in the Run 'n Fun system that Mike Leach ran while Harrell was there. He was expected to go undrafted because of the system he came in, but also his physical limitations. Going into the draft, most draft "experts" noted that his arm was below-average on a good day and that he likely didn't have the arm strength to be much more than a backup quarterback or even third quarterback on the depth chart. Still the Packers saw enough of him to give him a practice squad spot where he spent most of the year before getting called up at the end of the season when the Packers rested Aaron Rodgers before the playoffs. After having a lockout shortened offseason last year, this is going to be Graham's chance to really maximize his value in this system by going through Mike McCarthy's quarterback school. But what Graham Harrell lacks in arm strength, he makes up for with accuracy and leadership qualities. He was considered one of the best quarterbacks to come out of Texas Tech.

Most thought that Harrell was destined to turn out like other Leach quarterbacks in that they'd have a short shelf life in the NFL before finding themselves out of the league and likely stocking shelves at a local Walmart. Harrell has a chance to have a premier job holding a clipboard behind the best quarterback in the NFL and learning from one of the best quarterback coaches in the NFL. He'll have to work hard to beat out the promising rookie in camp.


B.J. Coleman

Advantages:
+ Impressive Physical Tools
+ Confidence
+ Desire To Be Great


Obviously due to Harrell's physical limitations, B.J. Coleman is the sexy pick to be Aaron Rodgers' backup but it's not that easy. Coleman wasn't very productive in college and remains a huge project but the upside might be a starting quarterback that the Packers could flip down the road for some picks. He's got all the physical tools you look for in a quarterback, but needs a lot of development before he's ready to play. Learning from Mike McCarthy might have been the best thing that could have had happen to him.

B.J. Coleman has the big arm, almost reminiscent of our former gun slinger Brett Favre who threw the ball around with reckless abandon. He'll have to curb his play if wants to win the backup quarterback job when McCarthy has put a premium on ball security. He's got impressive physical tools, but is still largely undeveloped after transferring from Tennessee to Tennessee Tech. Training camp will be a major factor as to whether or not he wins the spot, and he'll need to show that he's a bit more ready to contribute should Aaron Rodgers miss more time than expected. He might be tough to sneak through into the practice squad, but he might not be ready to contribute to the team just yet.

I've got no doubt that B.J. Coleman can develop into a starting quarterback, but it's on a matter of how hard he works. If his post draft interview is any indication of his work ethic, Graham Harrell could be in a world of hurt in training camp this year.


Verdict: Graham Harrell


I too wonder if will we risk exposing Coleman to the league to try to sneak him onto the practice squad so we might have to keep 3 this time around. It's unfortunate NFL rosters are so small.
_________________


Last edited by Pugger on Fri Jun 22, 2012 9:03 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 7928
Location: Titletown for the summer!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 22, 2012 9:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
Sadly, I have core issues with all of them. Some ability on this roster but I sure as hell don't see a bell-cow. Still say Grant is worth picking up the phone for if the price is right.


Me too. Poor Starks can't stay healthy, Green is coming off an injury that put him on the IR and Saine is super raw. Is Tyler fast enough? It will be interesting to see if we bring in anyone else over the summer.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group