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

Lacy vs. Franklin
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who will have the better career as a Packer?
Lacy
60%
 60%  [ 62 ]
Franklin
39%
 39%  [ 40 ]
Total Votes : 102

Author Message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2244
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ball's a system back, there's no question about that. You saw how well he performed last year when the O-line struggled early. He's a finesse guy and the only way he'll have a shot in the NFL if if he's splitting carries with another back. Denver does have this situation but I'm quite sure John Fox will have a hard time with a RB-by-committee; especially with Peyton as his QB.

Lacy's better than Ball simply because he's played through injuries which haven't slowed him down to date, he was a physical and bruising back, and he did it in the toughest conference. Ball played against the likes of Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Purdue. Not exactly tough squads.

Franklin is a 3rd down back and he's everything you want in a 3rd down back. There were a few people who were really high on him as a featured back but that just simply wouldn't work out in the NFL for him. However, someone else suggested he put on 5-10 lb.s or something of the sort. If Franklin were able to do that and be effective, he could carve a nice little niche for himself with the Packers and who knows, he could net us a nice comp. pick in a few years if some team had their heart set on him, but for now, he's a 3rd down back and I suspect he'll be a helpful role player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McThreadski


Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Posts: 202
Location: On the Gold
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NCPackFan wrote:
Ball's a system back, there's no question about that. You saw how well he performed last year when the O-line struggled early. He's a finesse guy and the only way he'll have a shot in the NFL if if he's splitting carries with another back. Denver does have this situation but I'm quite sure John Fox will have a hard time with a RB-by-committee; especially with Peyton as his QB.

Lacy's better than Ball simply because he's played through injuries which haven't slowed him down to date, he was a physical and bruising back, and he did it in the toughest conference. Ball played against the likes of Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Purdue. Not exactly tough squads.



Oh come on, it's not like Alabama played LSU every week.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-12/sec/2012-alabama-crimson-tide-football-schedule.php

They had more than their fair share of cupcakes.

Ball is the smoother back. I know these are highlight reels, but just watch the difference between the way that the two men run. It's clear to me that Lacy may have good vision and strength, but he rarely makes people miss. Whereas Ball just is patient and smooth and he had a lot more carries to prove his skill set, but because he has such vision, you never saw him get rung up for a bone crusher.

Lacy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh6Le6QXB9A


Ball

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXxjpYqy4tM

I would take Ball every time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gopackgonerd


Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 553
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

McThreadski wrote:
NCPackFan wrote:
Ball's a system back, there's no question about that. You saw how well he performed last year when the O-line struggled early. He's a finesse guy and the only way he'll have a shot in the NFL if if he's splitting carries with another back. Denver does have this situation but I'm quite sure John Fox will have a hard time with a RB-by-committee; especially with Peyton as his QB.

Lacy's better than Ball simply because he's played through injuries which haven't slowed him down to date, he was a physical and bruising back, and he did it in the toughest conference. Ball played against the likes of Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Purdue. Not exactly tough squads.



Oh come on, it's not like Alabama played LSU every week.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-12/sec/2012-alabama-crimson-tide-football-schedule.php

They had more than their fair share of cupcakes.

Ball is the smoother back. I know these are highlight reels, but just watch the difference between the way that the two men run. It's clear to me that Lacy may have good vision and strength, but he rarely makes people miss. Whereas Ball just is patient and smooth and he had a lot more carries to prove his skill set, but because he has such vision, you never saw him get rung up for a bone crusher.

Lacy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh6Le6QXB9A


Ball

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXxjpYqy4tM

I would take Ball every time.


Except Ball and Lacy are 2 completely different backs. Lacy likes contact, he's no Darren freaking Sproles for crist sakes. He's a big back that doesn't need to juke every single run to be good. I'd rather have an aggressive runner that can pass block. And actually run that sucker in on the goal line than relying on our FB that everyone knows is gonna get the ball there.

Like everyone says they were closely graded out. It's kinda ridiculous comparing these two ever since the draft was over. Ball isn't godly over Lacy, and Lacy isn't godly over Ball. Let's stop debating who's better it's not what the threads about.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
McThreadski


Joined: 11 Mar 2013
Posts: 202
Location: On the Gold
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gopackgonerd wrote:
McThreadski wrote:
NCPackFan wrote:
Ball's a system back, there's no question about that. You saw how well he performed last year when the O-line struggled early. He's a finesse guy and the only way he'll have a shot in the NFL if if he's splitting carries with another back. Denver does have this situation but I'm quite sure John Fox will have a hard time with a RB-by-committee; especially with Peyton as his QB.

Lacy's better than Ball simply because he's played through injuries which haven't slowed him down to date, he was a physical and bruising back, and he did it in the toughest conference. Ball played against the likes of Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, and Purdue. Not exactly tough squads.





Oh come on, it's not like Alabama played LSU every week.

http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa-12/sec/2012-alabama-crimson-tide-football-schedule.php

They had more than their fair share of cupcakes.

Ball is the smoother back. I know these are highlight reels, but just watch the difference between the way that the two men run. It's clear to me that Lacy may have good vision and strength, but he rarely makes people miss. Whereas Ball just is patient and smooth and he had a lot more carries to prove his skill set, but because he has such vision, you never saw him get rung up for a bone crusher.

Lacy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh6Le6QXB9A


Ball

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXxjpYqy4tM

I would take Ball every time.


Except Ball and Lacy are 2 completely different backs. Lacy likes contact, he's no Darren freaking Sproles for crist sakes. He's a big back that doesn't need to juke every single run to be good. I'd rather have an aggressive runner that can pass block. And actually run that sucker in on the goal line than relying on our FB that everyone knows is gonna get the ball there.

Like everyone says they were closely graded out. It's kinda ridiculous comparing these two ever since the draft was over. Ball isn't godly over Lacy, and Lacy isn't godly over Ball. Let's stop debating who's better it's not what the threads about.


I scratch my head everytime I hear this idea that Lacy is a goal line back but Ball isn't. Last I checked, Ball is the all-time record holder for TD's and the vast majority of them came on the goal line. Dude has has an absolute target set on the endzone. I'd rather have Ball, but I will take Lacy, but I have very little faith in that pick.

As for what the thread is about, I think Franklin will provide more for us than Lacy does, but if I am wrong, I will happily admit that I mis-judged it. You can mark that down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 11:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Madtown wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
I clearly would have also. But that's a much different debate. In terms of pure fit, Franklin would have been second on my RB list for the Packers after Ball. I don't view Franklin as an elite running talent but his game works in every way in system. A guy like Franklin is not half as hard to get your hands on as a guy like Lacy is. But he is very good at his game. Going to get his best from week to week also. Ton of pride in that young man! Just wish he was a little more North/South in terms of running style. Don't really love his narrow base eaither. But that's anything but a easy fix. I keep Franklin the way he is for the most part, have him put on 5-10lbs, and tell him to stick his head up in there a bit more.


Really? Interesting. I had Lacy close to Ball, but he was a clear #2 for me. I just really wanted someone who could get the tough/goalline yards, and Lacy fit the bill for me with his agility and vision to boot. I get what you mean, though. Franklin's all around game really fits this offense. I just liked what Lacy could bring in those strategic 3rd and short-type situations, plus hopefully the ability to smack the defense around a bit so they might not be so amped up on pass-rushing.


I hope one understands that I was not by any means talking about a grade there. There is a very real premium on what Lacy brings to the table and in that I had him above Franklin on my board. I for one hold the system fit at the RB position at a premium as well. But it's always the sum of all the parts. Talent is talent. Getting your hands on a stud power back like Lacy is no easy task. Those guys just don't fall off of trees. That fact alone will push his board.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 12:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pollino14 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
I know I say it all the time but it's always the sum of all the parts.

So yes, the miles on Ball was part of the final grade. Still liked Ball a little more long term than Lacy to tell the truth. I think Lacy will show value for the pick if only because your going to get four years of him on the cheap with the new CBA. Even more so because the players can't holdout under rookie contract. That second contract is going to be a tough call though IMO. When Lacy's body goes, IT'S GOING TO GO QUICK. Very few age well with that running style. When Ball's legs are done you are going to see it coming before hand.


Respect your opinion, but I do think Ball was a system back.

But if there is a place to get the most out of him, Denver is the place.


System back, yes! Product of said system, no! Ball is a damn good football player.

That's my point in all of this anyway. I for one don't think Ball is the pure talent that Lacy is. I just feel he is a better fit and I'm one that holds a premium on said fit at the RB position. Being in the right home matters as much to the RB position as any of them IMO.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PossibleCabbage


Joined: 25 Apr 2011
Posts: 3304
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
That's my point in all of this anyway. I for one don't think Ball is the pure talent that Lacy is. I just feel he is a better fit and I'm one that holds a premium on said fit at the RB position. Being in the right home matters as much to the RB position as any of them IMO.


Mac made some cryptic comments at the beginning of the offseason about how changing they go about running the ball. So when you say Ball was a better system fit, do you mean the system they used to run or what they're doing now?

Since certainly schematic fit is important, but to a certain extent you have to tailor your schemes to emphasize the best qualities of your players (I mean, Von Miller sure isn't playing a traditional 43 SLB.) So is it conceivable that taking the pure talent guy is a better bet than the system guy, because you can always tailor the scheme to whoever you've got?

Or would making Lacy as good (if not better) a fit as Ball require reworking too much of everything else?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PossibleCabbage wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
That's my point in all of this anyway. I for one don't think Ball is the pure talent that Lacy is. I just feel he is a better fit and I'm one that holds a premium on said fit at the RB position. Being in the right home matters as much to the RB position as any of them IMO.


Mac made some cryptic comments at the beginning of the offseason about how changing they go about running the ball. So when you say Ball was a better system fit, do you mean the system they used to run or what they're doing now?

Since certainly schematic fit is important, but to a certain extent you have to tailor your schemes to emphasize the best qualities of your players (I mean, Von Miller sure isn't playing a traditional 43 SLB.) So is it conceivable that taking the pure talent guy is a better bet than the system guy, because you can always tailor the scheme to whoever you've got?

Or would making Lacy as good (if not better) a fit as Ball require reworking too much of everything else?


The only time I would EVER draft a player with the mindset of changing the system at hand for said player would be at QB. If a great QB falls into your lap, ya do what it takes to make it work. Outside of that, you want players to play your fit, not the other way around. I would have been willing to pound the table for Ball in Green Bay. I would not have done so in our room. Sometimes the value river just meets the road though even if they are a less than ideal fit. Think this was very much so the case with Lacy and Boyd from this Packers class.

You always grade them out twice. High board and system at hand. If those two things go hand in hand you might have landed a All-Pro.

In terms of Mac "changing things up" in the run game. I'm sure they will change things up a bit but I don't look for huge change. Bet they still run zone by % a great deal, no doubt.

It's not like I'm saying Lacy is a poor fit. Man has very sound vision marks and is a very good fit IMO. I'm just saying that's not the RB I would draw up for Mac's fit. Ball was damn close though and would have been ideal with a hair more long speed. I'm very happy with the Lacy/Franklin combo. But don't sell short the value of a true three down RB. Would have made Rodgers just that much harder to deal with. Ya know?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8624
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
That's my point in all of this anyway. I for one don't think Ball is the pure talent that Lacy is. I just feel he is a better fit and I'm one that holds a premium on said fit at the RB position. Being in the right home matters as much to the RB position as any of them IMO.


Mac made some cryptic comments at the beginning of the offseason about how changing they go about running the ball. So when you say Ball was a better system fit, do you mean the system they used to run or what they're doing now?

Since certainly schematic fit is important, but to a certain extent you have to tailor your schemes to emphasize the best qualities of your players (I mean, Von Miller sure isn't playing a traditional 43 SLB.) So is it conceivable that taking the pure talent guy is a better bet than the system guy, because you can always tailor the scheme to whoever you've got?

Or would making Lacy as good (if not better) a fit as Ball require reworking too much of everything else?


The only time I would EVER draft a player with the mindset of changing the system at hand for said player would be at QB. If a great QB falls into your lap, ya do what it takes to make it work. Outside of that, you want players to play your fit, not the other way around. I would have been willing to pound the table for Ball in Green Bay. I would not have done so in our room. Sometimes the value river just meets the road though even if they are a less than ideal fit. Think this was very much so the case with Lacy and Boyd from this Packers class.

You always grade them out twice. High board and system at hand. If those two things go hand in hand you might have landed a All-Pro.

In terms of Mac "changing things up" in the run game. I'm sure they will change things up a bit but I don't look for huge change. Bet they still run zone by % a great deal, no doubt.

It's not like I'm saying Lacy is a poor fit. Man has very sound vision marks and is a very good fit IMO. I'm just saying that's not the RB I would draw up for Mac's fit. Ball was damn close though and would have been ideal with a hair more long speed. I'm very happy with the Lacy/Franklin combo. But don't sell short the value of a true three down RB. Would have made Rodgers just that much harder to deal with. Ya know?


But of course Ball was gone when our turn came up. I'm guessing Ted graded Lacy and Bell as pretty even, otherwise why would TT move down risking that Ball might not be there? Question
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 8:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Clearly that is true. I for one just disagreed with said trade at the time of the pick.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Madtown


Joined: 25 Nov 2009
Posts: 1010
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2013 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
I would have been willing to pound the table for Ball in Green Bay. I would not have done so in our room.


I agree with this whole heartedly. I think GB and Den both are perfect fits for Ball. I would have hated Bell in GB, but I think he found a good fit in Pit. Unless you're all-world like AD, system is really important at RB.

I think Lacy fits too, but maybe not quite as well as Ball. But he brings an extra thump to his game that I think makes up for the difference, especially with the Franklin pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobSacamano


Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 13286
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Call me a homer, but I think this offense is going to be one for the ages with these RB's in the mix. If the Packers can avoid injuries to key players, I can see this offense over the next few seasons being one that fans will talk about decades from now.

Ted listened to Wolf's "regret" with Favre and play makers, and is continuing to surround Rodgers with talent.
_________________


KingTarvaris7 wrote:
last year's vikings were far better than the packers team that just won
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2244
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 11:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gopackgonerd wrote:


Except Ball and Lacy are 2 completely different backs. Lacy likes contact, he's no Darren freaking Sproles for crist sakes. He's a big back that doesn't need to juke every single run to be good. I'd rather have an aggressive runner that can pass block. And actually run that sucker in on the goal line than relying on our FB that everyone knows is gonna get the ball there.

Like everyone says they were closely graded out. It's kinda ridiculous comparing these two ever since the draft was over. Ball isn't godly over Lacy, and Lacy isn't godly over Ball. Let's stop debating who's better it's not what the threads about.


At the next level, you need a guy who's not afraid of contact, Lacy loves contact and likes to run aggressively which is why(barring injury of course) he's that much better than Ball. Ball is a system back in that he HAS to have a good O-line in front of him in order to succeed.

I laugh every time I hear people try to argue that, it's as if they forgot how bad the Badgers were at the beginning of last season and why Ball played poorly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 83745
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd love to see Lacy get the bulk and be the workhorse. I'm honestly surprised they took 2 RBs so early, but its a position that needed to be addressed
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pollino14


Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 16585
PostPosted: Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

People are also forgetting that Ball has 5-6 hundred more carries than Lacy already. Give me the guy with less miles.
_________________
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 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 9 of 15

 
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