| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Devin Kurant
Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 11712
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 4:42 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Thomas5737 wrote: | | I spoke with Eddie Lacy's brother last night and he said, yeah, he's heavy. |
This sounds like a light humored joke Donald Glover would tell at his stand-up shows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BlaqOptic
Joined: 14 Feb 2007
Posts: 43632
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tatupu_64 wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | nextsuperstar wrote: | | jonu62882 wrote: | | Why do people keep harping on the weight?! Didn't Jerome Bettis successfully play at a high weight too? |
One different era when it was acceptable for a running back to average 3.6 yards per carry and still get the ball 300 times. Two I don't think Bettis was ever that badly out of shape. |
This. Bettis was in shape for his size. He could carry the rock 30 times a game if neccessary as the focal point of an offense with little need for breathers between. Lacy was MAYBE that as a rookie but has no capability to be so. |
What the hell does in shape for his size mean? LOL
Lacy has been given consistent carries because he plays in an offense with a HOF QB predicated on the pass |
The same way a lineman has a naturally bigger body yet can be in shape...
_________________
| FourThreeMafia wrote: |
Go straight to hell.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vike daddy
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 82974
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 8:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Eddie Lacy will be putting his mouth where his money is. Or something.
It was already known that his really/not really $5.5 million contract with the Seahawks has terms that make the earning hardly a sure thing, including $385,000 tied to making weight. The specific targets for that extra chunk of compensation have now been revealed.
Field Yates of ESPN.com reports that Lacy’s contract has seven different weight targets, each of which pay (or don’t pay) $55,000. Specifically, Lacy must get to 255 pounds in May, 250 pounds in June, stay at 250 pounds in August, and then reach and remain at 245 pounds in September, October, November, and December.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/17/eddie-lacy-has-seven-different-55000-weight-targets/
_________________
Everson Griffen: “We can be special. But it’s up to us.” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marc MacGyver
Joined: 28 Aug 2015
Posts: 5268
Location: In the thick of it.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 17, 2017 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Not really excited about this. So will just wait & see how it plays out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steadypimpin
Joined: 01 Jan 2009
Posts: 12669
Location: Rockville, MD
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Who's going to be the starter or will it be RBBC?
_________________
Thanks to Jgoldiscool on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
domepatrol91
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 7929
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| vike daddy wrote: | Eddie Lacy will be putting his mouth where his money is. Or something.
It was already known that his really/not really $5.5 million contract with the Seahawks has terms that make the earning hardly a sure thing, including $385,000 tied to making weight. The specific targets for that extra chunk of compensation have now been revealed.
Field Yates of ESPN.com reports that Lacy’s contract has seven different weight targets, each of which pay (or don’t pay) $55,000. Specifically, Lacy must get to 255 pounds in May, 250 pounds in June, stay at 250 pounds in August, and then reach and remain at 245 pounds in September, October, November, and December.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/03/17/eddie-lacy-has-seven-different-55000-weight-targets/ |
So they want him in the low 240s?
How's he look at that weight? I remember that 61 yarder where he ran out of steam, but I think he was like 260+ there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MookieMonster
Joined: 17 Jun 2016
Posts: 3508
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BlaqOptic wrote: | | Tatupu_64 wrote: | | BlaqOptic wrote: | | nextsuperstar wrote: | | jonu62882 wrote: | | Why do people keep harping on the weight?! Didn't Jerome Bettis successfully play at a high weight too? |
One different era when it was acceptable for a running back to average 3.6 yards per carry and still get the ball 300 times. Two I don't think Bettis was ever that badly out of shape. |
This. Bettis was in shape for his size. He could carry the rock 30 times a game if neccessary as the focal point of an offense with little need for breathers between. Lacy was MAYBE that as a rookie but has no capability to be so. |
What the hell does in shape for his size mean? LOL
Lacy has been given consistent carries because he plays in an offense with a HOF QB predicated on the pass |
The same way a lineman has a naturally bigger body yet can be in shape... |
Jerome Bettis was not in shape, he was fat. A little bit different for a lineman because they NEED the extra weight.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
domepatrol91
Joined: 26 Mar 2013
Posts: 7929
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
By the way, that first 55k weight goal covers his PF Changs delivery diet for a year, but all those bonuses would cover him for a nice 4 year extension.
We'll see how he plays this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
incognito_man
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 40976
Location: Madison
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CKSteeler
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Posts: 10339
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | What the hell does in shape for his size mean? LOL |
I've known guys over 200 who could run/exercise with the best of them. And these were guys who looked and were frankly fat. Most fatties obviously cannot do that.
A bit too much is being made of the weight here, but it has been something noticeable on the field with Lacy.
But Bettis's weight wasn't a non-story. The team didn't often make anything public, but just about every year the media would right puff pieces for him talking about how he was supposedly in the best shape of his career...despite looking even fatter than the previous one.
_________________
Mike Tomlin, January 17, 2017 on the avoiding the Patriots in previous playoffs:
"They haven't had to go through us, either. Stay tuned!"
Final: 36-17
NFL.com-BELICHICK OUTCOACHES TOMLIN YET AGAIN |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SoS
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 7053
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| steadypimpin wrote: | | Who's going to be the starter or will it be RBBC? |
It will definitely be a RBBC between Lacy, Rawls, and Prosise. CJP should be able to focus on passing downs and Lacy/Rawls will probably have a hot-hand approach going into each game.
I anticipate Rawls finishing the year with more carries.
_________________
 | DCRED wrote: | Your dialogue was amazing and your facts presented were Stellar.
You give yourself and your team's forum great Honor. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
imani
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 33493
Location: Harlem, NY
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 1:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Look at his numbers leading up to Seattle compared to lynch....it's scary
_________________
Russell Wilson Fan since July 2012 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
imani
Joined: 03 Mar 2009
Posts: 33493
Location: Harlem, NY
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Rawls is still a solid RB, with top 10 potential. But he'll likely never reach that potential with his health issues and limitations on passing downs, both passing and receiving.
The competition factor in Seattle should help...if not lacy will see limited snaps. It's that simple.
_________________
Russell Wilson Fan since July 2012 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MrOaktown_56
Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 8099
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| imani wrote: | Rawls is still a solid RB, with top 10 potential. But he'll likely never reach that potential with his health issues and limitations on passing downs, both passing and receiving.
The competition factor in Seattle should help...if not lacy will see limited snaps. It's that simple. |
I'd love it if Oakland traded for Rawls. IMO would be the perfect fit for his talents.
_________________
| Danand wrote: | | Carr is 22-25,no playoff games, I'd take Flacco over him.To me it seems like Flacco is just where he belongs. Behind the Brady, Roethlisberger,Rivers,Rodgers,Wilson and ahead of Carr,Tannehill,Cousins,Palmer,Dalton,Luck |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
