Game 6: Bears at Packers

[RRyder823]

Last night was the perfect example of why I don't think losing Eddie Lacy is that big of a deal. The guy has had a pretty good season from an individual standpoint, but I think he severely limits the speed at which our offense can play. He is really only effective when running the ball right up the middle and just bowling over people. He doesn't have speed to get to the outside or keep up with a hurry up offense. The only way I want him back in Green Bay next season is if he is spelling a speed back for us.

I concur and that's why I wish Ted would call the Jets about Matt Forte. We could likely get him for the cap space right now. Has he declined? Sure, but we only need him for this season and maybe next. He provides an ability to get out on the flat and catch passes which this offense also badly needs.

You mean like exactly how we're using Montgomery?

Forte is done. Between Cobb and especially Montgomery out of the backfield he offers almost literally nothing to this team



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[GBPackers47]

Last night was the perfect example of why I don't think losing Eddie Lacy is that big of a deal. The guy has had a pretty good season from an individual standpoint, but I think he severely limits the speed at which our offense can play. He is really only effective when running the ball right up the middle and just bowling over people. He doesn't have speed to get to the outside or keep up with a hurry up offense. The only way I want him back in Green Bay next season is if he is spelling a speed back for us.

I concur and that's why I wish Ted would call the Jets about Matt Forte. We could likely get him for the cap space right now. Has he declined? Sure, but we only need him for this season and maybe next. He provides an ability to get out on the flat and catch passes which this offense also badly needs.

You mean like exactly how we're using Montgomery?

Forte is done. Between Cobb and especially Montgomery out of the backfield he offers almost literally nothing to this team

Yes but the problem with Montgomery is he isn't as established as a runner up the middle. When you have someone like Forte, defenses have to respect him as a runner and a pass catcher. This isn't to say Montgomery won't add that to his game, but he doesn't have it yet. He did have a nice 30 yard carry on a draw against the Bears, but until he consistently shows he can run the ball, he isn't going to throw defenses off that much.

[RRyder823]

I concur and that's why I wish Ted would call the Jets about Matt Forte. We could likely get him for the cap space right now. Has he declined? Sure, but we only need him for this season and maybe next. He provides an ability to get out on the flat and catch passes which this offense also badly needs.

You mean like exactly how we're using Montgomery?

Forte is done. Between Cobb and especially Montgomery out of the backfield he offers almost literally nothing to this team

Yes but the problem with Montgomery is he isn't as established as a runner up the middle. When you have someone like Forte, defenses have to respect him as a runner and a pass catcher. This isn't to say Montgomery won't add that to his game, but he doesn't have it yet. He did have a nice 30 yard carry on a draw against the Bears, but until he consistently shows he can run the ball, he isn't going to throw defenses off that much.

Here's the thing though. Forte isn't good enough to gain respect for those things anymore



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[paulpressey25]

Forte is better than any back we have on our roster at the moment. If we can add him for $5 to $8 million of cap space you do it. For all we know Arod will retire next season. We're 4-2 with a chance to right the ship.

[RRyder823]

He doesn't bring anything to the team that's not allready being utilized. He's not going to be better then Montgomery out of the backfield, it's not even close, and his actual running skills aren't really that much better anymore either. I guess he'll be better in blitz pickups but that's about it.

For years we clamored for a Sproles type of guy. So what happens when we start using a guy like that? Trade for a long in the tooth RB that used to be good is apparently now the answer for some. And no your not getting him for just cap space. You'll have to trade a conditional pick and he isn't worth even that. In any case I'd rather use that cap space to extend Perry then add Forte.

If u want to trade for a running back McFadden is a MUCH better option. A conditional 6th, with the potential to be a 4th or 5th in 2018 , would probably be enough and he actually brings something Forte doesn't at this point and something we could use. The ability to run the ball.

(I guess I may being a little harsh on Forte but I just don't see the appeal anymore.)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[paulpressey25]

With 3 minutes to go in the 4th, Matt Forte has 27 carries for 99 yards and a TD and 4 receptions for 54 yards and another TD.

But no, Ted will need to use that 2017 7th round pick on Junker Patterico a long-snapper from McNeese State. That'll help Aaron get his groove back.

[Ron Swanson]

With 3 minutes to go in the 4th, Matt Forte has 27 carries for 99 yards and a TD and 4 receptions for 54 yards and another TD.

But no, Ted will need to use that 2017 7th round pick on Junker Patterico a long-snapper from McNeese State. That'll help Aaron get his groove back.

I'm not sure what you're implying here. He signed with New York as a free agent, and outside of 2 games (today and Week 2), he hasn't been that much of a factor (career low 3.5 YPC).

Edit: I see that you're advocating that we trade for him, and I really don't see why that makes sense after we just gave up a conditional pick for Davis.

[trwi7]

You know 99 yards on 27 carries is horrible, right?

[RRyder823]

You know 99 yards on 27 carries is horrible, right?

And he's still averaging career lows on the year and the game thats supposed proof he's still "got it" is still averaging under 4 yards a carry.

Let's trade for him ASAP

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[RRyder823]

With 3 minutes to go in the 4th, Matt Forte has 27 carries for 99 yards and a TD and 4 receptions for 54 yards and another TD.

But no, Ted will need to use that 2017 7th round pick on Junker Patterico a long-snapper from McNeese State. That'll help Aaron get his groove back.

Because a guy averaging less then 4 yards a carry and is less effective receiving out of the backfield then the guy we're using will definitely help Rodgers get back on track



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[RRyder823]

If a trade for a RB is what we need target McFadden or try and get Ivory from the Jaguars. We need a RB that's at least capable of moving the chains in short yardage. In other words a guy who can run between the Tackles.

Sorry a guy like Forte just doesn't add to this team at this stage in his career when we have guys on the roster who are allready filling the role which he's best suited for now better then he could which is 3rd down RB. Our problem is we're being forced to use them all 3 downs.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[paulpressey25]

I'm sorry that a guy who is an experienced vet and finished the day with 150+ combined yards and two scores isn't good enough to put in the Packers horrific backfield at this point in time.

[RRyder823]

I'm sorry that a guy who is an experienced vet and finished the day with 150+ combined yards and two scores isn't good enough to put in the Packers horrific backfield at this point in time.

I'm sorry that a guy who just had 126 yards out of the backfield, cheaper, younger and doesn't require giving anything up in order to get him isn't as attractive of an option as an aging player who's averaging around 3.6 yards per carry and not as good receiving out of the backfield anymore as the previous player mentioned apparently

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[paulpressey25]

I'm sorry that a guy who is an experienced vet and finished the day with 150+ combined yards and two scores isn't good enough to put in the Packers horrific backfield at this point in time.

I'm sorry that a guy who just had 126 yards out of the backfield, cheaper, younger and doesn't require giving anything up in order to get him isn't as attractive of an option as an aging player who's averaging around 3.6 yards per carry and not as good receiving out of the backfield anymore as the previous player mentioned apparently

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

Montgomery has played one game at RB. And what's wrong with having both as an option and allowing Montgomery to also play WR?

[RRyder823]

I'm sorry that a guy who is an experienced vet and finished the day with 150+ combined yards and two scores isn't good enough to put in the Packers horrific backfield at this point in time.

I'm sorry that a guy who just had 126 yards out of the backfield, cheaper, younger and doesn't require giving anything up in order to get him isn't as attractive of an option as an aging player who's averaging around 3.6 yards per carry and not as good receiving out of the backfield anymore as the previous player mentioned apparently

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

Montgomery has played one game at RB. And what's wrong with having both as an option and allowing Montgomery to also play WR?

Well its more like 2 games as we were using him in the 3rd down role before Lacy got hurt but i digress. It's not so much about not needing a RB. Its more of the cap space we lose by taking him on, which WILL be needed, to resign the likes of Perry but also that he isnt even worth the investment of a conditional pick as if we're going to trade for another RB to share the backfield with Montgomery it behooves us to bring in a RB that contrasts Montgomery at that spot rather then giving up both cap space and a conditional pick for a player that fills the same role. Also we just traded for a guy with that type of skill set. (Albeit not as good but still) so with this you'd be looking at 3 guys effectively filling the same role

Which is why I offered alternatives in the form of McFadden or say an Ivory as possible targets because they would bring skill sets to the team not currently on the active roster.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using RealGM mobile app

[Ron Swanson]

Idk, between Peppers, Guion, Cook, and now Knile Davis all in the last 2 years, I think Ted Thompson has kind of shut up the "he never signs or trades for outside free agents/players" crowd. Cook's injured and Davis has been here for 5 whole days. But I don't think that "he needs to trade a conditional pick for <insert veteran player>" argument is really a valid criticism anymore.

[paulpressey25]

Which is why I offered alternatives in the form of McFadden or say an Ivory as possible targets because they would bring skill sets to the team not currently on the active roster.

I see Forte as a better option than McFadden, but would gladly accept either. Where I'd take exception is that we don't need either. Think the team can be stronger with both Montgomery and that other versatile back.

In reply to Ron's comment above, he's citing four players TT has brought in over the last three seasons in the form of Peppers, Guion, Cook and now Knile Davis. Well, three of those four have actually been relatively good additions so why not go that route again? The jury is out on the fourth guy, Knile Davis, but I would rather TT gone for someone with more immediate firepower in Forte than try to dance around a much cheaper option.

[HKPackFan]

I have a feeling Davis Is The 2nd Coming If Travis Jersey. Speed But No Vision. Only Goes 1 Speed doesnt Have The Patience Or Vision To Find THe Holes.