Green Bay Packers: Five Running Backs Who Can Replace Ryan Grant

Too bad that Brandon Jackson and John Kuhn aren't on the list.

GBPfan wrote:

Too bad that Brandon Jackson and John Kuhn aren't on the list.

I was gonna suggest Parker or Westbrook to you guys and ask your opinion, what do you think? After the loss of Taylor I was wishfully hoping the Vikes would pick up one of these two, or LT.

Willie parker would be great. Brian westbrook would be good. But jackson just isn't a strtng a back. Don't get me wrong he's prt of my team and always have his back but he isn't a rb tht cn carry it 25 times in a game and be as productive as grant was. Sorry jackson I still suupport you and and look forward to seeing u ply agn

I don't think any one of them can "replace" Grant, but they would help out some.

I like both of the choices.Id like to trade for Brandon Jacobs in NY as well.

Westbrook isnt a big load back either,but, 10-12 carries maybe 15 on occasion would be fine,which is why id lean toward Parker.Westbrook only has 1 carry this year,so he clearly isnt the same,but, as mentioned a 10 or so carry back,he would be fine.

erie-vike fan wrote:

<quoted text>I was gonna suggest Parker or Westbrook to you guys and ask your opinion, what do you think? After the loss of Taylor I was wishfully hoping the Vikes would pick up one of these two, or LT.

I think they both might help, if healthy. I trust the Packer coaches and medical staff to determine that stuff. However, I just don't see it happening. I can't imagine that anybody is getting better value than Lynch for a 4th rounder. If that was too much for Ted, I don't think any trade would look good to him.

BTW there may be alot of teams wishing they had picked up LT right now. I've been a big LT fan, but even I thought Greene would be the feature back in NY this season.

What about Ryan Moats, the Vikes had him for awhile but let him go before pre-season, he is still young and as far as I know doesn't have any debilitating injury-I may be mistaken though.

there are a lot of good backs out there that could help the packers but they have the same problem the vikings have. Bad run blocking. Both teams, i think, have become to reliant on the pass game when they both have had RBs who are big threats. When favre came to MN they told him all he had to do was manage the game, dont turn it over, and hand it off to Adrian Peterson. He started off that way but it has turned into favre and the pass game. Now, the packers are finding themselves with a serious challenge at the RB spot trying to find someone to fill in for ryan grant. Only thing is that should be easy due to the fact that everyone knows if a team can open lanes and execute good run blocking, any RB in the league can make big plays. It will be an interesting season indeed and the nfc north better be bracing themselves for war cuz its on now that moss is back. Good luck to yaz cuz youza gonna need it.

C,mon man, you dont' gain 392 yds. in three games in the NFL with bad run blocking.....

Packers missed a chance prior to setting their practice roster.
Lagarrette Blount could have been a Packer --- brought in for minimum, adn signed to the roster.
He still might be had... but now it will cost.
Tampa Bay is carrying 4-5 HBs.
Blount is now part of their plans... in short yardage/goal line.
But in pre-season, he had a run for the Titans that showed his power/speed combo.

PS:
How about looking at practice squad player WR Chastin West at HB?
6-1, 216 pound HB who can catch?
Sounds about right.

Lombardi use to convert players in time of need.

eric wrote:

Westbrook isnt a big load back either,but, 10-12 carries maybe 15 on occasion would be fine,which is why id lean toward Parker.Westbrook only has 1 carry this year,so he clearly isnt the same,but, as mentioned a 10 or so carry back,he would be fine.

I worry about Parker and Westbrook staying healthy. Larry Johnson is coming off of injury to, I think their scaring teams away. Steve Slaton would be my choice, the guy was very good with the Texans until Foster came along, he is young and apparently is in Kubiak's dog house for whatever reason, I don't know. He put up big numbers a couple years ago, but I've heard he has issues holding onto the ball. Brandon Jacobs is on the top of my list also eric, but I think we both know it will never happen with TT running the show.

Like i said before if the Packers lose this year because of no running game and also Ted didnt do a friggin thing and esp. losing on Lynch when he needed to only offer a 4th to match Seattle and or maybe threw in an 8th just to beat it ect, he should be fired. There is no excuse for not signing a back..OK he lost on Lynch because he prob offered a 5th and Seattle offered a 4th,BUT, Willie Parker,Westbrook,Larry Johnson ( even though he has a rep of being a bit surley and maybe a PITA) all 3 are available and if Ted doesnt grab 1 of them,well, there is no excuse.Kuhn is a good, young strong back and i like him,but, Brandon Jackson isnt cutting it and we can certainly entertain for a better back.Where is the kid we signed from ATL practice squad D.Nance? why isnt he getting snaps? i have no idea if he will suck or will be pretty good or anything in between,we do know 1 thing Jackson isnt very good so Nance should get a shot and we know Starks will get his shot when hes off the PUP and i think TT is depending on him ( IMO ) and im not sure that is so smart since hes a rookie and we again have no idea as a rookie how he will do and throw in the fact the kid is coming off an injury on top of it.

eric wrote:

Starks will get his shot when hes off the PUP and i think TT is depending on him ( IMO ) and im not sure that is so smart since hes a rookie and we again have no idea as a rookie how he will do and throw in the fact the kid is coming off an injury on top of it.

And keep in mind that Starks is not only an injured rookie. He is an injured rookie that hasn't played in a football game in years, because he missed his senior year due to injury. The Packers have 3 weeks to bring the players to the active roster after coming off IR. Whether Starks can get into football shape quickly is questionable under the circumstances. If TT is really relying on Starks, I don't understand the logic behind that.

I hope im wrong but Starks missing his senior year with injuries and so far this year,is reeking of Justin Harrell.

We have to be willing to run the ball to evaluate anyone. The run worked the 1 or 2 times against Washington in the 4th quarter, but we didn't stick with it -- and ended up losing. We also didn't challenge what looked a TD for us, didn't take a free 3 points to go up 10-0. I can understand the no challenge -- I'm sure the Redskins weren't replaying that on the scoreboard, but after gaining zero yards in 3 downs, I would have taken the points on the road. Cost us the game, turned out. At home, maybe you go for it.

normallylikeyellow wrote:

We have to be willing to run the ball to evaluate anyone. The run worked the 1 or 2 times against Washington in the 4th quarter, but we didn't stick with it -- and ended up losing. We also didn't challenge what looked a TD for us, didn't take a free 3 points to go up 10-0. I can understand the no challenge -- I'm sure the Redskins weren't replaying that on the scoreboard, but after gaining zero yards in 3 downs, I would have taken the points on the road. Cost us the game, turned out. At home, maybe you go for it.

You need more than that, Rodgers got a cuncussion during the loss to the redskins!

packerhacker wrote:

<quoted text> You need more than that, Rodgers got a cuncussion during the loss to the redskins!

Yes they do, Cutler has the same problem but.....Chicago still has a running game they can rely on, GB management thinks their fine without one.