What can we do at Running Back?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    I was thinking about Jackson as the best option before the Richardson idea. He is a good back and still ahs a little bit left I think. The consideration I see there is do we want a two year stop gap trade or to get young and solid at RB with a more long term option. Richardson/Vereen have upside while Jackson is what he is with downside.

    Both are upgrades over BJGE, who I like as a a RB by the way. I just don't think he is enough to scare other teams from putting all the focus on Brady.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Jackson reminds me of Maroney.  The high running style, potential for injury, etc. Meh.

    What you could do is use Tebow as an HBack/RB a la Hernandez in 4 man spreads as the lone setback. Hmm.

    Wouldn't it be funny if Denver couldn't trade Tebow and they had to cut him?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Wouldn't it be funny if Denver couldn't trade Tebow and they had to cut him?
    Posted by BassFishing[/QUOTE]

    They should cut him.  Why pay a guy 7 mill to ride the bench?  If Manning gets hurt suddenly Elway can't get rid of him anymore (which he obviously wants to do).  He has no leverage in trade negotiations.  No reason for a team to give up draft picks for him (particularly with the price tag).
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Tebow is almost toxic. It's as if you have to commit to him entirely or stay away. He's the Ron Paul of quarterbacks. He has incredibly devoted followers who refuse to believe that he can't be a Super Bowl winning QB, just like the Paulsies still think he can be president, depsite all available evidence to the contrary. 

    I would guess that the only way a team would trade for him is if they could get him to buy into the role they have in mind beforehand. I don't think he'd coexist well with Brady, no better than he would have with Peyton if he stayed in Denver.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Some thoughts on the running game in general and the backs in particular:

    *Pats have placed a great deal of emphasis on the pass in recent years and enjoyed a great deal of success in doing so.  Although I'd like to see some solid production from the Pats backs I don't see the offense changing much.
    *No disrespect to any poster intended but I'd really be surprised if BB went after Steven Jackson or spent another high draft choice on a running back.
    *That said at some point, the backfield needs to get younger.  I see Vereen and Ridley as good moves in that regard.  Ridley showed some promise last year his late season penchant for fumbling at inconvenient times notwithstanding.  We have yet to see what Vereen can do in any meaningful way but if BB used a 2nd round choice to get him here then he's obviously got something. 
    *Woodhead is a specialty back that brings some neat things to the game.  Good to have him on the team.  He is your stereotypical situational player and BB does a great deal of situational coaching.
    *The market, thus far, has apparently not been overly kind to BJGE otherwise he'd have a deal either in hand or in the works.  I'd like to see him back.  He never fumbles and more often than not gets decent yardage when handed the ball.
    *If BJGE doesn't return then I see the Pats picking up a veteran either as a consequence of salary cap considerations or when rosters begin to be pared down.
    *I really don't see this as a major BB concern.  I'm guessing he sees that he now has nearly all of the RBs that he wants on the 53 man roster.

    My 2 cents.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Tebow is almost toxic. It's as if you have to commit to him entirely or stay away. He's the Ron Paul of quarterbacks. He has incredibly devoted followers who refuse to believe that he can't be a Super Bowl winning QB, just like the Paulsies still think he can be president, depsite all available evidence to the contrary.  I would guess that the only way a team would trade for him is if they could get him to buy into the role they have in mind beforehand. I don't think he'd coexist well with Brady, no better than he would have with Peyton if he stayed in Denver.
    Posted by Muzwell[/QUOTE]

    In complete agreement here.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from quinzpatsfan. Show quinzpatsfan's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : We keep 1 first round pick. We do not trade Mallet until the draft. This is after we are assured Hoyer will still be here. Mallet in my mind has alot more value than last year. Last year there were a good number of prospective QB's and there was some media bias against him because of his percieved attitude, drugs ect... ( this may be very true ). He has all the talent and scouts still know that, a year after being in an NFL system behind a great orginization while making no waves is a big plus not a negative. If Cleveland wants a QB and I think they do why would they consider picking Tannehill over Mallet and additional picks? Mallet is the better prospect I think talent wise and you can sell him to a fan base way more that you could Hoyer. If Clev picked Tannehill I think fans would eb all over them for reaching there. if they got Mallet and extra security onthe pick, I can see them sellign that. We give Mallet, #27, and #48. We lose a backup QB who would not help the team unless Brady went down ( and we would be close to done then anyway ) We swap first rounds picks. We lose a second. That 2nd round pick would be all we sacrafice from heping the team this next year reach the SB. A pick most of you will guess we trade till next year and cry about it. I think T.Rich ( if he is that good and I think so ) is a bigger plus for next years team over whatever defensive player you wanted to select at #27, thats the question. Who do you draft next year at 27 and 48 that will win us the SB against the Giants with a larger degree of certainty than Richardson will. Secondly, if Brady were to go down or retire in 5 years, a real true PB RB is huge to have ( as well as a top D of course but it is easier to find 11 good guys than 1 great RB )
    Posted by Asher77[/QUOTE]

    Ash, thats a better arguement than I had previously perceived however, I don't see the RB position as the reason we lost to the Giants, also you can't build your team with the goal in mind to not get beat by the Jints in the SB again.  The chances of them making it back are to slim and they arent in our division.  A stud RB would make us better regardless however with your scenario (and I'm NO draft nik but I don't think trading our 27 and 48 draft position value wise gets you anywhere near 4 overall as your saying trade Mallet after the draft) I'd rather trade up 10 spots and get Poe.    There no guarantee Richardson isn't the next Maroney or a worse bust, the assumption he's the next AP, well I believe Poe could be the next VW. If that's the case he can play NT in 3-4 and DT in 4-3. In the 3-4 we just got the best DE in the league in VW and in the 4-3 we have VW and Poe in the middle you can't double both of them. It would significantly make our whole def better because the outside guys would have an easier time getting to the QB  becuase the pocket would be collasping from the top consistently and the qb has less time to throw under more pressure, helps the DBs. I believe when you upgrade any position that you make the team better as a whole but at some point if you keep upgrading one side of the ball you get dimishing returns and drafting a RB at 4 overall and what it would realistically cost to trade up to No4 (see what washington paid to get a little higher) when you have TB at qb and a plethora of WRs is dimishing in my opinion. 

    I do appreciate your point of view.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Imagine a fresh Ridley in the 4th with NY not knowing why he was out there? Ugh.
    Posted by BassFishing[/QUOTE]

    then imagine if he fumbled and the Giants recovered BEFORE the Wes drop...

    then who brushes that off easier, the seasoned vet or the rook?

    Who do the fans forgive 1st? the guy with 550 catches in 5 years or the guy with 50 carries in 5 months and multiple fumbles in big games?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : In complete agreement here.
    Posted by ATJ[/QUOTE]


    Which is why Elway has little leverage. He's such an anamoly and not really a future QB in this league, but a gimmick player.  And, the demand is so low, with MAYBE Jax the only team willing to trade for him, Denver shouldn't expect a lot of calls.

    I would just wait for them to release him and then pick him up. I wouldn't trade for Tim Tebow.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from AyyyBoston. Show AyyyBoston's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Bass,

    I like your idea on Welker IF (major if) he is looking to get paid big money for 3 years. Just one thing: Can you really see a team giving us a 1st rounder for Welker? I feel like a 2nd rounder would be more likely for a slot receiver (although amazing) above age 30.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : Ash, thats a better arguement than I had previously perceived however, I don't see the RB position as the reason we lost to the Giants, also you can't build your team with the goal in mind to not get beat by the Jints in the SB again.  The chances of them making it back are to slim and they arent in our division.  A stud RB would make us better regardless however with your scenario (and I'm NO draft nik but I don't think trading our 27 and 48 draft position value wise gets you anywhere near 4 overall as your saying trade Mallet after the draft) I'd rather trade up 10 spots and get Poe.    There no guarantee Richardson isn't the next Maroney or a worse bust, the assumption he's the next AP, well I believe Poe could be the next VW. If that's the case he can play NT in 3-4 and DT in 4-3. In the 3-4 we just got the best DE in the league in VW and in the 4-3 we have VW and Poe in the middle you can't double both of them. It would significantly make our whole def better because the outside guys would have an easier time getting to the QB  becuase the pocket would be collasping from the top consistently and the qb has less time to throw under more pressure, helps the DBs. I believe when you upgrade any position that you make the team better as a whole but at some point if you keep upgrading one side of the ball you get dimishing returns and drafting a RB at 4 overall and what it would realistically cost to trade up to No4 (see what washington paid to get a little higher) when you have TB at qb and a plethora of WRs is dimishing in my opinion.  I do appreciate your point of view.
    Posted by quinzpatsfan[/QUOTE]

    Poe could make the team better. Personaly I see him as last years wilkerson. A work out wonder with great size but the football production just not there yet.

    With Richardson we have Saban as a lead scout and the production was there as he was 3rd in Hiesman vote. He is also not a riser based on workouts but a solid top 5 selection choice from most draft analysts.

    My point with the trade is that I think that in all previous years the price to go up to 4 was too high and the salary to steep to pay. Therefore no way we get a franchise back unless in FA and the contract there is also prohibative.

    This time we have a shot with he rookie wage scale in place, the picks, a deep roster, the RB to get with a personel recomendation, and the right trading partner. Clev. a team in need of a QB who can throw the ball downfield unlike Colt.

    I say we include Mallet in the trade with Clev. not after the draft? we do it on the clock of the 4th pick if Rich makes it past the vikes like he will do.

    It will not take a bounty like the Skins gave. That was for a predraft deal and a QB on the line.

    Clev will feild offers and we have the picks to match any team but also the QB which others can not offer. Mallet is the guy that gets it done. Maybe they wouldn't want him throwing the ball for them but I don't see that.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    I don't buy the stance that BB is happy to not have a better option at RB. 

    He is happy with the ones we have now because they are the best available options for our team up till this point that we have been able to secure. We apply value to positions and don't overspend. not in picks or $.

    If he can get a better RB, a real franchise guy, at a deal he thinks is good value, he would be even happier. Who wouldn't be. You would be mad because you liked BJGE better?

    You would be upset because you think the resources would have been better spent improving the team via a defensive pick.

    I think both picks would help us but the RB is my best option to make our offense consistent through the playoffs and against any defense teams may decide to play aganist us.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : then imagine if he fumbled and the Giants recovered BEFORE the Wes drop... then who brushes that off easier, the seasoned vet or the rook? Who do the fans forgive 1st? the guy with 550 catches in 5 years or the guy with 50 carries in 5 months and multiple fumbles in big games?
    Posted by rameakap[/QUOTE]

    RIDLEY was the play in Q4 especially across mid field or up by 2 scores
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Bass, I like your idea on Welker IF (major if) he is looking to get paid big money for 3 years. Just one thing: Can you really see a team giving us a 1st rounder for Welker? I feel like a 2nd rounder would be more likely for a slot receiver (although amazing) above age 30.
    Posted by AyyyBoston[/QUOTE]

    No, I hear you. I am not saying it would be a 1st for Welker, but I would ask for that and you simply never know what teams are thinking. A 1st is not out of whack for a player like Welker even at 31.

    Someone might say "4 years for a guy who can change how teams currently play us for a 1st rder"?

    I know Al Davis is dead, but still. hehe
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from AyyyBoston. Show AyyyBoston's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : No, I hear you. I am not saying it would be a 1st for Welker, but I would ask for that and you simply never know what teams are thinking. A 1st is not out of whack for a player like Welker even at 31. Someone might say "4 years for a guy who can change how teams currently play us for a 1st rder"? I know Al Davis is dead, but still. hehe
    Posted by BassFishing[/QUOTE]

    Ya it would be sweet if we were to trade Welker (hope we can keep him for a reasonable contract) and get a 1st rounder (especially if we can get it from a team who is looking at best to be a .500 team :)..but a 1st rounder from anyone will do ). I also am on the bandwagon for Johnathan Stewart. I said in another thread that on offense, a combination of Lloyd and a respectable running game will make this offense VERY tough to stop.

    Only concern about Stewart is what he would be looking for in terms of $$$.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from auchhhhhhhhhhh. Show auchhhhhhhhhhh's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    The only thing we have to do is resign BJGE !!!
    Vareen and Ridley deserve a full pre season and another chance.

    GO PATS !
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Yup.  I just think if you deal for Stewart and immediately re-up him with a raise, you cut to the chase and keep the leverage over his deal. The cap does go up in 2014, so if you give him the deal after trading for him, you can probably control the price a bit, especially with his previous two seasons being productively weak.

    People don't want to come to the point that a player like this may be expendable, and I am not saying he is, but NE is going to have to lock down Gronk and Hernandez BEFORE they are ready to go to market. Like, a full 2 years before being a FA to avoid being absolutely bludgeoned by a bloated FA market.

    So, I'd rather have more money to give to those two than overpay Welker. And, I am not sure I want to rent Welker for 2012 with the tag, because I can't see Welker accepting a tag two years in a row either. 

    It's too bad, but that's the way it is with a cap.  I'd like to keep him until his legs fall off, but we can't.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Thesemenarecowards. Show Thesemenarecowards's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Trade a 2nd rounder for Stewart.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from RickyHussle. Show RickyHussle's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    I would rather have Michael Bush then Stewart.  Stewart is more explosive in the running game, but he would be expensive, injury prone, and not all that versatile.  Bush is cheaper and more versatile.  Also he would seem to complement the other two backs as he seems to combine the skills of Faulk and the firm if you can imagine that.  Stewart IMO would replace Ridley not complement him, and I am not certain he would even be better.  Again Ridley is a little more versatile, and has more tread on the tires.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BassFishing. Show BassFishing's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    Bush is a one dimensional, overweight power back. We should have signed Tolbert if we wanted versatility. Stewart is more versatile than Bush.  He has some receiving ability, but he's more like a true FB. PLus, he's older than Stewart.

    Bush was a back up to McFadden in Oakland. Also, BUsh doesn't upgrade us over BJGE.  We know BJGE knows the blocking respoinsiblities, is a solid pass catcher, etc.

    I would have gone that route last year if they hadn't taken two RBs in the draft.  Stewart at least has lead back experience.

    Bush:

    The Raiders' offense, whether it had McFadden or Bush in the lineup, was nearly identical, save for one major difference — big plays. McFadden is one of the league's fastest runners, and Bush lacks that extra burst to break long runs. Bush had five runs of 20-plus yards in 256 carries in 2011 (1.9 percent), compared to McFadden's eight carries of 20-plus yards on just 113 attempts (7.1 percent). Not having breakaway speed cost Bush a few touchdowns and is the reason many believe he is best-suited for a team that has a RB-by-committee approach and not one where he is the unquestioned top rusher. Also, his rushing average has dipped the past two years as his carries have increased — from 4.8 ypc on 123 carries in 2009 to 4.1 ypc on 158 attempts in ’10 to 3.8 ypc on 256 carries in ’11.

    Source: Pro Football Weekly
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from quinzpatsfan. Show quinzpatsfan's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : Poe could make the team better. Personaly I see him as last years wilkerson. A work out wonder with great size but the football production just not there yet. With Richardson we have Saban as a lead scout and the production was there as he was 3rd in Hiesman vote. He is also not a riser based on workouts but a solid top 5 selection choice from most draft analysts. My point with the trade is that I think that in all previous years the price to go up to 4 was too high and the salary to steep to pay. Therefore no way we get a franchise back unless in FA and the contract there is also prohibative. This time we have a shot with he rookie wage scale in place, the picks, a deep roster, the RB to get with a personel recomendation, and the right trading partner. Clev. a team in need of a QB who can throw the ball downfield unlike Colt. I say we include Mallet in the trade with Clev. not after the draft? we do it on the clock of the 4th pick if Rich makes it past the vikes like he will do. It will not take a bounty like the Skins gave. That was for a predraft deal and a QB on the line. Clev will feild offers and we have the picks to match any team but also the QB which others can not offer. Mallet is the guy that gets it done. Maybe they wouldn't want him throwing the ball for them but I don't see that.
    Posted by Asher77[/QUOTE]

    I gotcha Mallet at the draft not after, fair points including Poe (strong combine raising his stock) I'm not married to Poe I want an elite Def Lineman you want an elite RB we'll see how it plays out maybe we'll get both you never know.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Trade a 2nd rounder for Stewart.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    Why would they trade him for a 2nd rounder.

    He is still on the way up at 24 years old and played great last year with the new weapon at QB. Stewart was picked 13th overall and if we did get him would command a good bit of $$ along with picks.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Asher77. Show Asher77's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back? : I gotcha Mallet at the draft not after, fair points including Poe (strong combine raising his stock) I'm not married to Poe I want an elite Def Lineman you want an elite RB we'll see how it plays out maybe we'll get both you never know.
    Posted by quinzpatsfan[/QUOTE]


    I think DL is a deep position in the draft and at #31 or #27 ( depending on trade ) we could still land a starter.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tompenny. Show tompenny's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    In Response to Re: What can we do at Running Back?:
    [QUOTE]Bush is a one dimensional, overweight power back. We should have signed Tolbert if we wanted versatility. Stewart is more versatile than Bush.  He has some receiving ability, but he's more like a true FB. PLus, he's older than Stewart. Bush was a back up to McFadden in Oakland. Also, BUsh doesn't upgrade us over BJGE.  We know BJGE knows the blocking respoinsiblities, is a solid pass catcher, etc. I would have gone that route last year if they hadn't taken two RBs in the draft.  Stewart at least has lead back experience. Bush: The Raiders' offense, whether it had McFadden or Bush in the lineup, was nearly identical, save for one major difference — big plays. McFadden is one of the league's fastest runners, and Bush lacks that extra burst to break long runs. Bush had five runs of 20-plus yards in 256 carries in 2011 (1.9 percent), compared to McFadden's eight carries of 20-plus yards on just 113 attempts (7.1 percent). Not having breakaway speed cost Bush a few touchdowns and is the reason many believe he is best-suited for a team that has a RB-by-committee approach and not one where he is the unquestioned top rusher. Also, his rushing average has dipped the past two years as his carries have increased — from 4.8 ypc on 123 carries in 2009 to 4.1 ypc on 158 attempts in ’10 to 3.8 ypc on 256 carries in ’11. Source: Pro Football Weekly
    Posted by BassFishing[/QUOTE]

    How many gains over 20 did Law Firm have and how many catches. Amusing to see you  knock Bush for not having big plays and talking about Jarvis has good hands. Law firm had no 20 yard gains last year and has less total catches in his career than Bush had last year. 

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: What can we do at Running Back?

    The Pats will bring in at least 1 or 2 more RBs but I think the answer to the post is:

    VEREEN.

    If Ridley can stop fumbling he will be a good player as he showed last year. But the answer is:

    VEREEN.

    Woodhead is a nice playmaker to have off your bench. Too bad his is not buikt to take more punishment. But he can make plays. Always nice. But the answer to the thread is:

    VEREEN

    Stewart is good. No one wouild complain if he were here. Just like no one would complain if Bush were here. Or if the Rams pick Trent Richardson and we got Jackson. But the answer to the thread is:

    VEREEN

    And he won't cost us any additional picks! And he is both quick and fast. And he can catch the ball. And he is tough. And he makes good use of blockers. And he knows the offense now better than if he had not "red shirted" with an injury.

    I speak of:

    VEREEN - the answer to the thread's question.
     

Share