Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

What Type Of Running Back Will Packers Draft?

By Category

What Type Of Running Back Will Packers Draft?

Two weeks have passed since Eddie Lacy took an incentive-laden deal with the Seattle Seahawks, a team that will feed him the ball and utilize his punishing style of running. John Schneider’s deal to bring Lacy to Seattle could prove to haunt the Packers long-term if he morphs into Beast Mode 2.0 and reverts to his 2013-2014 form.

While it is understandable that the Packers were disappointed with Lacy’s preparedness and battles with his weight, it seemed he never reached his potential in Green Bay. Based on the Packers’ decision to not re-sign him, it seems they either believed he was a poor fit for their offensive scheme or just did not trust his commitment level. It is reasonable to think that there were concerns with both.

With that thought in mind, what style of running back are the Packers looking for to replace Lacy’s production?

Ty Montgomery should feature as a prominent factor in the Packers’ 2017 backfield as he made multiple big plays running and catching the ball out of the backfield. It is clear he can make plays, but can he provide consistent production from the position? He tallied 497 rushing yards in limited time, but I’m not sure he can take 20 touches a game throughout a season.

Green Bay also has the quick burst and hard-running style of Christine Michael, but his play has been inconsistent through the years as well. Michael only has 1,080 career rushing yards, 98 yards less than Lacy’s rookie season total. That is not exactly replacing production with production, and it should be expected that Michael will fill the third running back role.

Are the Packers looking to replace Lacy with a power back? Even though I am a huge supporter of a power run game, it seemed that the Packers held Lacy back a bit with their style of offense and not giving him enough carries to wear the opposing defense down. Whether it was his lack of commitment to football or Mike McCarthy’s commitment to the running game, it never worked as well as it should have. With one of the top offensive lines in the league during his Packers era, it seems Lacy was underwhelming in his production and effectiveness. The Packers would probably be most effective by adding a one-cut power back that can be effective early and often without getting a lot of carries.

How about a speed back? The last time I thought about a Packers running back being fast was when Ahman Green carried the rock, and he was more of an all-around player with breakaway speed. Game-changing speed can impact any offense, but the presence of Montgomery in the third-down pass-catching role seems to limit a player like this. If McCarthy keeps calling that pitch play that loses 4 yards, however, it may be best to have someone carry the ball that can get to the perimeter. From my perspective, that toss play worked with Lacy about 5% of the time and 6% when someone else carried it.

Of course, it would be best if Green Bay nabbed the next Le’Veon Bell or Ezekiel Elliot, but feature backs are hard to find in the modern NFL.

What style of running back do you want the Packers to draft? Knowing Ted Thompson, he will draft zero running backs, four wide receivers and shock us all.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (20) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

aaronchev32's picture

I would Love D'onta Foreman, the guy is a beast and catches the ball well and with his insane numbers at his pro day I am sure he has more than enough speed to get the ball outside the tackles.

aaronchev32's picture

I would Love D'onta Foreman, the guy is a beast and catches the ball well and with his insane numbers at his pro day I am sure he has more than enough speed to get the ball outside the tackles.

Colin_C's picture

You just described Saquon Barkely perfectly, except for the fact he's got way more than just "some" elusiveness. Barkley is the reason I don't want an RB high this year.

croatpackfan's picture

You describe Joe Mixon, didn't you?

zoellner25's picture

I'd like to get a fast, shifty, Darren Sproles-type. Don't know who that might be. Thought franklin could be that guy until his neck injury

zoellner25's picture

always liked Wayne gallman from Clemson though

stockholder's picture

6 foot 2 " 212 pounds. or 5 foot 8 " 200 pounds. If you guessed Oj Simpson or Barry Sanders you are right. No Rb fits OJ. But who is as good Barry Sanders. Christian McCafferey? The thing is we could use both. So how do you draft a RB rd. 1? You Don't. We will have to go with the bargains. Forman is more of a Fullback, and like lacy. Cook shuttle time stunk. Why would he fall to the packers if there was not concerns. Still worth a shot? Perine did everything right at the combine. But still was a back -up. I see why TT signed Micheal. But this offense needs better. Monty could go down. Who can replace Monty should be the question. Therefore I'm going with Samuel.

Nick Perry's picture

It really is too bad Mixon beats women because I would love to steal this guy on day 3 though I'm sure someone will grab him by the 3rd round at the latest. The guy is so talented but the way he belted that woman and knocked her out, no hesitation, no nothing just BAMN! It gives me the sneaking suspicion he's probably done it before and gotten away with it.

Guys that hit women are gutless. Was the punch Mixon threw that much different from Ray Rice? They sure had the same effect that's for sure.

croatpackfan's picture

Yes Nick. It is pitty. But, he is young and made stupid, stupid thing. But I believe everybody deserves 2nd chance. Only question for me is he understand trully what he did and how low that is... I think we might have another Colt in "holder", hopefully with better outcome...

Difference between Rice and Mixon is that Ricew was (is) mch more "mature" when he did that. Hopefully maturation of Mixon will produce understanding of how wrong he was...

Nick Perry's picture

I agree with you, people deserve 2nd chances. But in the NFL there are those GM's who view what Mixon did as inexcusable and they take them off their boards altogether. Ted is pretty "Old School" hard to believe he'd take a chance on the guy but you never know.

Tugboat2's picture

I like foreman round 3 and McGuire round 5 or 6.

cheesycowboy's picture

I don't think Foreman will still be there at pick #93. I would love to see this man in GB though.

porupack's picture

>"With one of the top offensive lines in the league during his Packers era, it seems Lacy was underwhelming in his production and effectiveness."<

This is the question. Was it lacy's style, lack of reps and rhythm? Was the Oline over-rated? Or Lacy over-rated? Or scheme? Or what?
We'll know a lot in Seattle with a weak Oline. If Lacy has a 4+ ypc season behind their oline; that would be an indictment of GB oline. Here's hoping he averages 2.1 ypc up there in the muckbowl. No disrespect intended to Lacy.

While Monty had some big plays, the defense didn't really plan for him...so its hard to be confident he sustains or goes the next level. But, he'll have an offseason. Sure hope success for him.

packrulz's picture

I won't mind at all if TT drafts McCaffery. We need more speed. Watch his Youtube clips.

RCPackerFan's picture

I really liked Lacy. I thought he was a really good RB. The problem with him was that he honestly didn't really fit in with how GB likes to run their offense. He was a more traditional type of RB who was better in the I formation and a FB in front of him.
GB's offense is a more wide open type that likes to spread teams out and run a lot of Shotgun.

That's why when Montgomery became the main RB, the offense really opened up. It found a RB that could be really good running from the shotgun formation. Also found a RB that could be an actual weapon out of the backfield as a receiver. The thing that really stood out with Montgomery compared to Lacy is that once Montgomery broke free from the LOS he could take the ball 60+ yards easily.

After seeing the difference that Montgomery made in the offense I would like to see them add more speed to the position. Guys that can make people miss is another trait that they haven't really had in a while for a RB. We have a power RB in Ripkowski. I would like to add more speed.

MarkinMadison's picture

"How about a speed back? ... Game-changing speed can impact any offense, but the presence of Montgomery in the third-down pass-catching role seems to limit a player like this."

This does not reflect how the Packers do business. The Packers want to keep opposing offenses from changing personnel so they do not rotate in a third down back. Instead, they run packages with personnel groups where the back stays in for a series.

Given this, the presence of Montgomery on the roster tells us very little about what type of back they will get. To the extent that they need a power back for short yardage situations I think Ripkowski has shown that he can fill that role. If you want a power-I just Kendricks or Bennett in front of him and away you go. It opens things up for the Packers. They could do anything from get a McCaffrey to get a getting another Lacy. My hunch is they will look for a guy in the 220-range who can handle a workload in case Montgomery can't.

4thand1's picture

Mixon is a beast, top 10 pick. Has anyone even brought him in for a visit? I want Watt in the first. Bring in a bunch of RBs for training camp. Draft at least one in the 1st 4 rounds.

Couch Cleats's picture

I don't know how much MM influences TT's picks but coach is always the one talking about how he likes a big powerful back. Personally, I like the idea of a quicker more agile back even in short yardage situations. I don't think our OLine is built for a power running game anyway.

The defenses in the NFL are getting faster and faster and I don't care how strong your back is if 3 or 4 tacklers are meeting him. To me, someone with the quickness to avoid first contact has a better shot at getting a first down even in short yardage situations.

Also, with the tight ends that we have now that have the strength to set the edge and speed to get to a linebacker, I think a faster back will be much more impactful for our offense and produce more big plays.

slit's picture

I know nobody wants to talk about McCaffrey in the 1st, and I get it, we need a lot of DEF help. That said, adding McCaffrey would be exciting as hell. He might have the best hands in this whole draft, regardless of position, and he can run any route on the field. The guy could catch 80-90 passes per year in this offense. That said, I'll take TJ Watt.

PackEyedOptimist's picture

I think Montgomery and Michaels are a good one-two punch. That said, I would LOVE to get BYU's Jamaal Williams in round 4-5. He's so much fun to watch! At 6' 211# he isn't huge, but he is constantly in "Beast Mode!" Defenses must just HATE facing him, and he has terrific balance and jump-cuts as well as anyone in this draft. His highlight tapes are awesome!

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "