Blog Entry

Green Bay has no depth at RB

Posted on: September 6, 2010 2:14 pm
Posted by Josh Katzowitz

A weird bit of rosterology here. After all their cuts – many of whom were claimed off waivers by other teams – the Packers retained only two running backs (Ryan Grant and Brandon Jackson) on their roster heading into Week 1. That includes the 53-man roster and the eight-man practice squad roster.

Strange, eh?

RB Kregg Lumpkin was claimed off waivers by the Buccaneers, leaving only Grant and Jackson behind, though James Starks, placed on the PUP list, could be back after Week 6.

The Packers, however, do have plenty of fullbacks – Korey Hall, John Kuhn and Quinn Johnson. That means Green Bay has more blockers for running backs than actual running backs.

But as Rapid Reporter Greg A. Bedard writes, Kuhn’s ability to double as a RB also led the Packers to make that decision.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel examines why in an article that discusses Green Bay’s roster as a whole.

Writes Bedard:

In the case of each player who was claimed, Thompson decided to keep a player who is green as grass but arguably has more potential.

Even if Thompson dismissed that line of thinking Sunday.

"Potential is overrated," he said. "We want to win. We want to win now. (Potential) doesn't factor in as much as you might think."

For more NFL news, rumors and analysis, follow @cbssportsnfl on Twitter and subscribe to our RSS Feed .


Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: February 1, 2012 4:37 am

Green Bay has no depth at RB

Possibly you have whenever thought about of possibly communication little more than merely content material and also blog entries? I can recommend, whatever you tell may be very crucial in addition to any item.

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: February 1, 2012 12:10 am

Green Bay has no depth at RB

Detailed tend to thanks for which will initiatives which you have engineered inside of authoring them very helpful written piece. I'm hoping identical top notch do the job away on the longer term in addition to.

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 5, 2011 2:35 am
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 4, 2011 3:54 pm

Green Bay has no depth at RB

Perfect add. Write-up extremely are in agreement as a result various things can have compiled. ,,,, Above joyed when i stubled by means of an amazingly incredible web-site, will be actual to save lots of the particular to study non-stop.

Since: Dec 2, 2011
Posted on: December 4, 2011 11:24 am

Green Bay has no depth at RB

I was thinking entirely destined to be selected dull middle aged blog post, but it surely efficiently recompensed relating to my own time. I will write-up an online site hyperlink towards the present web presence on my own blog page web site. Massive completely self assured brand new browsers could very well find out about the fact that primarily impressive

Since: Jun 7, 2008
Posted on: September 8, 2010 9:09 am

Green Bay has no depth at RB

im pretty sure the NFC south is better than the North, The Falcons and Saints are better then the Vikings and Packers and the combo of the Bears and Lions bring that division downnnnnnnnn.

Since: Apr 13, 2009
Posted on: September 7, 2010 4:57 pm

Green Bay has no depth at RB

GB will make the playoffs if only because they are in a weak division.Weak division!? What are you smoking? They're not playing in the NFC West, but the NFC North. Anytime a division has two Super Bowl contenders (the Packers and Vikings) it is not a weak division. Then the Bears and Lions both have the ability to steal a game from anyone it is not a weak division.

This year the Pack and Vikes each have the ability to finish around 12-4 and when you have such a record and still don't win you division, it is not a weak division.

In fact among other divisions in the NFC the North is currently second only to the East. Only these two divisions have 2 legitimate SB contenders. 

Since: Jun 3, 2010
Posted on: September 7, 2010 4:44 pm

Green Bay has no depth at RB

The point is that the Packers are lacking DEPTH in the RB position, not that they have a WEAK running game. The Packers do this every year, which is, they release some guys on the roster thinking that they can re-sign at a cheaper rate. This year it happended to affect the RB depth and I think they were caught off guard when they ALL signed with other teams. Agree, the depth suffered as a result. However, to conclude that the Packers are only going to make the playoffs because they play in a weak division is moronic. The Packers are one of the top three teams in the NFL and one of the other teams is Minnesota. Two teams from the NFC North are going to make the playoffs and I don't believe this calssifies the division as "weak." Grant is capable or averging 75-100 yards a game to keep the defenses they will face off balance, as they consider Grant a legitimate threat. Grant is not a top 10 RB in the league, but, he does demand respect from opposing defensive coordinators when scheming against the Packers offense.

Since: Aug 21, 2007
Posted on: September 7, 2010 12:19 pm

Green Bay has no depth at RB

I don't think that anyone would argue that "today's" NFL is a passing (QB) league compared to teams in the 70's, 80's, and 90's.  The past few Superbowls have been defined by a strong passing attack.  I think the point of the article and many comments on this thread is that the GB running depth is weak. 

I think the two things that will make GB successful w/o a running game A) strong performances by WR's, B) an inventive passing game.  If they lose Grant and have to rely strictly on the passing game, many defenses (NYJ, DAL, BLT, PIT, SF, MIN) will be able to take advantage of double teaming and forcing them to run... which will be difficult.

GB will make the playoffs if only because they are in a weak division.

Since: Mar 8, 2008
Posted on: September 7, 2010 11:54 am

Green Bay has no depth at RB

good point

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or