View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 23rd, 2014, 12:22 am



Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Lions RB situation 
Author Message
Post Re: Lions RB situation
sweetd20 wrote:
I wouldn't mind seeing them draft a guy like Kelce or even Marqueis Gray to play a similar role as Hernandez in New England. Where they can line them up in the backfield, TE, in the slot or out wide.


I agree with you there. I even like Heller lining up in the backfield, but I do agree that the "Heller" position, if he's going to get more playing time, should probably be upgraded with a better talent.

That said, that's more of a luxury, we still need to fix basics on this garbage team.


January 3rd, 2013, 4:22 pm
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1371
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Lions RB situation
I think the only thing we can really expect for them to do is get a Best replacement and maybe an upgrade at guard. I think Raiola has this regime under his spell just like always and they would never look to replace him. They think they got their LT last year with Reiff and I'm pretty sure they wont look at actually drafting a FB or another TE. The most likely thing to happen is they draft a DE in the first and probably a RB soon after, so probably wont see any improvement in the run game unless the players they already have make the improvements themselves.

The best way to improve the RB situation is to improve the coach and GM situation.


January 3rd, 2013, 9:54 pm
Profile
National Champion

Joined: August 13th, 2006, 11:04 pm
Posts: 870
Location: Washington, DC
Post Re: Lions RB situation
Mikel Leshoure isn't the answer. However, as much as folks on here wanna gripe about our run game this year, I wanna point out one thing:

We had 16 rushing TDs as a team. The last time we have at least last much was back in 1997 (we had 19 TDs) and that was thanks to this one guy named Barry Sanders (with some help from "Touchdown" Tommy Vardell).

We need some help at RB, but I don't think our running game was the cause of us being 4-12.


January 4th, 2013, 9:16 am
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2301
Post Re: Lions RB situation
It was the lack of big plays and the ability to move the chains where the running game has been less than stellar. The problem with LeShoure was he left a lot of plays and yards on the field by not taking what was there because he danced around or simply didn't see the holes opening up.


January 4th, 2013, 11:05 am
Profile
Post Re: Lions RB situation
sweetd20 wrote:
It was the lack of big plays and the ability to move the chains where the running game has been less than stellar. The problem with LeShoure was he left a lot of plays and yards on the field by not taking what was there because he danced around or simply didn't see the holes opening up.


Exactly, it's our inability to move the chains and close out games that is costing us wins. It's our inability to sustain time killing drives that hurts us in the 4th Q.

You can talk about putting up 16 rushing TDs all you want. Matt Stafford had 4 of those "rushing TDs" (a Qb running play is more of a gimmick than an actual rushing play), and we didn't have a run over 20 yards until WEEK TWELVE... Frickin' 12 weeks it took us to get ONE RUN over 20 yards. That's just flat out pathetic.


January 4th, 2013, 12:33 pm
National Champion

Joined: August 13th, 2006, 11:04 pm
Posts: 870
Location: Washington, DC
Post Re: Lions RB situation
wjb21ndtown wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
It was the lack of big plays and the ability to move the chains where the running game has been less than stellar. The problem with LeShoure was he left a lot of plays and yards on the field by not taking what was there because he danced around or simply didn't see the holes opening up.


Exactly, it's our inability to move the chains and close out games that is costing us wins. It's our inability to sustain time killing drives that hurts us in the 4th Q.

You can talk about putting up 16 rushing TDs all you want. Matt Stafford had 4 of those "rushing TDs" (a Qb running play is more of a gimmick than an actual rushing play), and we didn't have a run over 20 yards until WEEK TWELVE... Frickin' 12 weeks it took us to get ONE RUN over 20 yards. That's just flat out pathetic.


Tough to argue with that.

Correct, we didn't move the chains enough. Leshoure is a 3rd down back. Bell isn't the answer. I think the Lions got the maximum they are going to get out of that particular group of running backs. I was just trying to reach for something positive.


January 4th, 2013, 2:59 pm
Profile
Post Re: Lions RB situation
Hystrix wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
It was the lack of big plays and the ability to move the chains where the running game has been less than stellar. The problem with LeShoure was he left a lot of plays and yards on the field by not taking what was there because he danced around or simply didn't see the holes opening up.


Exactly, it's our inability to move the chains and close out games that is costing us wins. It's our inability to sustain time killing drives that hurts us in the 4th Q.

You can talk about putting up 16 rushing TDs all you want. Matt Stafford had 4 of those "rushing TDs" (a Qb running play is more of a gimmick than an actual rushing play), and we didn't have a run over 20 yards until WEEK TWELVE... Frickin' 12 weeks it took us to get ONE RUN over 20 yards. That's just flat out pathetic.


Tough to argue with that.

Correct, we didn't move the chains enough. Leshoure is a 3rd down back. Bell isn't the answer. I think the Lions got the maximum they are going to get out of that particular group of running backs. I was just trying to reach for something positive.


I don't blame you, and honestly, I was impressed that we had 16 rushing TDs, until I saw that Stafford accounted for 1/4 of them.

Bell definitely had a decent YPC, and he was the runner that ended our weeks without a run over 20 yards streak. I like Leshoure as a situational short yardage guy, but he needs to hit the first hole he sees, or the hole that's designed for him. He dances too much for a big man. He's not fast enough in the NFL to dance and get yards. He got away with it against slower talent in NCAA, but he can't do it with the speed of the NFL.

IMO Bell is talented, but he's definitely not polished. He was a D2 player, and it shows. He looks lost occasionally. I think he could really do something if we spend the time to give him more reps and polish him up some, but we need something in the mean time.

That said, if we have the option of getting a new RB or getting a new OG, I'd take the OL fix in a minute.


January 4th, 2013, 4:38 pm
Varsity Captain

Joined: September 28th, 2011, 5:57 pm
Posts: 302
Post Re: Lions RB situation
I miss Sledge! So do the facemask suppliers.


January 9th, 2013, 1:50 am
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3787
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Lions RB situation
Boz wrote:
I miss Sledge! So do the facemask suppliers.


Me too! Looks like he will be my sig again here in Less than a week. He was my favorite lion durring the Millen era

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


January 9th, 2013, 7:38 pm
Profile
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: January 11th, 2006, 4:04 pm
Posts: 430
Post Re: Lions RB situation
How does anyone feel about picking up DeAngelo Williams if he's released by Panthers to feel the Best spot? From what I saw at the end of last year, he looked really good running those screens and dump downs from Cam. Thoughts??

_________________
The REAL "Lion King" and father to Simba


February 15th, 2013, 4:46 pm
Profile
Post Re: Lions RB situation
Mufasa wrote:
How does anyone feel about picking up DeAngelo Williams if he's released by Panthers to feel the Best spot? From what I saw at the end of last year, he looked really good running those screens and dump downs from Cam. Thoughts??


I think he'll be too expensive, but if we can afford him, I'd take him in a minute. I think we're more relegated to the Danny Woodheads of the league, but either would be an upgrade and provide versatility and depth.


February 15th, 2013, 4:50 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:34 pm
Posts: 10293
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post Re: Lions RB situation
DA will likely be way too expensive for what he produces. His play is declining and once he loses the ability to break the edge, his game is shot.

_________________
_____
I have no faith this team will win a game the rest of the year. The kitties finish at 7-9 and Miss the playoffs as GB wins out and takes it from the kitties.
Image


February 15th, 2013, 5:18 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1371
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Lions RB situation
I think I would rather have a Danny Woodhead over an expensive guy like Williams. Don't forget Williams is injured a lot, he always has a few hindering things while sharing the load with 2 other RBs and a running QB.


February 15th, 2013, 5:18 pm
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded

Joined: October 24th, 2005, 6:23 am
Posts: 1032
Post Re: Lions RB situation
Hystrix wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
It was the lack of big plays and the ability to move the chains where the running game has been less than stellar. The problem with LeShoure was he left a lot of plays and yards on the field by not taking what was there because he danced around or simply didn't see the holes opening up.


Exactly, it's our inability to move the chains and close out games that is costing us wins. It's our inability to sustain time killing drives that hurts us in the 4th Q.

You can talk about putting up 16 rushing TDs all you want. Matt Stafford had 4 of those "rushing TDs" (a Qb running play is more of a gimmick than an actual rushing play), and we didn't have a run over 20 yards until WEEK TWELVE... Frickin' 12 weeks it took us to get ONE RUN over 20 yards. That's just flat out pathetic.


Tough to argue with that.

Correct, we didn't move the chains enough. Leshoure is a 3rd down back. Bell isn't the answer. I think the Lions got the maximum they are going to get out of that particular group of running backs. I was just trying to reach for something positive.

Odd, but Bell was usually the 3rd down back.

wjb, you confuse me. In a non-FB run pattern you don't have a FB to pick someone up that the OL screwed up and missed. You also seem to be forgetting that it is usually 7 defensive players to 5 offensive linemen. 6 if you add the tightend which still leaves you at a disadvantage and doesn't include a safety coming downhill into the 'box'.

Leshoure and Bell both showed some promise. Neither are an answer because the question posed actually has to do with the offensive line that suffered from poor run blocking which usually starts with the guards. It is why Peterman was cut.

I don't have a problem with having a fullback, but that isn't how this offense is designed. It is a wasted position in this offense. Better to just put both Leshoure and Bell in the backfield and let them block for each other or slide out for passes.


February 16th, 2013, 6:57 pm
Profile
Post Re: Lions RB situation
Jafo wrote:
Hystrix wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
It was the lack of big plays and the ability to move the chains where the running game has been less than stellar. The problem with LeShoure was he left a lot of plays and yards on the field by not taking what was there because he danced around or simply didn't see the holes opening up.


Exactly, it's our inability to move the chains and close out games that is costing us wins. It's our inability to sustain time killing drives that hurts us in the 4th Q.

You can talk about putting up 16 rushing TDs all you want. Matt Stafford had 4 of those "rushing TDs" (a Qb running play is more of a gimmick than an actual rushing play), and we didn't have a run over 20 yards until WEEK TWELVE... Frickin' 12 weeks it took us to get ONE RUN over 20 yards. That's just flat out pathetic.


Tough to argue with that.

Correct, we didn't move the chains enough. Leshoure is a 3rd down back. Bell isn't the answer. I think the Lions got the maximum they are going to get out of that particular group of running backs. I was just trying to reach for something positive.

Odd, but Bell was usually the 3rd down back.

wjb, you confuse me. In a non-FB run pattern you don't have a FB to pick someone up that the OL screwed up and missed. You also seem to be forgetting that it is usually 7 defensive players to 5 offensive linemen. 6 if you add the tightend which still leaves you at a disadvantage and doesn't include a safety coming downhill into the 'box'.

Leshoure and Bell both showed some promise. Neither are an answer because the question posed actually has to do with the offensive line that suffered from poor run blocking which usually starts with the guards. It is why Peterman was cut.

I don't have a problem with having a fullback, but that isn't how this offense is designed. It is a wasted position in this offense. Better to just put both Leshoure and Bell in the backfield and let them block for each other or slide out for passes.


Where did I confuse you? The reference post doesn't mention a FB at all?


February 16th, 2013, 7:16 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.