I know the need/desire for a DB has intensified after the Packers loss to the Giants in the NFC Championship game, a need that was already well documented around here and a need that I have openly expressed that I was a little surprised that wasn't addressed in last year's draft.

I have also openly supported the idea of obtaining a RB, particularly someone like Felix Jones if he were to fall within 10 picks of the Packers selection (meaning early 20s in a trade-up scenario). This was also talked about when discussing the story in the MJS that suggested the Packers were interested in improving their running game for next season.

I bring this point up because of the reactions teams like the Seahawks, Saints and the Chiefs received when they drafted the likes of Shaun Alexander, Deuce McAllister and Larry Johnson in the first round when they already had established backs in Rickey Watters, Ricky Williams and Priest Holmes respectively.

There are other similar examples of teams with somewhat competent backs already in place that still used a first-round pick on a running back. Heck, the Vikings are one of those examples, taking Adrian Peterson last year when Chester Taylor ran for over 1,200 yards in 2006. Some claim Peterson was a can't-miss type of player, but many believed at the time that the Vikings could have gone a lot of different direcitons with that pick.

The Saints again took a RB in Reggie Bush, even if they used him in a variety of ways, despite the presence of McAllister.

The Patriots took Laurence Maroney when they had Corey Dillon. The Bears took Cedric Benson when they had Thomas Jones. The Rams took Steven Jackson when they had Marshall Faulk. The Falcons took T.J. Duckett after signing Warrick Dunn. Each of these scenarios have a different set of reasons for taking these players, from aging (Dillon & Faulk) to an unsettled position (Jones) to what created a unique running tandem that the NFL may never have seen before (Dunn and Duckett along with Vick).

And it doesn't really matter how you view these situations, even if you remember how they happened or through the power of hindsight. The point is that all of these teams had (or still have) a very strong running game because of the picks they made on the players listed above.

Heck, of the top 10 active rushing leaders, 7 are former first-round picks. Of the top 20, 12 are former first-round picks.

Stretching it to the all-time rushing list, 9 of the top 10 leaders are former first-round picks with 15 out of 20. The five that aren't former first-rounders from the all-time list, 4 were 2nd rounders and the other was a 3rd rounder.

For the most part, with running backs what you see is what you get, and there don't seem to be too many surprises or sleepers at the position, and there also don't seem to be too many disappointments either (William Green not withstanding). Sure, there are always exceptions to the rule, with Terrell Davis being a popular name people point to. But the bottom line is that if any team wants to get the most bang for their buck with a running back, in the short and long term, the first round is the way to go.

I'm not suggesting the Packers should reach for a RB that isn't first-round worthy, but if one of Jonathan Stewart, Rashard Mendenhall or Felix Jones gets close to the Packers pick I personally feel they should pounce on one of those guys given their desire to improve their power running game despite the presence of Grant, Wynn, Jackson or whoever else.

Question for you Colby: If one of those backs fell into the early/mid-20's, how far would you be willing to trade up to get them, and at what cost?

If any one of the three players I mentioned fell, I would use a 2nd to trade up, possibly to get ahead of the Cowboys and/or Seahawks who some seem to think may target a RB in the first round. The Texans may be another team, but I don't think a 2nd gets the Packers that far up. They can probably only get up 8 to 10 spots, with 8 being more realistic and 10 probably being a little ambitious.

The team can really add an influx of talent/depth this year, and barring something stunning like McFadden falling to #20, I'm not sure that trading away our 2nd to move up is really worthwhile.

While I definitely agree with this, part of my thinking is about how close the Packers were to making the Super Bowl. Depth is good, and TT obviously values draft picks to get as many quality players into the organization, but part of me thinks the team should take an aggressive risk or two to get a potential impact player should one fall to a position that would make it possible for the Packers to move up and acquire.

It also depends what they do on the free agent market. I have supported TT's approach to building from within, but he also needs to recognize when the time is right to strike while the iron is hot.

BTW, I too don't think any of those three guys falls, which is why I propose moving up.

Also the way the season played out, it kind of weeded out the roles for the backs already on the team. Grant obviously is a starter. Wynn is talented, but maybe a #2 role fits him better...and Jackson could be a decent third down option. I just see a totally different picture at RB, and that's mostly because Ryan Grant manned up.

And this is the best case against my proposal, because I agree with all of your points and I agree that the Packers probably view their situation at RB the same way. But again, I think a lot of people were surprised when the Saints and Seahawks in particular went out and drafted Deuce McAllister and Shaun Alexander respectively. Obviously, they were in a different situation with Williams and Watters, since both were in different situations as the Packers are with Grant. Again, I just like the idea of acquiring a potential gamebreaker at the RB position, and having two quality backs is an exciting thought, especially when it seems as though the passing game for the next few years should be relatively set.

Keep in mind this is also my proposal to improve the team's power running game. I'm not so sure the problem is the line. More than likely, it's a mix of a few different things.

As far as winning in January with a power running game goes, the team also failed in this respect when they have a power line with Wahle and Rivera on the interior and Ahman Green running behind them, although I seem to remember the team having problems in short yardage situations then as well. It probably doesn't help that Brett Favre has never been much of a QB sneak artist, or at least he never has had too many opportunities to do so.

When a defense pretty much knows that a QB sneak isn't coming, that doesn't help. It also doesn't help that the team doesn't, and hasn't had a FB for a few years now that is adept at running with the football (as opposed to catching passes out of the backfield). Again, if a defense knows that the ball is going to the tailback, it's less variables they have to deal with.


I don't think it is a coincidence that the Packers have had problems in short yardage situations for the past few years. Instead of trying to find a complementary RB to Grant as I have proposed, maybe they should try to find the second coming of Gerald Riggs, who is one of the best short yardage backs that I have ever seen in his days with the Redskins, and that's pretty much the only reason he was on their team.

EDIT: I remember feeling the same way a year ago, which led me and several others to be interested in Brian Leonard, a player they could have drafted a year ago had they not traded down in the 2nd round. I think I have talked myself into a 3rd/4th round type of picks for someone like Jacob Hester or Matt Forte, who profile in a similar fashion to Leonard, so thanks for listening to my ramblings .