Run James! Run!
Add Reaction
ðŊâĪïļððððĪððđððâïļððŧððŋðĒðĪŠðĪĢâ
ððĪ·ðĨðððĪŊOriginal Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Now THIS is something I hope we can all agree on.quote:Originally posted by Blair Kiel:
Run James! Run!
quote:Originally posted by pablopackerfan:
That's right! we have about 4 RB's better than Lynch.
quote:Originally posted by Pakrz:
Starks is an X factor today for GB. I think he has flashed some potential but we haven't seen him breakout quite yet. I'm hoping he gets more opportunities this week... including screens. He has the ability to be a difference maker.
quote:Originally posted by Blair Kiel:
During games, I have a little routine with Mrs. Blair Kiel. Every 1st and 10, I ask "What's the play here?" and she responds, "Jackson for 2"
She's usually right.
quote:Originally posted by Henry:
The visual is crystal clear in my mind. Is there a heavy note of sarcasm coming from behind a book?
quote:Originally posted by Fond Du Arrigo:
Reader's Digest, I'm thinking
quote:Originally posted by Green Crustacean:
Starks is active for the game. Could be interesting!
quote:Originally posted by Sally-Ka-Nancypants:
Starks is as good as the holes the line makes for him. If the line can give him space I am excited to see what he can do with it.
quote:Originally posted by PackLandVA:
I'd like to see a good ol'-fashioned debate as to who would benefit the Packers more - Starks getting some carries....or giving up a third rounder for Marshawn Lynch. Could get interesting, if not ugly!
quote:Originally posted by CJS:
I think we can now say that it's NOT the OL. It's the running back. Buh-bye BJunk for 2.