Run James! Run!
Original 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!
The X-Factor for us, not enough film on him for Philly to care ...
Hang on to the ball James and run like the wind!
Hang on to the ball James and run like the wind!
I could see Starks breaking out like Ryan Grant did in 2007. I just don't know if he's ready to break out yet, but once he proves he can make it through a training camp next year, 2011 might be that year.
I wasn't on the board last night to post on the Lynch/Jackson debate. I remember looking at some stats a couple weeks ago on the top 40 rushers in the NFL. I believe Jackson was tied for the 2nd worst yards per carry of all the top 40 backs... Who was the worst? Lynch. Can we all just come to a mutual agreement that maybe they both suck?
I wasn't on the board last night to post on the Lynch/Jackson debate. I remember looking at some stats a couple weeks ago on the top 40 rushers in the NFL. I believe Jackson was tied for the 2nd worst yards per carry of all the top 40 backs... Who was the worst? Lynch. Can we all just come to a mutual agreement that maybe they both suck?
You mean there is interest in discussing players actually on the Packer roster? I'm in...
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.
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.
No, because Lynch had a good run last night. For a 3rd, we may have gotten that run in one of our games. Down with ROTTT!!! 
quote:Originally posted by pablopackerfan:
That's right! we have about 4 RB's better than Lynch.
Rodgers is a QB, not a RB so he doesn't count. Nor do his carries and yards.
I like the idea of Starks and the little we've seen of him (and Nance) they both run downhill. When watching video of Starks form college he gets small when hitting the hole.
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.
Agreed, I hope MM commits to him today. If it's as windy as the weather reports were predicting, we're going to need him.
Is he active?
I would love to see him getting the load of the carries today.. I would be nervous about ball security.
I would love to see him getting the load of the carries today.. I would be nervous about ball security.
I'm not 100% sure he'll be active, but Hall is still out, so the chances are pretty good BrainDed.
Pablo, have you not been paying attention? Kuhn is a FB. 
When Starks has gotten the chance he's looked pretty good. The challenge with MM is that he he's usually dialed up more passes than runs, and my only concern is that with Philly's blitz packages will Starks be able to pick them up? We don't want Rodgers to get killed.
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.
He's taller so he falls further up the field. I'll take it.
Get through today....its off to the elite 8
What kind of trust will ROMMM have in Starks today. I hope he gives him a good chance. At least 12 touches.
What kind of trust will ROMMM have in Starks today. I hope he gives him a good chance. At least 12 touches.
Had a favorite uncle who gave me 12 touches.
Starks seems much stronger than Jackson and with a lot more speed than Kuhn.
If there isn't much push from the offensive line, greater chance with him of 2-3 yard gains rather than 0-2 with Jackson. And if a crease, he'll do a lot more than Kuhn.
If there isn't much push from the offensive line, greater chance with him of 2-3 yard gains rather than 0-2 with Jackson. And if a crease, he'll do a lot more than Kuhn.
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.
She's usually right.
There's a dirty joke somewhere in Kiel's last post, but I can't flush it out.
Little help?
Little help?
Saturdays are "Blair for 4"
Starks is active for the game. Could be interesting!
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.
The visual is crystal clear in my mind. Is there a heavy note of sarcasm coming from behind a book?
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?
Nailed it.
quote:Originally posted by Fond Du Arrigo:
Reader's Digest, I'm thinking
Nailed it.
Flaccid.
Like him.
Like him.
quote:Originally posted by Green Crustacean:
Starks is active for the game. Could be interesting!
Yup.
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 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.
I think we can now say that it's NOT the OL. It's the running back. Buh-bye BJunk for 2.
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!
When we didn't even know if Starks was going to be activated off the PUP or IR'd for the season, I felt that acquiring Lynch was the move most likely to fix the running game. I was open to giving Starks a shot, but I felt that it would be more likely that Lynch would be a success than the unproven Starks.
I am ecstatic that Starks has worked out - and I also posted in the I Was Wrong thread regarding Starks. Ted strikes again. Seriously, Ted's last 2 seasons have been amazing.
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.
No, actually "we" can't.
Starks is better than Jackson running the ball, but he also has to have somewhere to run, and MM has to continue to call enough runs.
Yesterday, both of those things happened, and I certainly hope it continues.
I certainly think there is down and distance and plays that Starks bring more to the table than Jackson, but I certainly don't want Jackson gone. Jackson does to many good things for that to happen.
Yep. Just like Bush's shortcomings as a DB, there is a value to these guys when they are playing their primary role. Whatever happens Saturday or the rest of this post season, Green Bay is a title contender and will be for years to come. Teams this close can and should find a place for role players just like B Jax.
If we find a guy like Starks can learn to protect and catch like B Jax, than you absolutely have a choice to make. Until then, appreciate the guy for what he does and does well.
If we find a guy like Starks can learn to protect and catch like B Jax, than you absolutely have a choice to make. Until then, appreciate the guy for what he does and does well.