RIP Ryan Grant (1 Viewer)

[ready5]

rotoworld says --

Packers RBs coach Jerry Fontenot conceded that James Starks is a better pass blocker than Ryan Grant and plays in all spread formations.

The Packers love to use the spread to exploit one-on-one matchups, so Starks will continue to play more snaps than Grant. Fontenot also says Starks has a leg up with "his ability to run in space" and "to digest what the defense is giving us and being able to pass protect." It's clear Starks is going to be the lead back in Green Bay. He's a recommended RB2 against Carolina.

from the source --

Protection counts:Ryan Grant was the starting running back against New Orleans. But after two series, it became the James Starks show.

The Packers decided before the game that Starks would play in most spread formations. That's the main reason why Starks finished with 45 snaps compared with Grant's 16. Starks carried 12 times, Grant carried nine.

"I was really charting touches more than total plays," running backs coach Jerry Fontenot said. "In certain situations, I tried to manage it by personnel groups and sometimes by situation."

All of John Kuhn's 21 snaps came at fullback in two-back sets. Rookie Alex Green didn't play from scrimmage.

Fontenot said Starks got the nod over Grant in spread sets because of "his ability to run in space" and "his ability to digest what the defense is giving us and being able to pass protect."

Although Starks gave up a fourth-quarter sack, Fontenot said that it probably was fair to say that he was more dependable in protection than Grant at this point. Starks' edge in protection isn't reading defenses but actually blocking a rusher, Fontenot said.

"In normal down and distance situations, I think they're pretty equal," said Fontenot. "Whenever you get in space and have to operate out of the shotgun, then obviously James is probably more suited for that."

Starks made a bad error in the fourth quarter, missing blitzing safety Roman Harper and allowing Rodgers to be sacked.

“Other than that play, I thought he did pretty well,” said Fontenot. “But the importance that we put on keeping the quarterback upright, that one play can give you an overall negative outcome.”

Fontenot said he wasn't sure how playing time would be divided Sunday in Carolina.

"I think they both ran the ball relatively well," offensive coordinator Joe Philbin said. "We were pleased about that."

so taking things at face value, starks is better at blocking but grant is better at reading the defense -- once again we have the talented youngster vs. the seasoned vet. fontenot diplomatically says they're 'pretty equal', but that will change as starks improves at reading defenses, allowing his talent to win out. in the meantime, i'm guessing starks has earned some more leash, but we'll see what happens if he blows another blitz pickup.and i think it'll be same story next week -- grant with the start but giving way to starks, who will get the majority of snaps thanks to the spread offense. there should be more rushing attempts than last week and i wouldn't be surprised to see starks' share climb over 60%, but not too much higher. who actually gets the rushing TDs (if there are any) is anyone's guess (plus kuhn will be in the mix), but i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

long-term, i'm becoming more optimistic. i could see starks getting the start and 80% of the non-garbage touches soon after the bye.

 

[Proximo]

Is anyone actually keeping Grant on their roster at this point? Does he have any value still?

 

[griff321]

Is anyone actually keeping Grant on their roster at this point? Does he have any value still?

He only holds value if starks goes down.

 

[ready5]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

 

[smackdaddies]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

plus Kuhn got stopped 1 yard short of a receiving td

 

[goodoldalky]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Seemed to be 60/40 in favor of Starks, but I didn't actually keep track. Just watched the game.

 

[GreenNGold]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

 

[ready5]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

this thread is about when starks will overtake grant as the featured back.

 

[GreenNGold]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

this thread is about when starks will overtake grant as the featured back.

Then this thread is about when Grant will get hurt??? He already is the "featured" back but it is so RBBC and that isn't changing unless one of them gets hurt. Kuhn is the goaline guy, and Green is the future, and Starks isn't some elite stud that is going to put up outstanding numbers, ever.EDIT: Also, this thread is not titled the "what ready5 wants to hear thread", sorry to speak the truth.

 

[ready5]

Then this thread is about when Grant will get hurt???

He already is the "featured" back but it is so RBBC and that isn't changing unless one of them gets hurt. Kuhn is the goaline guy, and Green is the future, and Starks isn't some elite stud that is going to put up outstanding numbers, ever.

EDIT: Also, this thread is not titled the "what ready5 wants to hear thread", sorry to speak the truth.

This post has been edited by GreenNGold: Today, 04:02 PM

uh, interesting attitude. i was just trying to alert you to the fact that you weren't answering any questions because i hadn't asked any.so your opinion is that starks won't supplant grant. duly noted, i guess, but i don't think anyone in this thread has claimed starks to be an "elite stud", nor has anyone claimed green won't eventually be the future. if you've got some good arguments for why starks won't supplant grant before green does, please feel free to share them.

 

[Clifford]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

115 total yards is worth starting

 

[RBM]

Grant should be getting no more than 2-3 carries a game at this point, only if Starks needs a breather

 

[GreenNGold]

Then this thread is about when Grant will get hurt???

He already is the "featured" back but it is so RBBC and that isn't changing unless one of them gets hurt. Kuhn is the goaline guy, and Green is the future, and Starks isn't some elite stud that is going to put up outstanding numbers, ever.

EDIT: Also, this thread is not titled the "what ready5 wants to hear thread", sorry to speak the truth.

This post has been edited by GreenNGold: Today, 04:02 PM

uh, interesting attitude. i was just trying to alert you to the fact that you weren't answering any questions because i hadn't asked any.so your opinion is that starks won't supplant grant. duly noted, i guess, but i don't think anyone in this thread has claimed starks to be an "elite stud", nor has anyone claimed green won't eventually be the future. if you've got some good arguments for why starks won't supplant grant before green does, please feel free to share them.

No, my opinion is that Starks has already supplanted Grant (as I clearly stated in the post you responded to), just don't expect anything more than average numbers out of him.

 

[Fiddles]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

115 total yards is worth starting

9.4 ypc today.

 

[cr8f]

Then this thread is about when Grant will get hurt???

He already is the "featured" back but it is so RBBC and that isn't changing unless one of them gets hurt. Kuhn is the goaline guy, and Green is the future, and Starks isn't some elite stud that is going to put up outstanding numbers, ever.

EDIT: Also, this thread is not titled the "what ready5 wants to hear thread", sorry to speak the truth.

This post has been edited by GreenNGold: Today, 04:02 PM

uh, interesting attitude. i was just trying to alert you to the fact that you weren't answering any questions because i hadn't asked any.so your opinion is that starks won't supplant grant. duly noted, i guess, but i don't think anyone in this thread has claimed starks to be an "elite stud", nor has anyone claimed green won't eventually be the future. if you've got some good arguments for why starks won't supplant grant before green does, please feel free to share them.

No, my opinion is that Starks has already supplanted Grant (as I clearly stated in the post you responded to), just don't expect anything more than average numbers out of him.

I do but not for a few more weeks unless you get a lot of points for receptions. One league I get 1.5 points for RB's. This week hew only got 3 catches but I expect a lot more in a few weeks.

 

[Dippa]

Grant looked much better tonight than expected, I would not say RIP Grant at all. Yes, Starks had that nice TD run but Grant would have had it too, the blocking was amazing on that play.

Either way, neither Grant nor Starks should be your #1 or your #2, as it is going to be RBBC on a passing-focused offense. Even the receivers get so spread around (WRBC?) other than Jennings it is hard to roster another. I can see both Grant and Starks finishing less than top 20 this year (or right around there). They aren't going to win you a league.

Rodgers might be the only true fantasy stud on this amazing offense.

Really!?I think Starks is talented enough to take over this RBBC and be exactly the kind of player that wins a league.

The only question now is how long will it take?

I really disagree. I think Starks (and same with Grant) is a top 20 RB at best. That will not win you a league. We are not talking about homeruns here, we are talking about just hoping for an average performance when you start either of them.

That absolutely can win you a league where Starks was drafted...obviously just top 20 isn't very good for an early rounder, but for a guy you got in the 8th to 11th round, a top 20 back there is a homerun. That's how leagues are won every year...I don't think anyone suggests Starks is a RB1 at this point, but if he keeps this up, he could be a solid RB2, and drafting a guy like that in the late rounds is golden..

 

[Banger]

I hope the Grant owners sold low this week.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Green is the future

Huh? You follow the Packers and think that?

 

[ready5]

Then this thread is about when Grant will get hurt???

He already is the "featured" back but it is so RBBC and that isn't changing unless one of them gets hurt. Kuhn is the goaline guy, and Green is the future, and Starks isn't some elite stud that is going to put up outstanding numbers, ever.

EDIT: Also, this thread is not titled the "what ready5 wants to hear thread", sorry to speak the truth.

This post has been edited by GreenNGold: Today, 04:02 PM

uh, interesting attitude. i was just trying to alert you to the fact that you weren't answering any questions because i hadn't asked any.so your opinion is that starks won't supplant grant. duly noted, i guess, but i don't think anyone in this thread has claimed starks to be an "elite stud", nor has anyone claimed green won't eventually be the future. if you've got some good arguments for why starks won't supplant grant before green does, please feel free to share them.

No, my opinion is that Starks has already supplanted Grant (as I clearly stated in the post you responded to), just don't expect anything more than average numbers out of him.

clearly stated? i see you saying starks is "featured" (in quotes) but also in an RBBC, which is a contradiction of terms.seems like your opinion is what i've already stated -- you don't consider starks to be the featured back, nor do you think he ever will become one before green comes on the scene.

 

[GreenNGold]

Green is the future

Huh? You follow the Packers and think that?

Huh? You have the hottest Packers avatar I have ever seen and don't think that?

 

[GreenNGold]

Then this thread is about when Grant will get hurt???

He already is the "featured" back but it is so RBBC and that isn't changing unless one of them gets hurt. Kuhn is the goaline guy, and Green is the future, and Starks isn't some elite stud that is going to put up outstanding numbers, ever.

EDIT: Also, this thread is not titled the "what ready5 wants to hear thread", sorry to speak the truth.

This post has been edited by GreenNGold: Today, 04:02 PM

uh, interesting attitude. i was just trying to alert you to the fact that you weren't answering any questions because i hadn't asked any.so your opinion is that starks won't supplant grant. duly noted, i guess, but i don't think anyone in this thread has claimed starks to be an "elite stud", nor has anyone claimed green won't eventually be the future. if you've got some good arguments for why starks won't supplant grant before green does, please feel free to share them.

No, my opinion is that Starks has already supplanted Grant (as I clearly stated in the post you responded to), just don't expect anything more than average numbers out of him.

clearly stated? i see you saying starks is "featured" (in quotes) but also in an RBBC, which is a contradiction of terms.seems like your opinion is what i've already stated -- you don't consider starks to be the featured back, nor do you think he ever will become one before green comes on the scene.

Maybe we don't have the same definitions of what featured and RBBC means (probably my fault as I am not as familiar with this forum as others). I think Green Bay will have, and continue to have, RBBC as long as both are healhty, but I think Starks will get the majority of opportunities. Grant (and Kuhn) will take enough opportunities away preventing Starks from being a true featured back, and in this pass first offense I don't see how getting the majority of carries in this RBBC system will ever pan out. So no, I don't think he will ever be the true RB1 with no competition, but he will be the RB1 of the RBBC. That is what I mean by "featured" (in quotes)

 

[wudaben]

If Starks keeps getting YPC numbers like he did today then that RBBC will become less and less....

 

[Banger]

If Starks keeps getting YPC numbers like he did today then that RBBC will become less and less....

It's week 2 and it's Starks in a landslide. Not sure what the argument is.

 

[ready5]

Maybe we don't have the same definitions of what featured and RBBC means (probably my fault as I am not as familiar with this forum as others). I think Green Bay will have, and continue to have, RBBC as long as both are healhty, but I think Starks will get the majority of opportunities. Grant (and Kuhn) will take enough opportunities away preventing Starks from being a true featured back, and in this pass first offense I don't see how getting the majority of carries in this RBBC system will ever pan out. So no, I don't think he will ever be the true RB1 with no competition, but he will be the RB1 of the RBBC.

i think many people would agree that starks is already the first back in the committee, but it seems just as many people are predicting that starks will indeed be the featured back sometime this season. when exactly that will happen is anyone's guess, so we have a range of opinions -- some in this thread think it's all but happened already, some like me think it'll happen after the bye, and some like you think it won't happen unless grant gets injured, etc.personally, i'm more interested in why people think what they think. why do you think it'll remain an RBBC? is starks not progressing quickly enough in key areas? or is green bay just not inclined to feature a back? if it's just a gut feel, that's fine, but if you've got some stats or whatever to share, please feel free.

 

[ready5]

upcoming schedule before the bye:

@chi

den

@atl

stl

@min

if you're shopping for starks, seems like after chicago and before denver would be a good time to try.

 

[wudaben]

If Starks keeps getting YPC numbers like he did today then that RBBC will become less and less....

It's week 2 and it's Starks in a landslide. Not sure what the argument is.

Sure, it's Starks in a landslide but he is still splitting enough carries with Grant and Kuhn to limit his upside. I'm a Starks owner so I obviously would like to see Starks take a greater percentage of the split but that doesn't mean GB will do it.

 

[qimqam]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

Missed out on Starks huh ... Sorry man

 

[Banger]

If Starks keeps getting YPC numbers like he did today then that RBBC will become less and less....

It's week 2 and it's Starks in a landslide. Not sure what the argument is.

Sure, it's Starks in a landslide but he is still splitting enough carries with Grant and Kuhn to limit his upside. I'm a Starks owner so I obviously would like to see Starks take a greater percentage of the split but that doesn't mean GB will do it.

as a Starks owner it's the best case scenario...you got him cheap and in week 2 he's already the lead back. Yes, he's not the guy getting 25 carries a game but you likely drafted him in the 7th or later. If Starks keeps running like he is, it will work itself out soon enough.

 

[GreenNGold]

Maybe we don't have the same definitions of what featured and RBBC means (probably my fault as I am not as familiar with this forum as others). I think Green Bay will have, and continue to have, RBBC as long as both are healhty, but I think Starks will get the majority of opportunities. Grant (and Kuhn) will take enough opportunities away preventing Starks from being a true featured back, and in this pass first offense I don't see how getting the majority of carries in this RBBC system will ever pan out. So no, I don't think he will ever be the true RB1 with no competition, but he will be the RB1 of the RBBC.

i think many people would agree that starks is already the first back in the committee, but it seems just as many people are predicting that starks will indeed be the featured back sometime this season. when exactly that will happen is anyone's guess, so we have a range of opinions -- some in this thread think it's all but happened already, some like me think it'll happen after the bye, and some like you think it won't happen unless grant gets injured, etc.personally, i'm more interested in why people think what they think. why do you think it'll remain an RBBC? is starks not progressing quickly enough in key areas? or is green bay just not inclined to feature a back? if it's just a gut feel, that's fine, but if you've got some stats or whatever to share, please feel free.

It is more gut than anything. I follow the team closely, listen to what the coaches have to say, etc.... As long as Grant is healthy, he will be part of the game plan and get similar to the amount of touches he is getting now. That with Kuhn getting the majority of goaline opportunities is all that I'm going by. Starks will get similar to the amount of touches he is getting now. If you are starting him, he can easily put up low numbers (without a TD) or average numbers (with a TD). He might have 1 or 2 good games this year but I really don't see anything other than average production out of him. Just my opinion, and since I don't have any math to back it up I will stop after this.

Please don't take what I'm saying the wrong way, I do think Starks has the most talent.

 

[GreenNGold]

i'd put starks' floor at 12/50 and his ceiling near 20/120 plus maybe a catch or two this time. or here, a prediction -- 18/80/1

9/85/0 rushing plus 3/30/0 receiving, so 12 touches for 115 yards (meanwhile grant only got 27 yards on 9 touches). anyone know the snap ratio?didn't follow the game, but so much for the presumption that green bay would leap to an early lead and do ball control. and i see the only rushing touchdown went to kuhn. interesting.

Kuhn is the red-zone RB. Neither Grant nor Starks are wroth starting unless you are really desperate or the other gets hurt.

Missed out on Starks huh ... Sorry man

Haha no! I have him as a reserve in one league, passed in the others. I don't have Grant in any leagues. I know no one cares but since you decided to derail in this direction I thought I would respond. I love how people like you get so emotional and cannot accept the truth when it slaps you in the face you have to resort arguments like these.

 

[wudaben]

If Starks keeps getting YPC numbers like he did today then that RBBC will become less and less....

It's week 2 and it's Starks in a landslide. Not sure what the argument is.

Sure, it's Starks in a landslide but he is still splitting enough carries with Grant and Kuhn to limit his upside. I'm a Starks owner so I obviously would like to see Starks take a greater percentage of the split but that doesn't mean GB will do it.

as a Starks owner it's the best case scenario...you got him cheap and in week 2 he's already the lead back. Yes, he's not the guy getting 25 carries a game but you likely drafted him in the 7th or later. If Starks keeps running like he is, it will work itself out soon enough.

Hence why I said that if he keeps that high YPC he'll eventually dominate the split...

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Green is the future

Huh? You follow the Packers and think that?

Huh? You have the hottest Packers avatar I have ever seen and don't think that?

Heck no. Green was drafted as a 3rd down back to replace the loss of Jackson. Nothing more. Starks is the future. And the present.

 

[GreenNGold]

Green is the future

Huh? You follow the Packers and think that?

Huh? You have the hottest Packers avatar I have ever seen and don't think that?

Heck no. Green was drafted as a 3rd down back to replace the loss of Jackson. Nothing more. Starks is the future. And the present.

I agree he is the present, if you think he is the future, then all GB RB's should be avoided at all costs, except for emergency situations.

 

[Reepicheep]

I see the Starks vs. Grant debate has devolved into Starks haters trying to explain how a guy with 172 yards from scrimmage and a TD in two games is only worth starting as a flex if you're "desperate".

Starks is a top 25 RB RIGHT NOW people. Wake up and smell the coffee.

 

[Joe Summer]

I see the Starks vs. Grant debate has devolved into Starks haters trying to explain how a guy with 172 yards from scrimmage and a TD in two games is only worth starting as a flex if you're "desperate".Starks is a top 25 RB RIGHT NOW people. Wake up and smell the coffee.

17th overall in my league, with Grant all the way down at 54th. What a joke.

 

[Tiki_Barber Fan]

Why can't their just be happy Starks AND Grant owners here?

Both came cheap in drafts. We know Starks is the primary guy now. And will give you a min of solid RB2 #'s. He or Grant get hurt, you're probably looking at a RB1.

Have a good day.

-Teek

 

[Joe Summer]

Why can't their just be happy Starks AND Grant owners here?

Because people in larger leagues took Grant in the 5th or 6th round, maybe even as their #2 RB. Meanwhile, Starks was typically taken in the 8th-10th round, with very few people relying on him as a starter.Grant owners are more heavily invested and are therefore less likely to cut bait.

 

[cr8f]

For the second straight week,there was a large disparity in snaps – unofficially, Starks played 37 while Grant played 16 – so as long as he stays healthy, it appears Starks will see more playing time.

 

[zoonation]

Time to close this thread down. Nothing to see here anymore.

RIP indeed.

 

[chook]

Grant's looked better out there today.

 

[Sam Quentin]

Is it time for an RIP Starks thread?

It was a good run...

 

[Joe Summer]

Is it time for an RIP Starks thread?It was a good run...

JINX! Now watch as Starks rips off a 40 yard TD.

 

[LittlePhatty]

JINX! Now watch as Starks rips off a 40 yard TD.

Or fumble.

 

[oukurt]

Grant injured. Limped off and fell to his knees in pain. Starks value spiking again.

 

[guderian]

Run In Peace, Ryan Grant.

Looks like this is still, at best, a RBBC with Kuhn getting the GL carries.

 

[smackdaddies]

What went right: Ryan Grant got his groove back. After a sluggish training camp, the veteran running back only had 15 carries through two games. On his signature cutback runs from two years ago, Grant carved through Chicago’s defense for 92 yards on 17 carries. The Packers showed balance all game and the interior blocking by Scott Wells and Josh Sitton was superb. Grant had grocery-store lanes to work with.

What went wrong: As good as Grants was, Starks (5 yards on 11 attempts) struggled. The second-year back was hesitant near the line, lacked burst and coughed up a fumble in the fourth quarter to give Chicago life.

From the JSentinal

And for those who are paying attention.... Ryan Grant is still listed as the Packers starting RB

But feel free to continue the man love for Starks

 

[Sam Quentin]

What went right: Ryan Grant got his groove back. After a sluggish training camp, the veteran running back only had 15 carries through two games. On his signature cutback runs from two years ago, Grant carved through Chicago’s defense for 92 yards on 17 carries. The Packers showed balance all game and the interior blocking by Scott Wells and Josh Sitton was superb. Grant had grocery-store lanes to work with.

What went wrong: As good as Grants was, Starks (5 yards on 11 attempts) struggled. The second-year back was hesitant near the line, lacked burst and coughed up a fumble in the fourth quarter to give Chicago life.

From the JSentinal

And for those who are paying attention.... Ryan Grant is still listed as the Packers starting RB

But feel free to continue the man love for Starks

Wow the media support picture has shifted already...

 

[cr8f]

Grant runs through these creases better than Starks for now. I also noticed Grant had better blocking for some reason, but as the season progresses I think Starks will improve . Grant is just better at one cut running so far and see the holes better.

 

[smackdaddies]

decent article on the game

What the game shows is not that Stark or Grant is "better" but that the Packers will go with anyone who is hot.

 

[wudaben]

Grant seemed to get a ton of cut backs off of the play action pass in this game while it seemed that Starks was often running straight up the middle. I haven't gone back to watch the game on rewind yet so I could be completely off base on that observation though!