This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Yes MOP, One of the Packer beat reporters, posted a msg breaking down his list for the final 53 roster. Im not sure you are missing much else..Starks has his burst back (but still not reflected on the depth chart) Green lacks play-time, if nothing else..fwiw I had been carrying Starks, but made some moves.
Interestingly enough the guy who picked up Starks in my League, decided to drop Green in the process. imho this add/drop means that Green has/had value as a 3rd down RB, but some may view Starks as a 3 down back. I believe GB has to be concerned w recurring turf toe re-injury. Basically Im only following thread to try to "get up to speed" myself. Im still lost as too why Starks was inactive last wk (What, the Pack didnt want Benson fretting about his role? or provide insight to other teams?)p.s. Id be lerry of what the Pack reporters are posting (ie. I only think one of em is a fan of Starks) Saine is the ex-trackstar too
I think it's because 1) he's not as good as Green and 2) he doesn't play special teams and Saine does. There was no role for him when everyone was healthy. Now he has a chance to get one again.
yeah, the recurring turf toe injury is Starks biggest problem.if he can put up 3-5 games before getting it hurt again, I could see Green being more ready to assume the role of 'starter'I think they will start Starks, but it will really be a time share situation where Starks will get 8-10 carries and Green will get the same. From there, I guess we'll see how things progress.No doubt they want to take some pressure off of Green until he gets his pass protection skills up to speed. As such, I'd argue that starting him every down is not likely in the cards.No doubt Green is getting pass protection lessons every day, so I figure it will be at least 3 or 4 weeks until he's ready to play as an every down back.'Dismattle said:Yes MOP, One of the Packer beat reporters, posted a msg breaking down his list for the final 53 roster. Im not sure you are missing much else..Starks has his burst back (but still not reflected on the depth chart) Green lacks play-time, if nothing else..fwiw I had been carrying Starks, but made some moves.
So what is the score withe Starks? He averaged 4.3 yards per carry last year but only scored one TD ... And it seems like Greenbay wants to run him out of town.
Watch them play. Benson looks like a professional running back. Starks, in my opinion, does not. You can have a sustained running game with Benson. Rarely can you do that with Starks. It remains to be seen if Green can offer that. We'll find out starting Sunday night but there's no question in my mind he brings far more potential explosiveness to the backfield than Starks. Starks is a very ordinary NFL running back in my opinion. There's nothing special about him and I think the Packers realize that and know they've gone as far with him as the lead back as they can. Hence, their heavy belief in Green despite the fact he missed all of last season with a serious injury. Here are some good quotes from Green and Saine about Benson for what it's worth. In a million years I doubt you'd hear anyone say the same things about Starks:
Guilty as charged. As a Packers fan, my agenda is wanting to see them win. Benson was a massive upgrade over Starks. That was obvious the second Benson put on a Green Bay uniform.
Why?I get that Starks is average.Benson is equally average. You are arguing for a guy with a career average that is awful and has only 32 rushing TDs to his name.The Packers were not a better team with Benson in there. The offense is out of synch. This injury is probalby a blessing in disguise. If not Starks than someone else will be better than Benson.
Only Chris Johnson can do that.
No Brian Cushing either.Only Chris Johnson can do that.
Thats sounds like some good reasoning (thank-you) But the thing that bothers me is the fact that IF a player is in the works so to speak; He needs to experience some game time hits..In other words why did the Pack keep him on the 53, IF he does need a few weeks of NFL game-play to get up to speed. How are the guru's expecting Green (15 total career carries) to perform against Hou? I know its said that you cant plan for injury's, but Im not sure it can get much worse.
I meant anyone on the Packers.Only Chris Johnson can do that.
When has Benson played a major role for them at all this year? Just because he was given the majority of carries does not mean he was a major role. His numbers all season were not good. He is/was average to below average. Starks is not good, this is apparent, however people are acting as if he was awful all last season. People get he is a below average NFL rb. However, he was playing well enough for the Packers to win games and not hurting them last year.
Benson >>> Starks. His lower YPC has more to do with the opponents he faced in his first 3 games than his talent level (PS Im not saying Benson is talented, just that hes better than Starks). How are other opponents running vs SF, CHI, & SEA?
The win over Chicago in Week 2 when Benson rushed for 81 yards and had 116 total yards.The second half of the win at Seattle when they were MUCH better offensively once they began using Benson more.
He had a 3.9 YPC in the 2012 playoffs. He had a great opening game vs Philly when he basically burst on the scene but was mediocre after that game
I am sure you can go back to last year and point out the games Starks and or Grant played well in and helped GB win. I just find it amusing that the Packers fans are acting as if Benson was a major upgrade or the answer to their running problems this year. He is just not good now or going forward. He was released from Cincy for BGE another extremely ordinary RB. He should be a back up RB in the NFL. Starks should also be a back up RB in the nfl. I just don't think the drop off from Benson to Starks is really anything at this stage. Two below average rb's.
This is exactly the point I am trying to make. Yes the Packers can succeed with Green/Starks combo. Benson having ok games had less to do with him and more to do with the Packers offensive unit. When Rodgers and the passing game play well it opens up a ton of lanes for whoever is back there (Benson included). There is a reason an uninspiring Starks was able to average 4.3 ypc last year and Ryan Grant had some successful years there as well.
Yea, you're going to have to stop that. It was a terrible call but, it's over.
Ok.... so you own Starks, we get it.
He sucks.
I think he's an absolute hold. He's getting 20+ touches per game (including an increasing role in the passing game) on an explosive passing offense. TDs will be hard to come by but that was the case when he took the job so nothing's changed there. I think he's a low-end RB2/high-upside RB3 in PPR leagues going forward. Like I said before, he's the guy and he's getting volume. I'd like the rushing numbers to be better but the Rams' D line was a monster yesterday against the run.
He's not as good between the tackles as Benson. That was a huge upgrade that Benson provided and without him that may be hit and miss. But I agree with you about Green in the passing game. It was great to see Rodgers look to him more on check downs like he was doing with Benson because Green can pick up yards quickly. Had 4 catches and should've been 5 but he dropped an easy one right in his hands.
Starks had almost as many Fantasy Points as Green and he did't have a carry
