DaFreak Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/includes/blog...mp;post_id=2081 Looks like he will see some action. Any homers have any insight into his upside the rest of the year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The 13ers Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/includes/blog...mp;post_id=2081 Looks like he will see some action. Any homers have any insight into his upside the rest of the year? It's the Mike McCarthy Packers. They just do not run. I wouldn't expect much production. The guy hasn't played a game in two years. But, he is going to get a few carries, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 It's the Mike McCarthy Packers. They just do not run. I wouldn't expect much production. The guy hasn't played a game in two years. But, he is going to get a few carries, I think. Wow. Just wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 More to the point about the first response: Packers rushing NFL ranking the past two seasons under McCarthy: 2009 14th attempts 15th rushing yds 2008 14th attempts 17th rushing yds So what that tells us is that while GB isn't an elite running team, that McCarthy certainly understands the need for the run and utilizes the running game. This year has been different for obvious reasons - after Grant got hurt there was no go-to RB. There hasn't been a healthy guy on the roster that could take over Grant's role. Despite that, GB still ranks 23rd in both attempts and rushing yds this year. I've got a report on Starks in this thread: Link on post #65 that you could take a look at if you're looking for some more information on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Official now. Starks is active and Nance is inactive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaFreak Posted December 5, 2010 Author Share Posted December 5, 2010 More to the point about the first response: Packers rushing NFL ranking the past two seasons under McCarthy: 2009 14th attempts 15th rushing yds 2008 14th attempts 17th rushing yds So what that tells us is that while GB isn't an elite running team, that McCarthy certainly understands the need for the run and utilizes the running game. This year has been different for obvious reasons - after Grant got hurt there was no go-to RB. There hasn't been a healthy guy on the roster that could take over Grant's role. Despite that, GB still ranks 23rd in both attempts and rushing yds this year. I've got a report on Starks in this thread: Link on post #65 that you could take a look at if you're looking for some more information on him. I agree with your analysis in your post. The Packers are "looking" for someone to take the job. IIf, and it's a big if, he shows something I think he could easily be the guy, the remainder of the year. at least. That's my hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 It's the Mike McCarthy Packers. They just do not run. I wouldn't expect much production. The guy hasn't played a game in two years. But, he is going to get a few carries, I think. BB already proved my point... But really? You're a packers fan, so I assume you watch the games... They have tried Jackson, Kuhn, and Nance to fill the void left by Grant to no avail. At a certain point McCarthy realized that spreading the offense out gave them the best chance to win. IF Starks can provide a spark then MM will run the ball. A large part of McCarthy's offense is based off of play action. You have to have the running game to have a meaningful PA pass. McCarthy can and will run IF he has a runningback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 More to the point about the first response: Packers rushing NFL ranking the past two seasons under McCarthy: 2009 14th attempts 15th rushing yds 2008 14th attempts 17th rushing yds So what that tells us is that while GB isn't an elite running team, that McCarthy certainly understands the need for the run and utilizes the running game. This year has been different for obvious reasons - after Grant got hurt there was no go-to RB. There hasn't been a healthy guy on the roster that could take over Grant's role. Despite that, GB still ranks 23rd in both attempts and rushing yds this year. I've got a report on Starks in this thread: Link on post #65 that you could take a look at if you're looking for some more information on him. Yes the perception is they don't run and Ryan Grant didn't many yards but isn't true. These uniforms - the blue looks almost purple to me.... If Starks can stay healthy he could be good. Like Arian Foster he fell considerably before the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 He's looking good so far. Hopefully GB can get a nice lead and give Starks some more reps. I'm optimistic to see what he can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 He's looking good so far. Hopefully GB can get a nice lead and give Starks some more reps. I'm optimistic to see what he can do. Me too. He seems very quick in tight spaces and could be a needed addition down the road. When he had a couple good runs it seemed to open up the offense and then Jackson had that long run too. I'd like to see more Quinn Johnson too. In college he could catch the ball out of the backfield and would like to see a few throws to him down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damageinc Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 For the packers he looks very good. Just what they need . But for fantasy I dont see alot of upside. Jackson is in on passing downs and they used Kuhn on short yardage and the goal line. limited fantasy points but still should be on a roster for backup purposes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Hope my move of dropping Best (oops?) before kickoff for Starks makes me look a genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Me too. He seems very quick in tight spaces and could be a needed addition down the road. When he had a couple good runs it seemed to open up the offense and then Jackson had that long run too. I'd like to see more Quinn Johnson too. In college he could catch the ball out of the backfield and would like to see a few throws to him down the road. He doesn't dance in the backfield or hesitate like Jackson has done too much. He finds a hole and goes. He looks like he does what Jackson can't do, which will allow Jackson to be a good third down back. For the packers he looks very good. Just what they need . But for fantasy I dont see alot of upside. Jackson is in on passing downs and they used Kuhn on short yardage and the goal line. limited fantasy points but still should be on a roster for backup purposes. For fantasy purposes he'll help Rodgers and all of the WR. For fantasy purposes he's a dynasty guy for next year. This year he'll be part of a RBBC at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 For the packers he looks very good. Just what they need . But for fantasy I dont see alot of upside. Jackson is in on passing downs and they used Kuhn on short yardage and the goal line. limited fantasy points but still should be on a roster for backup purposes. You don't think there's a possibility they kept his situations limited, given that it was his first game in 2 yrs? There's no potential upside from 18 carries for 73 yds? That was a very credible performance under the circumstances. But I'm guessing you probably didn't know a hell of a lot about Starks leading into this week, and probably found out only a bit more today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damageinc Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 (edited) I know quite abit about starks. Hes a good Rb and showed that today. I said he was good. But hes not a fantasy starter. they used Kuhn at the GL for a while , thats not going to change and Jackson is a good reciever and thats not going to change. I mean would you risk starting a RB who dosnet get GL and Receptions in the fantasy playoffs. You would have to be desperate at RB to do something like that. We saw one week. Next week Jackson can have 10 carries and Starks 12 . its a RBBC with 3 backs doing different things. One in on 1-2 down ( Starks) one in on Passing Downs ( jackson) and one in on Short yardage and Goal Line. ( Kuhn) and Nance will be back next week. now you got 4 backs . not a good situation. Edited December 5, 2010 by damageinc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 You don't think there's a possibility they kept his situations limited, given that it was his first game in 2 yrs? There's no potential upside from 18 carries for 73 yds? That was a very credible performance under the circumstances. But I'm guessing you probably didn't know a hell of a lot about Starks leading into this week, and probably found out only a bit more today. I assumed he was talking about for this year. If so, I don't know many that will play Starks in the Playoffs unless its an absolute desperation play. With Grant having a substantial cap hit for next year, and Jackson showing that he's not an every down back I do think Starks has substantial value going into next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 I know quite abit about starks. Hes a good Rb and showed that today. I said he was good. But hes not a fantasy starter. they used Kuhn at the GL for a while , thats not going to change and Jackson is a good reciever and thats not going to change. I mean would you risk starting a RB who dosnet get GL and Receptions in the fantasy playoffs. You would have to be desperate at RB to do something like that. We saw one week. Next week Jackson can have 10 carries and Starks 12 . its a RBBC with 3 backs doing different things. One in on 1-2 down ( Starks) one in on Passing Downs ( jackson) and one in on Short yardage and Goal Line. ( Kuhn) and Nance will be back next week. now you got 4 backs . not a good situation. Nance is the non-factor of the four. Expect him to be shut down. And Jackson isn't the third down back because he can catch the ball. It's because he can pick up incoming defenders more than anything. For the remainder of the year I wouldnt roll with a GBP RB, but moving forward Starks has by far the most upside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 (edited) We saw one week. Next week Jackson can have 10 carries and Starks 12 . its a RBBC with 3 backs doing different things. One in on 1-2 down ( Starks) one in on Passing Downs ( jackson) and one in on Short yardage and Goal Line. ( Kuhn) and Nance will be back next week. now you got 4 backs . not a good situation. Well, apparently we can ask you for the score of the GB game next week, too. You don't, I don't, and no one else doesn't know - except the GB staff - how GB intends to use Starks from this point forward. I'd say given the performance today that's there's just as good a chance they expand his role a bit as there is that he's caught in a full blown RBBC. Edited December 5, 2010 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damageinc Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 YeaH I was only talking about this year. I think Starks can be there RB of the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damageinc Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Greenbay wins 28-10 . Your right I was just giving an opinion. He did have a nice day and looks like the real deal. thats the most important thing to Packers fans. Well, apparently we can ask you for the score of the GB game next week, too. You don't, I don't, and no one else doesn't know - except the GB staff - how GB intends to use Starks from this point forward. I'd say given the performance today that's there's just as good a chance they expand his role a bit as there is that he's caught in a full blown RBBC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 You don't, I don't, and no one else doesn't know - except the GB staff - how GB intends to use Starks from this point forward. I'd say given the performance today that's there's just as good a chance they expand his role a bit as there is that he's caught in a full blown RBBC. At worst, or unless he proves not ready, he's going to be a big factor in the RBBC. In that, I think he'll get the majority of the touches, peppered in with some GL work as we go forward. GB did not keep him away from IR all year long if they didn't have a plan for him. When they activated Starks, they cut Al Harris to make room. Obviously GB thinks a lot of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted December 5, 2010 Share Posted December 5, 2010 Greenbay wins 28-10 . Your right I was just giving an opinion. He did have a nice day and looks like the real deal. thats the most important thing to Packers fans. The debate is the thing. Your opinion is every bit as valuable as mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.