lords_of_thelema
14 years ago
Dude's hunches might not be so great, but Jackson's ypc average is higher than Grant's was last year. He just isn't getting carries because Mike McCarthy doesn't adhere to fundamentals. Bottom line is Starks can catch, make people miss and has 4.5 speed. That's what Greg Jennings ran at the combine. The rap on Starks this spring was that he was running too high. That's my main concern.
blank
warhawk
14 years ago
A lot of rookie RB's and several not well known have come out pretty darn strong and have done so quickly.

The RB position is more about instincts and using the strengths they have whether it be a powerful lower body and shedding blocks or cutting ability and moves or great vision to see holes.

These instincts will take over once they have the ball in their hands. It's not that hard to pick up on what the Oline blocking scheme is going to try and set up for them. From there it's up to the RB to do what they do best.

The thing about RB is you can't teach the things they do well. Balance, vision, ability to make tacklers miss, it's something they just have in them.

If the kid is good it won't take long for it to show.
"The train is leaving the station."
ILikeThePackers39
14 years ago

Dude's hunches might not be so great, but Jackson's ypc average is higher than Grant's was last year. He just isn't getting carries because Mike McCarthy doesn't adhere to fundamentals. Bottom line is Starks can catch, make people miss and has 4.5 speed. That's what Greg Jennings ran at the combine. The rap on Starks this spring was that he was running too high. That's my main concern.

"lords_of_thelema" wrote:




Just for the record, here are a couple other guys who 'ran too high'*:

-Marcus Allen

-Eric Dickerson




*quotes not aimed at you; I know that's the stated knock on Starks.
blank
zombieslayer
14 years ago
Nance still hasn't picked up the playbook? WTF! Is he partially retarded or just lazy? Either way, my opinion of Nance dropped significantly.

RB is not that hard. Seriously, it's not. The NFL is the only sport that takes an IQ test. RB is among the lowest. OT is the highest. If I'm not mistaken, C is next. OG is up there too. QB depends on the offense. Some require smart QBs, some don't. DTs can be partially retarded and often are. RBs only require around an 85 IQ which is pretty low (exactly half way between average and retarded).

Here's to hoping Starks is good enough to warrant some carries.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
ILikeThePackers39
14 years ago

A lot of rookie RB's and several not well known have come out pretty darn strong and have done so quickly.

The RB position is more about instincts and using the strengths they have whether it be a powerful lower body and shedding blocks or cutting ability and moves or great vision to see holes.

These instincts will take over once they have the ball in their hands. It's not that hard to pick up on what the Oline blocking scheme is going to try and set up for them. From there it's up to the RB to do what they do best.

The thing about RB is you can't teach the things they do well. Balance, vision, ability to make tacklers miss, it's something they just have in them.

If the kid is good it won't take long for it to show.

"warhawk" wrote:




I played RB for years as a youth, and this is spot-on. You do learn some things about blocking schemes, and obviously the most important thing that needs to be learned is protection schemes so your QB doesn't get killed. But the rest is on the RB - many, many great runs don't go through the set hole, but rather are a result of instinct and talent. I never thought back there - I looked for a hole and hit it hard, and if there wasn't a hole I headed for the edges. The illustrious Mr. Sanders made most of his hay just freelancing. If you're good, you're just good.

Not saying it's a lock that Starks is that good (certainly not comparable to Mr. Sanders) - but if he's got the ability, he won't need practice time to use it.
blank
lords_of_thelema
14 years ago
That's a great point. You run to daylight, wherever it is. You don't just hit the set hole. (Unless your name is Ryan Grant. LOL.)
blank
djcubez
14 years ago

I don't get how anyone can expect anything from Starks.

He is a rookie, first of all. That means, he has to digest a voluminous playbook. It's not easy for a rookie to do that. Yes, he has had a few more months than Nance to learn the playbook, but then there are audibles and such he has to learn. I highly doubt McCarthy will insert Starks unless he can surely protect the QB from getting hit.

Secondly, this dude has not played in more than a year and a half. Outside of wondering whether he is ready for the physicality of the NFL (which is more physical than college) we have to wonder how long he will take to get back in stride. A lot in the ZBS is predicated on timing, on the RB knowing when he can make the cut. You have to have a fell of when a hole will open along the trenches, and this not something that can be mechanically learned.

Starks would be a welcome addition. I just cannot, however, see him contributing much until perhaps the last quarter of the season. And even that is a long shot.

And the fantasy article link.... honestly, that dude is going off nothing more than a hunch. He picked up Brandon Jackson off a hunch he could replace Grant and traded for Lynch off a hunch that he'd end up in GB... this dudes hunches are just plain awful.

"all_about_da_packers" wrote:



Burnett's a rookie this year and he wound up starting. Matthews and Raji played significant time in their rookie years. Neal would be getting a lot of snaps if he weren't injured. Brad Jones was a rookie last year and stepped up. Ryan Grant was a UDFA that we traded for--basically a rookie. Samkon Gado was in essence a rookie. And that's just on the Packers.

I don't know where you get this idea that rookie's can't contribute but it's mind boggling. I understand Starks may be a different story because he hasn't played in over a year but it doesn't mean he has nothing to bring to the offense. I know that some people would rather not get their hopes up but why not? Why draft a guy if you don't expect him to play or contribute?

Secondly, this dude has not played in more than a year and a half. Outside of wondering whether he is ready for the physicality of the NFL (which is more physical than college) we have to wonder how long he will take to get back in stride.



It already said he's been running full speed. Give him a few practices and then put him in the game once to see if he can take a hit. It's not like he has to learn to play all over again...
all_about_da_packers
14 years ago

Burnett's a rookie this year and he wound up starting. Matthews and Raji played significant time in their rookie years. Neal would be getting a lot of snaps if he weren't injured. Brad Jones was a rookie last year and stepped up. Ryan Grant was a UDFA that we traded for--basically a rookie. Samkon Gado was in essence a rookie. And that's just on the Packers.

I don't know where you get this idea that rookie's can't contribute but it's mind boggling. I understand Starks may be a different story because he hasn't played in over a year but it doesn't mean he has nothing to bring to the offense. I know that some people would rather not get their hopes up but why not? Why draft a guy if you don't expect him to play or contribute?

"djcubez" wrote:



You're misreading what I wrote, dj. I did not say he cannot contribute simply because he is a rookie, but rather than Bigby and Harris (who are vets) Starks is coming into a whole different league. He has to get familiar with not just the plays, but get down the audible calls (including pass-pro) that Rodgers makes. He has to get adjusted to a whole new level of speed and power, because the NFL has the best of the best players. In other words, he is a rookie who has been injured for all of training camp and the first six weeks of the season. He is going to be playing with the big boys.... and it's a challenge when you are facing competition at a higher level than what you are used to given that he has not even practiced once in the NFL yet.

Then there is his injury. Let's put it this way: this man has gone 18 months without even participating in a football practice. Not just games, but actual practice... we're not talking about a week or two, but 18 months. That's a longer absence than players who tear their ACLs go through. Burnett, Gado, Sam Shields, Clay, Brad Jones, etc. have never had to go through that. Starks has to not just get adjusted to a whole higher level of competition, but he has to get back in a rhythm of carrying the ball, keeping his pads low, learning to deal with taking hits, learning to change direction in less than a moment's notice... all these things are going to take time when you have not consistently been doing them for 18 months.

I am not saying Starks will not contribute at all. I'm saying that if anyone thinks he is going to do for us soon what Grant did for us in the 2007 season, they have to adjust expectations. Perhaps Starks can give us a boost in the last month of the season, but he will need time to get up to playing speed.

I would welcome Starks because he has one thing all our RBs lack: relatively good speed at the RB position. We desperately need that. But to think our RB problems are okay simply because Starks is practicing again and eligible to come off the PUP is wrong.

Like warhawk said, if Starks is good it will not take long to show. I really hope he shows something, because this team can use every bit of help it can get, especially on offense.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
zombieslayer
14 years ago
AADP - With all due respect, I think you're overrationalizing how hard it is to be a RB. I said it before and I'll say it again. There's a reason the NFL makes players take an IQ test. It's the only sport I know of where IQ matters.

RB is among the lowest when it comes to IQ requirements. It really is easy. Run this way. Run that way. Follow this lead blocker. Don't fumble the football.

Necessary IQ for a RB? 85+. 85 is half-way between normal and retarded.

I know, I know. There's going to be someone who said they played RB and they're going to be offended. Tough. Don't argue this with me. Argue this with NFL coaches. They look at the Wonderlic scores (which is an IQ test) for a reason.

I'm not at all implying you have to be stupid to be a RB. Anyone who read that into what I said needs to learn basic logic. What I am implying is the MINIMUM requirement is an 85 IQ. (And of course the physical tools to be a RB, but I shouldn't even have to mention that).
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Zero2Cool
14 years ago
I may have missed it, if I have I apologize, but do you have anything to support RB's have lower IQ's?
UserPostedImage
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Mucky Tundra (4h) : FG to make it academic
    Mucky Tundra (4h) : and there's the dagger
    Mucky Tundra (4h) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
    Mucky Tundra (4h) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
    Mucky Tundra (5h) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
    Mucky Tundra (5h) : Game not over yet
    beast (5h) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
    beast (5h) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
    beast (5h) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
    Mucky Tundra (6h) : Notre Lame getting rolled
    Martha Careful (7h) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : Oh snap!!!
    Zero2Cool (7h) : Even Stevie Wonder can see that.
    Zero2Cool (7h) : Nah, you see Lions OC leaving to be HC of Bears is directly related to Packers.
    Mucky Tundra (7h) : ohhhhhhh Zero is in TROUBLE
    packerfanoutwest (8h) : Zero, per your orders, check Bearshome, not packershome
    Zero2Cool (10h) : Then he'll land with another team and flourish.
    Zero2Cool (10h) : Ben going to Bears. He'll be out in 3 years.
    Mucky Tundra (10h) : what's so funny?
    Zero2Cool (11h) : BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    Zero2Cool (11h) : Bears are finalizing a deal to hire Ben Johnson as their head coach. (via @tompelissero )
    Mucky Tundra (11h) : Looks like Lions OC Ben Johnson is going to be the Bears coach
    Mucky Tundra (20-Jan) : TD but another failed 2 pt conversion!
    Mucky Tundra (20-Jan) : Ravens still alive, but barely
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : Or not...BUT THAT CATCH BY NACUA
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : WE MAY HAVE BEEN PREMATURE KANATA
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Time to make dinner
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Ouch!!!! Dagger for the Eagles
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : DAGGER
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : pass plays
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Seems some of their passes are too deep. Reminds me of MLF as well.
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : Oren Burks with a clutch pass break up...I will now light myself on fire
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : a run on 2nd down and 17 from McVay? So that's where MLF gets it from!
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : Do or die time for the Rams
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Kicking field goals are impressive
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : Oh that might be a backbreaker
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : That's what I thought too, just wasn't sure
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Kicking doesn't make much sense
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : If the Rams score a TD on the upcoming drive, they go for 2, right?
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Stafford is pretty good with 4th quarter comebacks. I would like to see it.
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : YUGE stand by the Rams D there
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : killer penalty!
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : Philly has to go for this right?
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : FUMBLE
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : pre-safety
    TheKanataThrilla (19-Jan) : Hurts being a gamer, that tackle on him looked painful on his knee
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jan) : Ooo a safety! Things are getting spicy
    Martha Careful (19-Jan) : quick analysis, Philly Oline, for the most part, is what our Oline should strive to be
    Zero2Cool (19-Jan) : I just saw score. Teams are really struggling with place kicks.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    Recent Topics
    2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    18-Jan / Random Babble / packerfanoutwest

    18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.