And to answer the questions of what RB's were out there, who did we draft? Starks, he's doing alot. Nance off waivers, guy still doesn't know the offense.
FA were Washington, Williams, Brown, Thomas, Norwood and Snelling to name a few.
After the first week rumors of Barber, Jones, Lynch and Jackson
FA rookies not drafted this year Blount, Ivory
Any questions? So we didn't have options or just chose not to pursue any?
"packer98" wrote:
You fail to point out how any of those RBs give us a better option than Jackson.
Still, you make a very, very valid point Packer98. I've been on Ted's case for a while for short-changing the RB position by basically having no RB with speed to get to the outside consistently besides Grant. He had one in Lumpkin, only to go and cut him with back-up John Kuhn in mind. That's downright moronic.
But you need to be careful about what you're implying. We don't need a true RB, we simply need one who has more speed than Jackson, one who can quickly get to the outside and exploit mismatches / single LBs.
Jackson cannot, consistently. That much should be obvious. Yet, neither can someone like Blount, who is more of a tough between the tackles runner.
Frankly, going forward this is what we have. Our long-shot hope is that Starks get accustomed to the NFL in the next month, is ready to take game snaps, and if he gets any snaps then shows some real speed.
We can get by without such a RB. I'm not saying we need an elite RB to win, because it is obvious we do not. But considering the coverages and teams are mostly throwing at us and the loss of J-Mike, a RB like Grant would go a long ways in making life much easier for our offense to operate.
It is astonishing when you go back and look at the film how much teams are basically daring McCarthy to run the football. We've even had holes Ryan Pickett could fit through opened up. Yet, simply, we lack the personnel at RB to take advantage of the opportunities teams are giving us.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.