shield4life
13 years ago
Anyone else think they will play Grant & trade him off before the trade deadline. They will see how Starks is playing and if Green steps up, it could clear some cap for the following year too.

I am not saying I would want this to happen but who knows, what are the possibilities that this could happen?
Glad To Be A Packers Fan.
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

Zero - Good point.

I hope you're right. I hope the sample size is too small and in 2011, we see the after burner speed in Starks that Grant has already proven he has.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



I hope so too. I watched the Super Bowl again recently and I don't know if James Starks can out run someone because he runs bowlegged. Knee's more outside the ankles than in line with them. Not sure if that makes sense. Maybe I over analyzed it??

Anyone else think they will play Grant & trade him off before the trade deadline. They will see how Starks is playing and if Green steps up, it could clear some cap for the following year too.

I am not saying I would want this to happen but who knows, what are the possibilities that this could happen?

Originally Posted by: shield4life 


I don't think Ryan Grant gets traded at all this season. Packers have invested too much money that they can not get back. Might as well work his tail off and get your money's worth. Unless of course James Starks proves to be the second coming of Jim Brown or something. Which... I highly doubt.
UserPostedImage
zombieslayer
13 years ago
Zero - Yeah, I know what you mean. That's why I'm not keeping my hopes up that he'll have after burner speed.

However, people read that and they think I don't like Starks. I'm a big fan for a completely different reason. Grant & Starks are apples and oranges. Grant goes down easily. But he's good for a 20 yard run once a game and every once in awhile will bust a really long one.

Starks on the other hand never gets stopped at the line. He's like John Riggins. He punishes the guy tackling him.

Both styles I want to see on our Packers.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
Zero2Cool
13 years ago

Zero - Yeah, I know what you mean. That's why I'm not keeping my hopes up that he'll have after burner speed.

However, people read that and they think I don't like Starks. I'm a big fan for a completely different reason. Grant & Starks are apples and oranges. Grant goes down easily. But he's good for a 20 yard run once a game and every once in awhile will bust a really long one.

Starks on the other hand never gets stopped at the line. He's like John Riggins. He punishes the guy tackling him.

Both styles I want to see on our Packers.

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer 



Ryan Grant is good for a 20+ run once every other game, based on his statistical history. :P


I like Ryan Grant, to a point. I think he runs with his head down too much, thus runs into his own guys. I'm not a fan of that.

I think the Packers are in good hands with both James Starks and Ryan Grant.
UserPostedImage
vikesrule
13 years ago

...my research said that elite RBs actually HURT the team as they take too many carries away from the passing game.

zombieslayer wrote:


At least you don;t have to worry about that theory of yours...with either Grant or Starks.


I am somewhat amused by you guys arguing Grant Vs Starks.
....reminds me of the old "who's the skinniest kid at fat camp debate"🤣
Rockmolder
13 years ago
Yeah, I reckon that I'll do it this time...

That may be true, but how many rings did AD get you? NONE. HAHAHHA. WE WON THE SUPER BOWL. THAT MAKES EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR POINTS IRRELEVANT.

etc.

Zero2Cool
13 years ago

At least you don;t have to worry about that theory of yours...with either Grant or Starks.


I am somewhat amused by you guys arguing Grant Vs Starks.
....reminds me of the old "who's the skinniest kid at fat camp debate"🤣

Originally Posted by: vikesrule 



Skinniest fat kid... well I believe the theory goes, fat or skinny, they both have a World Championship ring.




// I don't care if someone else said it, ... just like vikesrule can't pass up bringing up T.J. Rubley, I won't pass this up. 🙂
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
13 years ago
I like Grant, but he's kind of a long strider. Doesn't get outside like Starks does. In the 8 carries for 45 yards he had last season, he looked much improved, as far as vision and not running up the backs of his own guys.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
nerdmann
13 years ago
Given Stark's collegiate accomplishments, I don't wonder if he can be better than Grant. I wonder if he can be better than Apete.



http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/126847423.html 

Bigger Starks has new focus at camp

All it takes is one look. James Starks came to Green Bay a new player this season.

For one, he's finally healthy. Injuries have dogged the running back since his junior year at the University at Buffalo. And two, he's bigger. Following a strict diet, Starks added eight pounds this offseason. He's up to 225.

Considering Starks is already taller than his peers at 6-foot-2, adding bulk was a good idea. Now, he hopes it helps him in the battle for carries with Ryan Grant.

"I'm just going to go out there and play," Starks said. "I'm sure coaches will put me in a great situation to perform. If I do what I'm supposed, everything will work out for itself."

Once he was finally healthy and in the lineup, the rookie had a postseason-high 315 yards a year ago. Green Bay's lackluster rushing game received an antibiotic when it mattered most. Heading into year two, Starks didn't want to weather another nagging hamstring injury.

So this offseason, he visited a nutritionist. After the consultation, he got onto a gluten-free diet. No more regular protein shakes for this guy. In the past, the Niagara Falls, N.Y., native thought that carbohydrates were paramount.

Not anymore.

"My body didn't react to it the right way," Starks said. "That played a big part in the healing process taking so long. As soon as I got on the diet, I started picking up weight and feeling a lot stronger."

New and improved, Starks has had a strong camp so far. He has been decisive, all while playing with a lower center of gravity. To avoid injury, he knows that's key. And whereas last year was about learning plays and getting acclimated, Starks says he's taking more a take-charge approach this summer.

Case in point, Thursday night. During red zone work, Starks violently barreled over safety Anthony Bratton.

Grant remains the No. 1 back right now. Back from his season-ending ankle injury, he's been working with the first team and playing well himself. But as all players at this position know, things can change on a dime during the course of the season.

Mike McCarthy prefers the hot hand. Sorry fantasy football junkies.

"We have a lot of backs," Starks said. "So if somebody's not doing what they're supposed to, I'm sure (McCarthy) will be able to count on any one of us. All of us are like brothers. We stick up for each other. If one's slacking, we try to pick that person up."

JSO wrote:



http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/126946228.html 

Aug. 5 camp notes: Starks shows explosion

--- After talking about his new diet earlier in the day, James Starks went on to have one of his best practices. The second-year back had a pair of runs in 11-on-11 action Friday that opened eyes. On one run to the right side, he patiently let defenders wash down and then cut upfield for 15-20 yards. And on an inside run, he showed a second gear. Starks took one quick cut and was in the second level for what could have been a long touchdown.

Coach Mike McCarthy definitely took note.

"He's as explosive as he was in the playoffs," McCarthy said. "You saw James Starks at 100 percent in the playoffs. He is a little bigger...I think he looks more powerful than he did last year. He puts his foot down and gets to that second level. He's had a very good camp. He came in great shape."

Practices only do so much for running backs. The true first test for Starks, Ryan Grant and all the backs will be Aug. 13 in Cleveland.

JSO wrote:


“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Zero2Cool
13 years ago
I like reading that he's got a second gear. Hopefully we'll get to see him rip off a dozen 70+ yard runs this season.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (19m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (28m) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (40m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (4h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (5h) : Packers will get in
beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses
Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch
buckeyepackfan (22h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?
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
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

3h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.