All you numbnuts' got accomplished was four posts of regurgitation while I was busting ass in the honey house? Pussies.

---

Please, enlighten me Dakota -- you bastion of original content you.

(This thread is a bizarre turn of fates for me -- rarely am I arguing with the cynic from a supposed position of nostalgia. I suppose I have nerd to thank for fueling my rage)

---

Original content from DakotaT? Sure, if you call throwing a random word prior to what he lacks (nuts) being original, sure ...

---

Well at least this thread isn't a total loss!
If Cliffy should start because he's the "best option" at the position, then why shouldn't Starks start over Grant? Because he's "injury prone?" Because Grant has more experience?
Fact is if they'd have kept Sherrod at LT, he'd probably have beaten Cliffy out already, but they wanna try these guys on the inside, even though they're not built for the position. Just like Newhouse last year.

---

I just watched a transcendent hour long episode of “Louie” on FX. Then I get on here and read a bunch of bullshit from dummies arguing that the Packers should jettison a veteran, pro bowl caliber  RB who has consistently kept the passing game on schedule, for a streaky, undisciplined runner who had moments of greatness at the end of last season. Oh no, wait, that would be James Starks. You herp derps are saying the Packers should ditch Grant for totally unproved Nance. Hah hah, funny joke guys. He looked fucking awesome against 2nd and 3rd stringers in a pre-season game though, didn’t he guys. Didn’t he?? Guys???

Hello?

See now I’m not in a good mood any more. The Packers need a runner who can get 3 yards per carry. That’s it. I think they proved that last year with guys who, well, could barely get 3 yards per carry (Nance’s average last year was 2.6, for the record). In 2009 Grant had 4.4 yards per carry  and I’d be willing to bet he could do it again this year. In 8 carries last season grant looked powerful. He ran for 5.6 yards per carry and busted off an 18 yarder before getting hurt. I don’t understand how you can argue that the man who did that has magically disappeared in the last year. I don’t buy it.

Finally, Grant isn’t an old man. He will be in his 6th season this year after a year off to rest his body and get back in shape. The Packers would be foolish to let him go. After Grant went down last year and the Packers were desperate for RBs, Nance couldn’t get on the field and James Starks was either hurt or looked so bad in practice for 3/4ths of the season that Super Bowl Champion head coach Mike McCarthy didn’t have enough confidence in him to put him out there. I’ll take pro-bowl caliber Ryan Grant to start the season, thanks.

Tom Silverstein should either be ashamed of writing this link bait article or pull his head out of his ass.

edit: I mean guys, look at this guy’s stats , we should clearly cut Grant and blindly rely on Starks  and Nance. Pre-season rules all!

---

Sherrod would've beaten out Clifton? Where do you come up with this stuff? Oh, wait a minute, I know: You just make it up. Sherrod is not ready to start in the NFL now, at least not for a team with high standards like the Packers. That's not a surprise.

And I don't agree about the so-called harmful effects of playing O-linemen at different positions. This is Darren Colledge's legacy. Because he sucked at both guard and tackle, and used switching back and forth as an excuse, a lot of people seem to think that players are damaged by this. The reality is that Colledge sucked at both positions because he's not a very good player, though I do give him credit for playing pretty well last year.

For most games, seven (or at most, eight) offensive linemen suit up. This means there are two or three backups who must be ready to step in at five positions. Therefore, backups generally need to be able to play more than one position. In the long run, Sherrod should benefit from playing guard, and if he never turns into a good tackle, it won't be because he played guard. It will be because he's no good.

---

Actually Silento, the brightest of us dummies could give a shit about Dimitri Nance. We are high on Alex Green. Ryan Grant held us out for hostage and got himself paid several years ago and last year he got a long vacation. In case you didn't notice there's another kid that is just as productive and runs with more burst and vision than Grant.

I laughed when Grant and his agent took that reduction in pay. They are very worried as well as they should be. How long has it been now since TNS started the playoff game with two fumbles and then exploded against the Seahags? It's all ancient history, and like Saint Ron Wolf always said: you're only here until we find somebody to replace you. The Packers have found those two guys in Starks and Green. Enjoy your last season of Grant missing the right hole - hope you didn't buy an authentic jersey for $180.

---

Ever thought about the contract changes being accepted from Grant's side were not as much because of a fear of being cut, but because of a mutual agreement that this'd be better for both sides?

I mean, with Starks exploding in the play-offs the way he did last year, he's going to take some hand-offs from Grant. Hitting those incentives might become quite a bit harder that way. Going to a 2.5 mil guaranteed contract might actually be better for him. And for the organization, as well, clearing up 1 mil in cap space. It's a win-win, that way.

Now, I'm not sure if that's what really happened. Of course he should be a little anxious, but let's be honest, if he's not the best HB on the roster, he's the 2nd best. Starks has had his share of injuries and his play has been up and down. Alex Green hasn't done a thing, but seems to be the beneficiary of some green and gold goggles.

Not quite sure what Nance did to deserve that roster spot, either. Is it the 2.7 avg last year, the 7-runs sample in the pre-season this year or his non-standout practice results?

Why the generalization? Who's saying the Packers should cut Ryan Grant in favor of keeping Dimitri Nance? I know this is a long thread, but I don't recall that.

Myself, I've said it from the beginning. Packers paid Ryan Grant the bonus money. He's in a contract year, run his wheels off and use James Starks as a breather back. That amount of time should give an indication if James Starks can be 'the guy' in 2012.

Could you explain how James Starks is an undisciplined runner? Or you just spouting things and calling folks names without anything to back up your conjectures?

---

James Starks is the better running back but having Grant on this is like having 2 starting RB's. We shouldn't cut him specially for Nance...

---