2011 Starks v Grant: week 1

nerdmann
Premier Member Topic Starter

13 years ago

Starks: 12 carries 57 yds, 4.8 (1 TD)
Grant: 9 carries 40 yds, 4.0

I thought Grant looked good, though. Seeing holes, not running into his blockers. Liked what I saw from both. Wouldn't mind seeing more screens.
They throw screens, just usually to the WRs.

“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.”

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

coltonja
Member

13 years ago

This one two punch worked really well. When Starks was hot McCarthy stayed with him and that made Grant really hungry for the rock. You could tell when he got in he had a little extra motivation. Not that he needed it with him having to prove himself all over again. Kuhn was great on short yardage as well. Great run blocking this week, and I loved Collinsworth giving love to our line (especially Wells). Excited about this side of our offense for sure

Thanks to pack93z for the sig!!!

wpr
Preferred Member

13 years ago

Title should be Starks AND Grant. They are on the same team they are not competing against one another.

all_about_da_packers
Senior Member

13 years ago

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

Pretty telling that McCarthy said "Starks looked good (couple second pause) running the ball". Missed a blitz pick-up that I'm sure coaches are going to get on him about.

Honestly, I like Starks more and more with each carry. Dude is just so tough. I was actually extremely impressed with on a carry in the second half that went maybe 3 yards, but he got the hand-off and got to the LOS and seemed to stop all of a sudden trying to make the defender miss and within a couple of seconds was running hard. That actually made me yell out "Whoa!" because I have not seen that too often, outside of Adrian Peterson.

Interesting to note that Starks got more carries, and McCarthy said after the game he probably did not give Starks the carries he deserved. I'm guessing going forward we see Grant still start, but Stark is going to be getting most of the touches.

The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

13 years ago

I don't think James Starks will have a carry for more than 40 yards. I do think James Starks is a better runner and gets more yards consistently than Ryan Grant.

James looks like he has a burst through the hole, where Ryan Grant seems to be kind of sluggish going into the hole.

nerdmann
Premier Member Topic Starter

13 years ago

I thought Starks did well in pass pro. He's not a Bjack who just specializes in that, and he's quite young yet too. In a way, he's still a rookie, because he hasn't been activated for a full 16 games yet. Plus he missed this offseason due to the lockout. He's doing fine, and he's just gonna get better at that stuff.
Nice to see those FB dive plays with Kuhn work. Now that we actually have threats at RB, they gotta cover other shit, they can't just assume Kuhn's gonna get it.

“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.”

Silentio
Registered

13 years ago

I thought Starks did well in pass pro.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I hope the coaches don't tell him they thought he did well in pass protection. I counted two sacks given up by Starks. He did fine, all things considered, but he must improve in the area. I have faith that he will do so as the season goes on. The dude looked like a stud in the running game and it is great to have a nice one two punch in the backfield. The Packers won't be telegraphing the run with one back or the other in the backfield, because both guys seem to be able to get yards, and most importantly to get yards and 1st downs in key situations.

edit...
The yards per carry is more interesting than the pure stats, IMO:

Starks = 4.7
Grant = 4.4

blank

evad04
Member

13 years ago

Starks looked great running the ball tonight. I'm really liking the rotation we have. It was particularly fantasmic to see us converting on 2nd/3rd and short situations. That said, Starks was bad in pass protection. That is clearly the biggest weakness to his game and he needs to improve.

P.S. in what universe is 40/9 = 4?

William Henderson didn't have to run people over. His preferred method was levitation.
"I'm a reasonable man, get off my case."

Silentio
Registered

13 years ago

P.S. in what universe is 40/9 = 4?

Originally Posted by: evad04

In a universe where you fib to make your favorite back look better than the guy you shit all over during the preseason.

blank

gbguy20
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#10

I hope the coaches don't tell him they thought he did well in pass protection. I counted two sacks given up by Starks. He did fine, all things considered, but he must improve in the area. I have faith that he will do so as the season goes on. The dude looked like a stud in the running game and it is great to have a nice one two punch in the backfield. The Packers won't be telegraphing the run with one back or the other in the backfield, because both guys seem to be able to get yards, and most importantly to get yards and 1st downs in key situations.

edit...
The yards per carry is more interesting than the pure stats, IMO:

Starks = 4.7
Grant = 4.4

Originally Posted by: Silentio

Sample size is far too small for that to be relevant yet.

BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (now) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (now) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (now) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (4m) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (5m) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (5m) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (6m) : 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 (7m) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (10m) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (13m) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (15m) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (16m) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (25m) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (31m) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (33m) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (33m) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (36m) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (45m) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (50m) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (54m) : Packers will get in

beast (54m) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (1h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (1h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (2h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (3h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (3h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (4h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (4h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (13h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (13h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (14h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (17h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs

packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.

beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating

Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!

wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.

beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!

beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS