Who's better?

---

Kuhn and maybe Green. I've read Green pass blocking is pretty good but he's still pretty raw at other things and they want to get him caught up before using him too much.

---

Starks added some size this offseason!

dude is a tank!

---

They are different runners. Grant still looks rusty.

McCarthy may be keeping both of them fresh by alternating them. One will be dominating come playoff time.

I think Grant does not return next year. The Packers need the cap room and with a season and a full offseason Starks and Green improve considerably.

---

Welcome to the Dojo of Coolness, Calicheez. 👍

You'll have to forgive some of brothers who's hearts are bigger than their brains. Ryan Grant is still a 1200 yard rusher dontchaknow.

---

Starks really needs to improve on everything beyond running. Other than that, I was surprised to see him in so much. I thought Grant was ok when an obvious opening is there, as usual...but Starks really has the ability to find a way to keep going if that opening is not there. Which is why I can guess the coaches kept Stark in the game a bit longer.

---

Find anyone on here that thinks Grant will get 1,200 yards this season and I'll bake you a cookie and send it to you. We have known for some time that Grant and Starks would be splitting time. People naturally came to Grant's defense when the topic of cutting him was introduced.

I will admit I am concerned about Grant's production through the lens that he is typically a guy who gets better as the carries increase. We have seen it many times before. Now, as far as last night he ran the ball well -- I don't know how anyone can dispute that. He converted in obvious running situations, and he showed a nice burst.

All these "who is better" questions are completely arbitrary in my opinion. Is Jordy better than Driver? Well, it doesn't really freaking matter if a) both are on the field at the same time b) both still make plays.

It's a similar situation with Grant/Starks. Number one, there is depth there. If one guy goes down, we'll be in good shape either way. Neither guy needs to rush for 1,200 yards to prove their value to the team, you facile buffoon (don't take this to heart -- I mean it in jest). The other obvious advantage of having both is being able to stay fresh at the position.

Cobb scored a TD last night, and he's #5 on the depth chart. That's a luxury. That's depth and talent on your roster. Grant and Starks helps us (not a claim you deny, I know). Can we just move on and be happy with these guys?

---

I still don't see how we can say Starks is a better receiver than Grant, Starks has only caught TWO balls as a pro. So sample size would say that after the catch that Grant made on that screen last night I still say Grant is a better receiving back than Starks.

---

I prefer chocolate chip please.

---

Damn! Foiled! My fingers were crossed when I posted it, so the contract is nullified.

I appreciate Zombie's optimism in Grant, but I disagree with his notion that Grant will reach 1,200 yards. In the years Grant was getting 1,200 yards there wasn't an alternative that really made sense to split carries -- DeShawn Wynn and Brandon Jackson to name a few. With Starks' talent it absolutely makes sense to split carries.

The main point I was trying to address is that each player's value is not diminished by failing to achieve 1,200 yards. If we have a more balanced offense, get more YPC, and can rotate guys in/have depth, we are a better team for it. The "Grant vs. Starks" is a distraction from what should be a conversation about the benefits of "Grant and Starks."

---