I'm not sure there's a whole lot of difference between Starks, Harris and Neal as far as the RB position is concerned and some here like Crockett, too.

Starks is a major injury risk and I think we may as well save some pennies by going with one of the young guys. Neal was a college WR at one point so he'd be great in the pass game. All these guys seem the same. None of them have big time speed which is what I thought we needed as a complement to Eddie. We have the same RB in 4 different backs.

We have talked a lot about 2 RB's. I'm not so sure I'm not okay with just 1 with Kuhn as the FB. Kuhn can carry it if need be for a game until we pull someone off the PS. I'm pretty sure we could find the next Dmitri Red Army Nance out there somewhere. James is up there in years and isn't going to get less injury prone. If we put him on the street I'm not sure he's finding another team unless they have injury issues themselves.
Ted Thompson gambles sometimes...I wouldn't be surprised to see him gamble by letting Starks go ...I would be a little surprised if he went with 1 RB but not as surprised as the masses who surely think that's stupid. Cobb can help at RB...88 cent can help, plus, if they really don't want to lose Ripkowski they could keep them both even though FB's are pretty obsolete these days.

---

😂 You're funny!

Why we're at it, lets go with just 2 CBs, we don't need no stickin back-ups, Montgomery can fill in there as well. And 1 QB after all Cobb should be the QB if Rodgers goes down.

As for my opinion on Starks, he's safe unless he does something extremely stupid and/or two of the other guys pass him on the depth chart, and again in my opinion none of the back-ups this preseason (including Starks) have shown the ability to play at the level that Starks has in the past in real game action, which I think would be the tie breaker even if they were all tied up. And I think Starks has shown better pass protection, a few of the young RBs looked down right HORRIBLE in pass protection.

---

I feel strange even needing to type this statement, but I'll go out on a limb and predict the Packers will keep at least 3 RBs, with 1 or 2 FBs. Unless, of course, they decide to go with 3 punters. Then 1RB is a real possibility.

---

yes he is a true relief guy for lacey, he can catch out of the backfield and block ok, he is safe due to lack of depth outside him !!

---

What I saw in the game was some very nice QUICKNESS from Starks - way more than any other RB on the field. I was down on Starks before, and he still is kinda injury prone, but I like what I saw. The three young RBs looked pretty good too - adequate for a team with a QB like Aaron Rodgers. Starks was a cut above that. I think now we keep three RBs - I was one of those saying previously maybe it would only be two. The third spot is still up for grabs, but I think Harris has the early lead.

---

This is so close. I can see it going either way. My gut tells me he sticks around, because he has the trust of the staff, and it is natural to go with what you know...

---

Yes but is he safer than Janis?

---

In looking at James 1.8 mil cap hit... he has 362k cap charge if we cut him if he hasn't already achieved his roster bonus of 225k, but I believe he has to make the roster, but I'm unclear on that.

So cutting him clears about 1.45 million....

A guy like Alonzo Harris is 400k against our cap. We'd net a mil if we got rid of James and went with Harris. In fact, his total 3 year deal is what James charge for this year is.

I remain convinced if the gap isn't clear that James is really on the bubble here.

---

Well sure, if the gap isn't that clear. But it is. Starks is a good #2 RB and a proven vet. There's not nearly enough evidence that any of the other RBs are at his level. They will have to prove a lot to even be considered. I don't see it happening unless Starks has really regressed.

I don't see Starks as similar to Lacy at all. Completely different type of runner, and much faster.

---