This is just another fail on the part of TT. Why didn't they just throw a few bucks at Spiller? Or better yet, draft another back. Starks is over 30, and Eddie Lacy has his weight, asthma, and injury issues. And to make matters worse, no third running back. I just don't understand the thinking at 1265 Lombardi Avenue sometimes, but I guess I don't need to.

Defense will probably need to carry this one.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

If Spiller is so great why did NO release him without saving a penny? Spiller would not have cost a single penny more to finish the season in NO.

If you’re Spiller do you go to GB who have Lacy and Starks or Seattle that has Christian and Rawls, and Rawls cant stay healthy? How much more $$ would Ted have to pay to entice Spiller to come to GB? Can Spiller even block? No thanks I’ll take Monty.

On draft: there were 2 stud RBs late in 4th and Ted had 2 picks there. I wonder if Ted grabbed Martinez hoping one of the RBs would be left; but Denver and Balt got them, so Ted took Lowry. RBs are a dime a dozen, 4th round picks like Martinex and Lowry are not.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

Yes I have. I am not saying they are not strong. I am saying thy do not have the mentality of a RB. One hit no matter how weak and they go down. I have not been impressed with Montgomery's runs have you? 2 carries 0 yards long of 1 yard. Yeah he is big and strong but he hasn't shown he is able to use it against defensive linemen.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

On a WRs not being strong enough to run inside, ya know, not many RBs [See Starks] are also not very good at running inside.

You’re comparing Monty to Lacy; you need to compare him to Starks or Don Jackson or Crockett for that matter.

Everyone says GB kept 7 WRs’, maybe they didn’t. Maybe Monty is or #3 back and had a few plays where he split wide as a RB like Lacy does. I wonder how may reps Monty has been getting at RB this year.

At combine Monty was 5117 221; Starks-6021, 218. 2.4 inches shorter, and 3 pounds heavier. Monty clearly has the body to run inside compared to Starks.

As a senior in HS Monty had 823 yrds in 93 attempts. At Stanford he had 39 carries for 334, but some of those were end-arounds. Unlike many WRs, Monty has had some pre NFL reps at RB.

In 2016, Starks is 24 for 42 and half [12] of Starks carries went for 1 yrd or less.
In 2015 Starks was 148 for 601 and almost half [69] went for 2 yards or less [16 negative runs; 18 runs of zero; 11 runs of 1; 24 runs of 2].

Monty running plays went for 9, 4, 1, 1, -1.

Starks is not a 4 yard, 4 yard, 4 yard guy, he’s a 0, 1, 11 guy. Starks gets most of his big runs untouched and on cut back runs, there’s no reason why Monty cant produce similarly. And if he can learn Starks timing on cut backs, something he’ll get with reps, he’ll be twice the back Starks is.

Also, I think Monty will be a great backfield blocker and obviously 1000x better than Starks coming out of the backfield.

Surely this week Monty has been getting 95% of the first team reps at RB unless they were getting Jackson ready all week and audibled by activating Goodson when Rollins got hurt. These effing GB reporters are so damn busy foisting their worthless opinions into their questions and articles, they fail to ask questions that elicit factual information so they can report on the damn facts, like who the hell is getting reps at RB this week. They all suck.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

The Packers should use Ty Montgomery on 3rd downs so they don't mess up with their WR rotation. Montgomery has the size and ability to run people over (see last season before injury) and would be a good 3rd down back.

I don't like seeing Randall Cobb back at RB because I think it weakens the WR depth.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

Using Ty Montgomery or Randall cobb at half back is absolutely ludicrous. Cobb is a slot receiver and Ty should be used as an undersized tight end like Denver did with Shannon Sharpe.

And fucking Ted should be raiding practice squads for running backs.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

You specifically said he's "not strong enough" but he is plenty strong and built like any other "strong enough" RB but you know absolutely 0 about his "mentality" the fact that he typically plays wr says nothing about his mentality or if he can be successful carrying the football, that's an individual personal trait. The sample size of 5 carries says nothing too. We've seen him carry the football and take on tackles with power as a WR and returner though. Maybe he will work out maybe he won't but at this point we have no clue.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 

On a WRs not being strong enough to run inside, ya know, not many RBs [See Starks] are also not very good at running inside.

You’re comparing Monty to Lacy; you need to compare him to Starks or Don Jackson or Crockett for that matter.

Everyone says GB kept 7 WRs’, maybe they didn’t. Maybe Monty is or #3 back and had a few plays where he split wide as a RB like Lacy does. I wonder how may reps Monty has been getting at RB this year.

At combine Monty was 5117 221; Starks-6021, 218. 2.4 inches shorter, and 3 pounds heavier. Monty clearly has the body to run inside compared to Starks.

As a senior in HS Monty had 823 yrds in 93 attempts. At Stanford he had 39 carries for 334, but some of those were end-arounds. Unlike many WRs, Monty has had some pre NFL reps at RB.

In 2016, Starks is 24 for 42 and half [12] of Starks carries went for 1 yrd or less.
In 2015 Starks was 148 for 601 and almost half [69] went for 2 yards or less [16 negative runs; 18 runs of zero; 11 runs of 1; 24 runs of 2].

Monty running plays went for 9, 4, 1, 1, -1.

Starks is not a 4 yard, 4 yard, 4 yard guy, he’s a 0, 1, 11 guy. Starks gets most of his big runs untouched and on cut back runs, there’s no reason why Monty cant produce similarly. And if he can learn Starks timing on cut backs, something he’ll get with reps, he’ll be twice the back Starks is.

Also, I think Monty will be a great backfield blocker and obviously 1000x better than Starks coming out of the backfield.

Surely this week Monty has been getting 95% of the first team reps at RB unless they were getting Jackson ready all week and audibled by activating Goodson when Rollins got hurt. These effing GB reporters are so damn busy foisting their worthless opinions into their questions and articles, they fail to ask questions that elicit factual information so they can report on the damn facts, like who the hell is getting reps at RB this week. They all suck.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn