What could have been with Jackson· Page 3

Stevetarded
Registered

13 years ago

As a 3rd down blocker/receiver, I'd rate him above Grant and Starks at this time. But as the primary (1st/2nd down) running back, I'd have to rank him (carrying the ball) below Grant and probably Starks, though I want to see Starks do it in more than one game.

Jackson's run 136 times for 527 yds. He got 13% of those yards (71) on one play against Washington. With that one run he's averaging less than 4 yds per carry, and if you subtract that one run out he's averaging less than 3.4 yds per carry.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:

Take out Grand or AP big runs and see where they lie.

"macbob" wrote:

Only take away 1 of them and they still look pretty good because they make more of an impact than 1 freakin play.

blank

blueleopard
Member

13 years ago

#22

He's our Kevin Faulk. That's what he is. He will never be anything more on any team.

Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings

MassPackersFan
Member

13 years ago

#23

Kevin Faulk has been great for the Patriots. If Jackson proves to be as useful as Faulk was, he'll more than earn his keep on the team.

I love Jackson in pass pro. I love him on screens. I love him when he sees and hits the hole. He just dances laterally far too much, especially considering how strong he is. There was a run he had two weeks ago (I think) where he bounced to the outside on 2 or 3 straight tacklers, and ended up with 3 yards when he could have had 6 or 7 if he just ran FORWARD hard one of those times.

beast
Select Member

13 years ago

#24

This was never about, who is better. Just about what could have been had McCarthy used Jackson correclty, and how that could have camouflaged the loss of Grant and better helped opening up the passing game.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:

It can be argued that Jackson wasn't good enough RB to be used correctly...

And if he did used Jackson correctly it could of looked like the Falcons game where Jackson was used like a normal back and sucked at it until late in the fourth quarter were the Falcons would to a prevent defense which helped Jackson...

musccy
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#25

We could hand the ball to him 30 times/game and could manufacture a 1,000 yard rusher but whoop de doo! Are we trying to appease the axiom that you need to have 50/50 balance, or do we actually want to give the ball to playmakers?

He's not being used properly because he's not a viable threat, or at least not nearly as much as what the passing attack provides. Don't you think the Packers would have run more on 3rd and 2s this year if they had any faith in Kuhn/Bjack?

Greg C.
Registered

13 years ago

#26

"Stevetarded" wrote:

Take out Grand or AP big runs and see where they lie.

"macbob" wrote:

Yeah, I agree--take out anybody's successful plays, and the rest of their plays don't look nearly as good. But it was one run. The entire rest of the season hasn't looked so good.

I'm not bashing Jackson. Just giving my opinion. As a runner, I haven't been impressed with him and would rate him 3rd and would go with Grant or Starks first. As a receiver, I'd want Jackson.

"PackFanWithTwins" wrote:

Exactly, I hate that argument when it relates to a small sample size (like only 1 game) but compared to an entire seasons worth of plays IMO it's valid. When 13% of a starting running backs yards for the ENTIRE SEASON come off of 1 run that is very bad.

"macbob" wrote:

What's so bad about 13%? That statistic means nothing. Where do people come up with this stuff?

Why is it so hard for people to understand that long runs are a GOOD thing? Long runs are what really force defenses to honor the running game. One of Jackson's biggest shortcomings is that he doesn't break ENOUGH long runs, yet people continually use his longest run (his BEST run) in order to discredit him. I don't get it.

blank

Dulak
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#27

Starks is better than Jackson. We all know that. .

"nerdmann" wrote:

we know this by 1 nfl game?

musccy
Veteran Member

13 years ago

#28

You shouldn't cherry pick the stats that you want to remove from a players' resume to fabricate an argument. But at the same time, we all know that Bjack provides very little threat to pop appreciable gains with any regularity (relative to NFL RB standards) and the 13% stat is an illustration of that.

Greg C.
Registered

13 years ago

#29

"musccy" wrote:

It is, huh? Then how do you explain the following: If Brandon Jackson had tripped and fallen at the line of scrimmage instead of gaining 71 yards on that play, his percentage of yards on his longest run of the season would be considerably LESS than 13%. So you're saying that would make him a better runner?

Stats are great when they actually mean something, but when people start pulling stuff out of their asses (in this case, percentage of total yards gained on the longest carry of the season), stats do nothing but muddy the waters.

blank

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#30

There was a time when 100% of Jackson's yardage this year came on a single run.

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

Martha Careful (10h) : any interest in Marshon Lattimore?

Zero2Cool (12h) : What does NFL do if they're over cap?

Mucky Tundra (12h) : They've been able to constantly push it out through extensions, void years etc but they're in the hole by 72 million next year I believe

hardrocker950 (13h) : Seems the Saints are always in cap hell

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Saints HC job is not an envious one; gonna be in cap hell for 3 years

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Dennis Allen has now been fired twice mid-season with Derek Carr as his starting QB

Zero2Cool (14h) : Kuhn let go

beast (16h) : I wonder if the Packers would have any interest in Z. Smith, probably not

Zero2Cool (17h) : Shefter says Browns and Lions will figure out how to get a deal done for Za'Darius Smith..

Zero2Cool (20h) : Packers are more likely to have 1,000 yard rusher than 4,000 yard passer

Zero2Cool (3-Nov) : It's raining hard.

Zero2Cool (3-Nov) : Packers inactives vs. Lions: CB Jaire Alexander S Evan Williams C Josh Myers Non-injury inactives: WR Malik Heath OL Travis Glover DE Bren

packerfanoutwest (3-Nov) : Malik Willis: My focus is helping the Packers win, not proving I can start elsewhere. But he could

Zero2Cool (1-Nov) : I had Texans, but the loss of another WR flipped me

wpr (1-Nov) : I thought about taking the Jets but they've been a disaster. Losing to the Pats last week

Zero2Cool (1-Nov) : Surprised more didn't pick Jets in Pick'em.

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

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS