I agree that he does well in space. The problem is that we don't have the space often enough. His running style is not a good match for our offensive line and their set of "issues".
Starks did well against a smallish D, as did Jackson on that play. We are headed to Atlanta now, and that is an entirely different kind of front to face.
Some might say better, some might say worse, as regards a running game, but against US, I would say DECIDEDLY "better".
We had some success the first time we played Philly as well--mix-wise.
I think we ALL have advocated more screens throughout the year, and if Jackson gets them, that's fine, imo
Right now, though... I'd advocate giving them to Starks to see what he can do with them...
Why?
We did NOTHING from the backfield the first go around against Atlanta until the 4th quarter, on a 3rd and 1 with 11:23 left on our 38 to be specific...
It's been argued (elsewhere) that it is because Jackson was getting nailed in the backfield---
(Please don't try and say our line has improved since then, at least until we see it has improved against ATLANTA.)
My response is this. What has changed to prevent that this week from our offensive line? I would submit that we have to TRY something different, and that would be Starks, and in a perfect world (for me)-- it just MIGHT mean trying some screens to start out instead of run plays...
Why do we go to the left?
...And now we are completely hosed, because it WORKED this past week, lol
Nice smart running by Brandon on that play, but his body of work has been poor for most of this year, and it has been expensive to our passing game, as well as our running game. To say otherwise is mostly defensive fandom and homerism, imo
I see nothing special out of him that cannot be relatively easily replaced in the future. People hate that I call him a bust, I do that because I (PERSONALLY) expect more from a 2nd round pick than what I see. I would call him at minimum a disappointment.
He can't run consistently behind THIS line against many teams. We have looked at it everywhichaway--I don't like so many aspects of this line, so "blame" isn't on him, per se--
One of the "axioms" is that you need either a premier line or a premier back to run effectively, and we have neither when Jackson is out there...that is my strong opinion---Then the question becomes "How good does our RB have to be to overcome the o-line deficiencies? (again, imo)
I say he has to be damn good at what we need him to do---
Hit that GD ZBS seam. Grant could do it often enough (barely) We will see with Starks...
It would be nice to have a back that can catch, block, and move the chains...one back...not sending in a 3rd down back in for increased predictability, imo not with this line...
Jackson cannot--Not often enough. If we EVER (imo--again) fix this o-line, scheme, coaching, whatever you want to call it- that might change. The pieces might already be on this team, but I'm pretty friggin' sure it doesn't mean Cliffy at LT with Colledge at LG for a balanced attack.
Everybody wants to keep Jackson, that's fine-- I could care less if he walks this year. He had his chance to really step up for the Pack and failed, and THAT is taking in his "entire body of work".
imo