The Green Bay Packers can’t let James Starks walk

Announcement PH Beta → Check it out! Click Me! (you might be see "unsafe", but it is safe)

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

Remember last April on the second day of the NFL Draft when Eddie Lacy became the newest member of the Green Bay Packers and there were reports stirring about the mainstream media that James Starks was on the trading block? Well, so much has changed since that day — and for the better of

LombardiAve wrote:

I am more confident in Starks than I am in Harris. If Mike likes Harris that much they don't need to keep Starks and his higher price.

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

I am more confident in Starks than I am in Harris. If Mike likes Harris that much they don't need to keep Starks and his higher price.

Originally Posted by: wpr

Aside from possible injury concerns (and Harris should have just as many of those) I fail to see how Starks did not impress everyone this season. If its a money thing and Ted Thompson feels the need to let Starks go I can understand that but if its a talent or potential issues we must have a HOFer in Harris.

On the other hand if it comes down to Jones or Starks I'd rather keep Jones. Hopefully we can keep them both.

texaspackerbacker
Veteran Member

10 years ago

Originally Posted by: sschind

I think we can and should keep both Starks and Harris. Starks should be a lot cheaper than James Jones, and IMO, contributes more to the team than Jones. Starks' injury history should keep his price down, and if he is used the way he was used this past season, hopefully he can stay healthy.

It shouldn't be a money thing, as you can always structure a cap-friendly contract, plus, with several other free agents we will pass on, there easily should be enough.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.

luigis
Member

10 years ago

It's crystal clear that the staff has some problem with Starks.

I think they will like the Lacy-Harris combo and Starks will be again in the trading block.

What is a fair trade value for Starks? I think they will let him go for a 3rd round but I honestly think he is worth a 2nd round pick.

Unless they can trade Starks there will be no room for Franklin in this team.

Luis

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

10 years ago

Originally Posted by: luigis

Starks is an Unrestricted Free Agent, The Packers can sign him or let him go, there is no trading.

Sign and trades do not happen in The NFL.

Tough decision to make, but hopefully Ted decides to keep them all.

There is alway a way.

Lacy, Starks Franklin, Harris, and of course John Kuhn.

Lacy, Franklin and Harris are all signed, Kuhn wants to stay, he won't cost much to keep.

Offer Starks a fair contract, see if any other team offers him starting money.

If that happens, reality says Starks will be gone, but with his injury history, I think Ted can be competitive enough to keep him.

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

wpr
Preferred Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

you are quick buckeye.

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker

Like I said, If I had my choice it would be Jones but you are right Starks should be a lot cheaper. I just hope we don't lose both of them. With them our WR and RB positions are top 5 in the league without a doubt. Without them they drop to maybe around 10 or so. That is certainly not bad and for the most part I could live with it but when the opportunity is there to have at least in the top 5 it would be a shame to lose it. We already have a top 5 QB (I know I know top 1 but I am allowing for argument) so it would be nice to be able to compliment him.

The wildcard could be Aaron Rodgers. While I really like James Jones it could be the Rodgers will be able to make just about any WR look good. If that is the case why not take a chance on a rookie or cheaper FA and stick with Starks to boost the RB spot.

sschind
Senior Member

10 years ago

Originally Posted by: luigis

I have no idea why you keep saying that. What is it that makes it so crystal clear to you that the Staff has problems with Starks? As far as trade I don't think they get a third for him. but its a moot point anyway since he is a FA.

nerdmann
Premier Member

10 years ago

Originally Posted by: sschind

Seems like that to me too. They got down on him rookie year for his "work habits." Seems like they've made statements about his pass pro too.

This staff doesn't just randomly make comments like that.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

luigis
Member

10 years ago

#10

Originally Posted by: sschind

Starks is actually a good running back but they were ready to trade him and go with Harris, Lacy and Franklin even before Lacy emerged.
They haven't signed him to an extension and they have leaked comments about his work ethics and problems learning the plays. All this while we get comments about how important Dujuan Harris was going to be for the offense.

Get it real, they don't like Starks at all.

Luis

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

beast (1h) : I was rooting for the Bears to win and hurt their draft pick status

Zero2Cool (1h) : Forgot there was even a game last night haha

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : That was terrible.

TheKanataThrilla (2h) : Watching that game in its entirety yesterday is proof positive that I am a football addict.

beast (2h) : And horrible time management multiple times... and not being able to score more than 3 points on a team with talent

beast (2h) : Realizing the Bears didn't fix it from the previous week and do the same thing, getting the game to overtime

beast (2h) : They probably are not tanking, but they've absolutely mismanagement some things, such as Vikings seeing the Packers blocked FG and realizing

Zero2Cool (3h) : Crazy of Bears to have that mindset that is

Zero2Cool (3h) : Hail Mary stop away from 5 - 2. Not sure how that flips to tanking. Crazy mindset if true

beast (4h) : I've quietly questioned if Bears are tanking on purpose... they suddenly got a lot worse with some simple concepts like 101 clock management

wpr (6h) : Watching bares fans melt down over how putrid their team is, so enjoyable. It's the gift that keeps on giving.

Mucky Tundra (13h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago

beast (14h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years

Zero2Cool (21h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.

packerfanoutwest (21h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it

beast (22h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done

Zero2Cool (26-Dec) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.

Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

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

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS