Packers Running Game (1 Viewer)

[HittinHard]

How do you guys see Green Bays running game this campaign compared to last year.Do think Ryan Grant will come back stronger?

 

[valence]

60/40 Grant/Starks. I don't think BJax is back and I don't think Green sees the field much this year barring injury.

 

[adrenaline]

I think people are too high on Grant & to low on Green. Green is durable, has a good size/speed ratio, he catches the ball well & pass protects well. I really think the job is up for grabs.

 

[Mario Kart]

75% Grant

20% other RB

5% Rodgers

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I suspect that a 29 year old Grant coming off a major injury, and the thoroughly mediocre Jamesdon Jackstarks will have trouble keeping Green off the field. IMO will come down to pass protection and ball security on Green's part.

 

[Zimm]

I honestly don't think Grant even makes the team unless he takes a huge paycut. I don't even see Green as much of an option as a rookie. He is highly overrated coming out of pass happy Hawaii. Green is a big back that runs upright and is not a powerful back and that never works in the NFL. He is more of a 3rd down back at the next level and on top of that he has fumble issues.... 8 times in 271 touches and that is something that needs improvement, If you looking for a run option in GB i really think Starks is the best bet.

 

[adrenaline]

I honestly don't think Grant even makes the team unless he takes a huge paycut. I don't even see Green as much of an option as a rookie. He is highly overrated coming out of pass happy Hawaii. Green is a big back that runs upright and is not a powerful back and that never works in the NFL. He is more of a 3rd down back at the next level and on top of that he has fumble issues.... 8 times in 271 touches and that is something that needs improvement, If you looking for a run option in GB i really think Starks is the best bet.

Fumbling is my main worry with Green, although GB had another A.Green with security problems too ...

 

[Zimm]

I honestly don't think Grant even makes the team unless he takes a huge paycut. I don't even see Green as much of an option as a rookie. He is highly overrated coming out of pass happy Hawaii. Green is a big back that runs upright and is not a powerful back and that never works in the NFL. He is more of a 3rd down back at the next level and on top of that he has fumble issues.... 8 times in 271 touches and that is something that needs improvement, If you looking for a run option in GB i really think Starks is the best bet.

Fumbling is my main worry with Green, although GB had another A.Green with security problems too ...

Ahhh you beat me to it i was just going to edit my post because i thought it was ironic....Screw it give the ball to KUUUHHHHNNNN.

 

[Aaronstory]

Wrote a little about this yesterday here: http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/a-look-at-the-packers-running-game

And I think Starks will be your bellcow back sooner rather than later.

 

[eakfootball]

40% Grant, 30% Starks, 25% Green, 5% Rodgers.

 

[smackdaddies]

Wrote a little about this yesterday here: http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/a-look-at-the-packers-running-game

And I think Starks will be your bellcow back sooner rather than later.

Still don't think Starks blocks well enough to push Grant out. He played matador a couple of times in the SB

 

[sihaokills]

I still feel like Grant will start and get 55% of the carries. 30 goes to Starks while Rodgers gets 5%, Green gets 8% with more of a third down role. 2% goes to the remaining players like Kuhn or Jackson

 

[Aaronstory]

Wrote a little about this yesterday here: http://cheeseheadtv....rs-running-game

And I think Starks will be your bellcow back sooner rather than later.

Still don't think Starks blocks well enough to push Grant out. He played matador a couple of times in the SB

He really improved in that area throughout the playoffs. Yes, he had one or two misses in the Super Bowl - but Grant is terrible, and I mean terrible, in pass protection. If Starks continues to improve in that area, you'll see him featured sooner rather than later.

 

[Blackjacks]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

 

[Aaronstory]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.I believe he is due alot fof $$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

They won't make him take a cut. He has a $3.5 million salary and is due a $1.75 million roster bonus on the 15th day of the new league year. The Packers will gladly pay that.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

got a feeling this will be a mess all season.

1a - Grant

1b - Starks

3 - A.Green

4 - Kuhn

 

[Ghost of Bill Walsh]

Grant may begin as the starter simply because he knows the offense and has had some success in the past but that won't be enough to keep him as the starter. I see Starks improving on his pass protection and I think he'll have the attitude and the work ethic this year to take over as the starter after a few games.

 

[humpback]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

 

[ThePittbully]

I'd love to know what the people picking Starks to have the majority share are basing that off of. Was it the amazing 3.5 ypc he averaged in the regular season or the much improved 3.9 he averaged in the post season? Ryan Grant isn't getting released, his contract is very reasonable for a guy who previously rushed for 1200 yards in back to back seasons. Starks may be a better blocker (that's debatable) but at this point he's definitely not the better runner. As for Alex Green, I think he's got potential but will take time to develop, I doubt he sees much field time this year.

If I had to break it down I'd guess 65% Grant, 35% Starks with Green and Kuhn picking up a carry or two here and there throughout the season. I think Starks probably takes Bjax place and takes up 3rd down work, but I still see Grant getting most of the 1st and 2nd down carries and likely goal line work

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Last two years the pack drafted A.Green and Starks.

 

[humpback]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Last two years the pack drafted A.Green and Starks.

Yes, with the last pick in the 3rd round and a late 6th round pick- not what I would call drafting his replacement.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Last two years the pack drafted A.Green and Starks.

Yes, with the last pick in the 3rd round and a late 6th round pick- not what I would call drafting his replacement.

both were drafted before Grant was

 

[smackdaddies]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Last two years the pack drafted A.Green and Starks.

Yes, with the last pick in the 3rd round and a late 6th round pick- not what I would call drafting his replacement.

both were drafted before Grant was

So was Brandon Jackson - how's that working out?

 

[Sabertooth]

I suspect that a 29 year old Grant coming off a major injury, and the thoroughly mediocre Jamesdon Jackstarks will have trouble keeping Green off the field. IMO will come down to pass protection and ball security on Green's part.

Grant could have played in the Super Bowl according to reports at the time if he wasn't on IR.

 

[Aaronstory]

Starks may be a better blocker (that's debatable) but at this point he's definitely not the better runner.

Totally disagree. I think Starks has much better vision than Grant, is able to create in ways Grant is not, and - no small thing - the staff loves him. I think your playing time percentages are spot-on as far as how things will start out. I just think Starks is more talented overall and it will be hard to keep him on the bench the longer the season goes on. We'll see.edit for grammar/clarity.

 

[smackdaddies]

This is a BleacherReport qoute from 2009

As long as the Packers can score 21-28 points passing and their defense can allow 20 or less, the run by committee approach should work this season.

That was not just the 2009 plan of the Pack, that appears to be thier permenant plan

Brandon Jackson is the only "good" pass blocker. And the Pack appears to be more than willing to toss him aside.

That leaves Grant/Starks, both marginal blockers, but clearly Starks is more marginal. I don't remember plays where Grant basically played matador pass blocking like Starks does far to often

Green is the new guy - we will see how he fits in.

The Packers have proved they just don't really care. Give them a guy who can hold on to the ball, pound out some yards, thats enough. They are going to be pass first, second and third, unless McCarthy forgets and accidently calls a running play.

 

[humpback]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Last two years the pack drafted A.Green and Starks.

Yes, with the last pick in the 3rd round and a late 6th round pick- not what I would call drafting his replacement.

both were drafted before Grant was

Grant wasn't expected to be the starter either, that's the point. I'm not saying those guys can't or won't replace him, just that I don't think GB drafted those guys expecting them to be the heir apparent. I don't think using later draft picks on RBs means that they don't like Grant.

 

[sho nuff]

I suspect that a 29 year old Grant coming off a major injury, and the thoroughly mediocre Jamesdon Jackstarks will have trouble keeping Green off the field. IMO will come down to pass protection and ball security on Green's part.

Starks is thoroughly mediocre now? Interesting.

 

[sho nuff]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.I believe he is due alot fof $$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

They won't make him take a cut. He has a $3.5 million salary and is due a $1.75 million roster bonus on the 15th day of the new league year. The Packers will gladly pay that.

Not sure why some think his number is too high.And I believe its the last year of his deal too. They have been drafting "replacements" because Thompson thinks years ahead of time, not just year to year.And some are underrating what Grant has done in this offense. The guy can run the ball pretty well in McCarthy's system.That said, Starks, IMO will be getting the majority of the carries by year end unless Grant is just out of this world good, or Starks can't replicate some of the success he had in the postseason.

 

[Tau837]

I suspect that a 29 year old Grant coming off a major injury, and the thoroughly mediocre Jamesdon Jackstarks will have trouble keeping Green off the field. IMO will come down to pass protection and ball security on Green's part.

Just for clarity, Grant doesn't turn 29 until December.

 

[Tau837]

I'd love to know what the people picking Starks to have the majority share are basing that off of. Was it the amazing 3.5 ypc he averaged in the regular season or the much improved 3.9 he averaged in the post season? Ryan Grant isn't getting released, his contract is very reasonable for a guy who previously rushed for 1200 yards in back to back seasons. Starks may be a better blocker (that's debatable) but at this point he's definitely not the better runner. As for Alex Green, I think he's got potential but will take time to develop, I doubt he sees much field time this year. If I had to break it down I'd guess 65% Grant, 35% Starks with Green and Kuhn picking up a carry or two here and there throughout the season. I think Starks probably takes Bjax place and takes up 3rd down work, but I still see Grant getting most of the 1st and 2nd down carries and likely goal line work

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Blackjacks never lets facts get in the way of his story

 

[Sabertooth]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.

I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.

He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Huh?

Blackjacks never lets facts get in the way of his story

He's quite the wordsmith.

 

[Mario Kart]

I never thought Grant was that good and I think GB feels the same way sense the have been drafting his replacement is the last couple of drafts.I believe he is due alot fof $$$ this year and I agree with an earlier poster that he will gone if he doesnt take a cut.He just doesnt fit that offense, not versatile enough.

Grant, if healthy, fits the offense perfectly. I have no idea where you are getting your assessment from.

 

[smackdaddies]

In a separate move, the Packers paid Ryan Grant his $1.75 million roster bonus, which was due the first week of the league year. The bonus pretty much assures that Grant comes to camp as the starter with Starks sharing carries with him.

#justsayin

 

[gethugefast1]

In a separate move, the Packers paid Ryan Grant his $1.75 million roster bonus, which was due the first week of the league year. The bonus pretty much assures that Grant comes to camp as the starter with Starks sharing carries with him.

#justsayin

Ryan Grant - RB - Packers The Packers have paid Ryan Grant's $1.75 million pre-training camp roster bonus, ensuring he'll remain with the club this year.We'd seen speculation that Grant might not be a Packer in 2011, but it was never realistic. James Starks didn't play nearly as well as some folks in the media portrayed last season, and beat writer Tom Silverstein confirms that the Packers' payment of the relatively hefty bonus means Grant is the heavy favorite to open camp as the starter. We project him for just over 200 carries, keeping Grant in the low-end range of RB2s. Source: Tom Silverstein on Twitter Jul 28, 9:40 PM

 

[Hoosier16]

In a separate move, the Packers paid Ryan Grant his $1.75 million roster bonus, which was due the first week of the league year. The bonus pretty much assures that Grant comes to camp as the starter with Starks sharing carries with him.

#justsayin

Ryan Grant - RB - Packers The Packers have paid Ryan Grant's $1.75 million pre-training camp roster bonus, ensuring he'll remain with the club this year.We'd seen speculation that Grant might not be a Packer in 2011, but it was never realistic. James Starks didn't play nearly as well as some folks in the media portrayed last season, and beat writer Tom Silverstein confirms that the Packers' payment of the relatively hefty bonus means Grant is the heavy favorite to open camp as the starter. We project him for just over 200 carries, keeping Grant in the low-end range of RB2s. Source: Tom Silverstein on Twitter Jul 28, 9:40 PM

When did $1.75 million become a significant bonus?

 

[sho nuff]

In a separate move, the Packers paid Ryan Grant his $1.75 million roster bonus, which was due the first week of the league year. The bonus pretty much assures that Grant comes to camp as the starter with Starks sharing carries with him.

#justsayin

Ryan Grant - RB - Packers The Packers have paid Ryan Grant's $1.75 million pre-training camp roster bonus, ensuring he'll remain with the club this year.We'd seen speculation that Grant might not be a Packer in 2011, but it was never realistic. James Starks didn't play nearly as well as some folks in the media portrayed last season, and beat writer Tom Silverstein confirms that the Packers' payment of the relatively hefty bonus means Grant is the heavy favorite to open camp as the starter. We project him for just over 200 carries, keeping Grant in the low-end range of RB2s. Source: Tom Silverstein on Twitter Jul 28, 9:40 PM

When did $1.75 million become a significant bonus?

As a roster bonus? Umm...Id say always.

 

[Hoosier16]

In a separate move, the Packers paid Ryan Grant his $1.75 million roster bonus, which was due the first week of the league year. The bonus pretty much assures that Grant comes to camp as the starter with Starks sharing carries with him.

#justsayin

Ryan Grant - RB - Packers The Packers have paid Ryan Grant's $1.75 million pre-training camp roster bonus, ensuring he'll remain with the club this year.We'd seen speculation that Grant might not be a Packer in 2011, but it was never realistic. James Starks didn't play nearly as well as some folks in the media portrayed last season, and beat writer Tom Silverstein confirms that the Packers' payment of the relatively hefty bonus means Grant is the heavy favorite to open camp as the starter. We project him for just over 200 carries, keeping Grant in the low-end range of RB2s. Source: Tom Silverstein on Twitter Jul 28, 9:40 PM

When did $1.75 million become a significant bonus?

As a roster bonus? Umm...Id say always.

Raji and Rodgers had 2nd year roster bonuses of $7 million. That's significant.

 

[sho nuff]

In a separate move, the Packers paid Ryan Grant his $1.75 million roster bonus, which was due the first week of the league year. The bonus pretty much assures that Grant comes to camp as the starter with Starks sharing carries with him.

#justsayin

Ryan Grant - RB - Packers The Packers have paid Ryan Grant's $1.75 million pre-training camp roster bonus, ensuring he'll remain with the club this year.We'd seen speculation that Grant might not be a Packer in 2011, but it was never realistic. James Starks didn't play nearly as well as some folks in the media portrayed last season, and beat writer Tom Silverstein confirms that the Packers' payment of the relatively hefty bonus means Grant is the heavy favorite to open camp as the starter. We project him for just over 200 carries, keeping Grant in the low-end range of RB2s. Source: Tom Silverstein on Twitter Jul 28, 9:40 PM

When did $1.75 million become a significant bonus?

As a roster bonus? Umm...Id say always.

Raji and Rodgers had 2nd year roster bonuses of $7 million. That's significant.

2 first round picks...one a top 10 pick, the other a QB.Bit different than an almost 30 year old running back coming off missing a season.

Its significant given Ted Thompson is not the type to just throw money away.

 

[Sabertooth]

Grant appears to be a nice little sleeper. This offense is going to score a top of points. I bet he tops his career best of 11 rushing touchdowns if he stays healthy.

 

[SWC]

stark is set to be the next big thing not quite barry sanders big but still pretty huge and you will all be shocked if he throws a gaget play TD but i wont be because that is what i am always watching for

 

[Mario Kart]

stark is set to be the next big thing not quite barry sanders big but still pretty huge and you will all be shocked if he throws a gaget play TD but i wont be because that is what i am always watching for

I might be in Cambodia right now but Grant has always been the starter. Draft Starks higher but that will be a wasited pick.

 

[We Tigers]

Grant's good for this year, but I believe Starks will be one of the best back halves of a committee you can find. I like both guys at their current ADPs.

 

[smackdaddies]

stark is set to be the next big thing not quite barry sanders big but still pretty huge and you will all be shocked if he throws a gaget play TD but i wont be because that is what i am always watching for

lets put away the crack pipe ok - unless by "not quite barry sanders" you mean someday he might be 1/4 as good as Barry.

 

[Mr.Pack]

I honestly don't think Grant even makes the team unless he takes a huge paycut. I don't even see Green as much of an option as a rookie. He is highly overrated coming out of pass happy Hawaii. Green is a big back that runs upright and is not a powerful back and that never works in the NFL. He is more of a 3rd down back at the next level and on top of that he has fumble issues.... 8 times in 271 touches and that is something that needs improvement, If you looking for a run option in GB i really think Starks is the best bet.

I'm not sure you watched Starks last year. He's the exact same type of upright runner, granted he's more powerful than Green, but the knock on Starks is that he's an upright runner prone to injury.ETA: That said, I think Starks will be the man, sooner than later.

 

[SWC]

stark is set to be the next big thing not quite barry sanders big but still pretty huge and you will all be shocked if he throws a gaget play TD but i wont be because that is what i am always watching for

lets put away the crack pipe ok - unless by "not quite barry sanders" you mean someday he might be 1/4 as good as Barry.

i said he wouldnot be as good as barry sanders so i agree with you and we are on the same page brother but it would be awesome if he was better than barry but that probably wont happen at the end of the day maybe someday we will see him blossom into a good rb like jake blossomed into a good deckhand on deadliest catch