Can we discuss James Starks?

[Forget Favre]

Watching him at first was exciting and I thought he was going to be the future running game for GB.
Now he has had 12 carries and only 9 yards this season.
What happened?

I think we should give him one more season and if he doesn't return to getting better or how he was, cut him.

What do you think about James Starks?

 

[Mondio]

I think Lacy is and should be our primary back. I know James works hard and all that, but get lacy going and keep him going. Let Starks provide relief and be done with it

 

[Deleted member 6794]

What do you think about James Starks?

Starks has been a disappointment so far this season and if he doesn´t improve significantly the rest of the year his performance doesn´t justify the contract he was signed to.

 

[gopkrs]

I don't think Starks has had much of an opportunity...including nowhere to run.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't think Starks has had much of an opportunity...including nowhere to run.

Starks has made questionable decisions on several runs though as well.

 

[OldSchool101]

I'd like to see him involved more. At one point he and Lacy made a nice 1-2 punch

 

[PackerDNA]

I'd like to see Starks 2nd year of this contract voided after the season. We've past the point of diminishing returns with him.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'd like to see Starks 2nd year of this contract voided after the season. We've past the point of diminishing returns with him.

It depends on what happens with Lacy next offseason though. If the Packers don´t re-sign the starting running back releasing Starks would result in not having an experienced player at the position.

 

[PackerDNA]

Why keep a player who's done? Starks is pretty much done now; he won't get better a year from now.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Why keep a player who's done? Starks is pretty much done now; he won't get better a year from now.

I think it´s too early to assume Starks is done.

 

[PackerDNA]

I think it´s too early to assume Starks is done.

You're right. In Green Bay it will take about 3 more years.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Think the Jets would trade Forte for Starks even up? I can't hide it, I wanted Forte before Starks was signed but wasn't that unhappy when Starks was resigned based on his body of work as a Packer. As Captain pointed out then and now, we probably overpaid him.

While I'm not ready to give up on Starks, I have found myself cringing as of late, when he lines up in the backfield and is handed the ball. He can't seem to find a running lane and is even worse when the defense is playing the run. He can be a nice compliment to the passing game and I would prefer seeing him be used mostly on 3rd and long. Last season receiving stats.... 3 TDS, 43 catches for 392 yards and a 9.1 average.

 

[GBkrzygrl]

Is that why they keep using Cobb/Montgomery? That drives me nuts. They are not running backs. If the DL was wearing down then maybe but to me they have used those 2 more than they have used Starks.

 

[azrsx05]

I think Starks is one of those players that got paid for what he's done instead of what he's going to do. I think it was a bad decision to keep him instead of getting a young guy to get experience behind Lacy in case Lacy doesn't return. But Lacy should be the primary runner this year for sure

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Is that why they keep using Cobb/Montgomery? That drives me nuts. They are not running backs. If the DL was wearing down then maybe but to me they have used those 2 more than they have used Starks.

My take on lining Cobb or Montgomery up in the backfield is that it makes them harder to defense in the passing game, which way are they going to go and who picks them up? While Cobb has had some success in that formation running the ball and they probably need to keep the defense honest by handing him the ball once in awhile, I think the Packers are taking their chances on some pretty big men getting some whacks on a smaller guy at the line of scrimmage.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think Starks is one of those players that got paid for what he's done instead of what he's going to do. I think it was a bad decision to keep him instead of getting a young guy to get experience behind Lacy in case Lacy doesn't return. But Lacy should be the primary runner this year for sure

Yes and no. I think you are right, while it would have been nice to get a young under study, which is what Crockett was suppose to be, they need a guy like Starks to fill in for Lacy on a regular basis. Lacy isn't a guy that can play all the snaps and a seasoned Vet like Starks is viewed more as a complimentary back to him more then just a back up.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I like starks. Im suprised at his numbers rushing this year. But if we didnt have him id be nervous.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I like starks. Im suprised at his numbers rushing this year. But if we didnt have him id be nervous.

I think its safe to say, if we hadn't resigned Starks, we would have someone else behind Lacy, that at this point couldn't be any worse then we have seen so far from Starks. Whether that was a FA or a rookie, I don't know. I'm leaning on a vet, given how much our #2 back is called upon.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Is that why they keep using Cobb/Montgomery? That drives me nuts. They are not running backs. If the DL was wearing down then maybe but to me they have used those 2 more than they have used Starks.

This season using Cobb in the backfield hasn´t worked out at all averaging only three yards per play on 20 attempts. The coaching staff used Montgomery in that role vs. the Lions on four plays but as far as I can remember it didn´t produce any big plays either.

I think Starks is one of those players that got paid for what he's done instead of what he's going to do. I think it was a bad decision to keep him instead of getting a young guy to get experience behind Lacy in case Lacy doesn't return. But Lacy should be the primary runner this year for sure

I was fine with re-signing Starks but Thompson overpaid to retain him.

 

[El Guapo]

He's got 12 rushing attempts for 9 yards over the past three games. Obviously his average is terrible, but 12 attempts is also terrible. He may have made questionable decisions but this isn't enough to judge the man. We know that he can run, but they either need to give him the ball consistently in a game or keep him reserved for backup duties. Lacy needs more touches so there is no reason to give Starks opportunities unless McCarthy intends to give Lacy some recuperation time.

I don't think that Starks is done. He just needs better opportunities, both from the coach and his blockers.

 

[El Guapo]

I was fine with re-signing Starks but Thompson overpaid to retain him.

I don't think that you'd be saying that had Lacy shown up fatter and in worse condition. I think that TT had to either re-sign Starks or find a FA and we know which of those options was most likely. Either way he would have paid quasi-starter/backup money.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

He's got 12 rushing attempts for 9 yards over the past three games. Obviously his average is terrible, but 12 attempts is also terrible. He may have made questionable decisions but this isn't enough to judge the man. We know that he can run, but they either need to give him the ball consistently in a game or keep him reserved for backup duties. Lacy needs more touches so there is no reason to give Starks opportunities unless McCarthy intends to give Lacy some recuperation time.

I don't think that Starks is done. He just needs better opportunities, both from the coach and his blockers.

I agree that 12 carries is a small sample size to evaluate Starks performance. I prefer to get Lacy the ball more often before worrying about Starks to receive additional touches.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't think that you'd be saying that had Lacy shown up fatter and in worse condition. I think that TT had to either re-sign Starks or find a FA and we know which of those options was most likely. Either way he would have paid quasi-starter/backup money.

I said at the time the Packers re-signed Starks that the team overpaid for a backup running back. So far he for sure hasn´t justified being paid $3 million a year.

 

[Poppa San]

I said at the time the Packers re-signed Starks that the team overpaid for a backup running back. So far he for sure hasn´t justified being paid $3 million a year.

I was so-so at his signing. Right now he is ho-hum. Hasn't done diddly to deserve a roster spot. Not even sure his pass blocking is all that effective. It might be, I haven't paid attention. I think he was retained to be the "new" Kuhn. Reliable, play-book savvy veteran backup. Ain't happening at the moment.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Not even sure his pass blocking is all that effective. It might be, I haven't paid attention.

Starks struggled in pass protection vs. the Lions as well.