1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Not so fast!

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by rodell330, Nov 5, 2012.

  1. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    So we had over 180 yds rushing the ball yesterday....and? that's still not good enough, and a true starter still hasn't emerged going into week 10. Starks will show flashes and then do something dumb like miss a block or fumble at the wrong time..Green just doesn't have any umf or power behind his pads and generally is stuffed at the first point of contact.

    I look at Cobb and hes at full speed when he gets a carry, and then its one cut and he's out the gates. His vision is wayyyy better than Green or Starks has been and Cobb runs with conviction even tho he's not the biggest guy. I think the return skills are extremely helpful because h's so accustomed to trying to find a lane or running to a lane and then turning it up. The Cardinals are not the best team to judge on if you have finally found the formula to be able to run the ball so i'm not convinced at this time. Do it against a very tough Detroit front in a couple weeks then i might be.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Aaron rodgers is god

    Aaron rodgers is god Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    786
    Ratings:
    +154
    Do we need a true starter. We don't have a complete back, so make a complete back from 2 players. Starks run early downs which he was very productive yesterday. Green come in on 3rd downs and block and catch the ball with the occasional run. How was that not good enough for you yesterday? I was at the game and I was loving every bit of it. If we could do that every game, that would be perfect for us.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  3. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,683
    Ratings:
    +1,056
    I like Cobb as a runner, but he won't last long at his size if he's in the backfield full time. Plus, with Nelson and Jennings not 100% we need him as a receiver. I'll take 80- 100 yds rushing with Starks, Green and Kuhn all taking turns. We're still a pass-first team, and always will be with Rogers running things.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013

    See that's my issue...its that we don't have a complete back, so the theory of making one from two doesn't work because what if one gets hurt? see my point? i'd rather have a complete back. Also alot of those yards came from Rodgers and Cobb so we are giving Starks and Green o much credit. When you have to depend on a wr to help bolster your run game and when the qb has a junk of rushing yards that's not going to cut it.
     
  5. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,289
    Ratings:
    +4,132
    Why the lions?

    The cardinals are 19th in the league in run defense and the lions are 15th. We have already played 3 of the top 6 teams in run defense.
     
  6. Aaron rodgers is god

    Aaron rodgers is god Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    786
    Ratings:
    +154
    Sure I'd love to have a complete back. The thing is our complete back got hurt, so we are working with what we have. Right now we have Starks and Green. If you can name a complete back that is in free agency, let me know. Plus the running backs I'm giving to much credit had 114 yards combined. I'd say that was pretty good considering what they usually get. Give credit when credit is due and that's what I'm doing. Starks had 61. Green 53.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    555
    Ratings:
    +305
    It was nice to finally see the Packer running backs bouncing to the outside for once, Starks more then Green. I will be the first to admit, I spent all of last week in the "Steven Jackson Rumors" thread pulling for TT to make a move for Jackson or Blount (TB). But TT didn't and maybe...just maybe we saw why yesterday, running back by committee seemed to have gotten the job done. As Starks knocks more rust off and Green becomes less Green (more seasoned), we may have enough to make it the rest of the way.....and if and a BIG IF, Benson can somehow come back for the last 3 games or playoffs, the running game will get us through the cold weather playoffs. Now we just need the walking wounded back!!
     
  8. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013

    Detroits front four is wayyy better imo. That's why i say them..or even against New York. You know what? i just wanna see it two games in a row.
     
  9. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013

    i'll give em credit that is a step up from what they usually do. I just need to see it again.
     
  10. Aaron rodgers is god

    Aaron rodgers is god Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    786
    Ratings:
    +154
    Absolutely that is what I hope for. Consistency is probably one of the things that separates teams.
     
  11. CHIpackFAN

    CHIpackFAN Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2012
    Messages:
    73
    Ratings:
    +21
    I'm not so that it will happen but I think cobb would make a heck of RB. Darren sproles is smaller that cobb and Doug martin is about 20 lbs heavier that cobb. I think he wouldn't be too big of an injury risk back there. It can be done. IMO....
     
  12. Pokerbrat2000

    Pokerbrat2000 Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    Messages:
    555
    Ratings:
    +305
    If Jennings and Nelson were healthy, I might agree with you, but no way do you want to expose Cobb to the kind of hits a running back takes. He is needed at wide receiver and an occasional run from the wildcat will keep the defenses guessing.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    5,818
    Ratings:
    +2,671
    I thought the Green/Starks combo in the first half is where the running game needs to be, the best we've seen this year, and good enough to win in the playoffs.

    Here are some notes from the first half:

    - Two short yardage attempts (1 or 2 yards to go), one each by Starks and Green, both for first downs, both on the 80 yard drive for the second TD
    - No attempts that gained fewer than 2 yards; only one non-short yardage that gained fewer than 3 yards
    - 12 for 67, 5.6, long run of 21

    Second half...not so good. Green/Starks were 0-2 on short yardage (both no gains), 8 attempts gaining 2 or fewer yards, 16 for 47, 2.9, long run of 14.

    It's interesting to see McCarthy giving Green about half of his runs out of the shotgun, a familiar look for him from his college scheme. It's one way to fabricate some patience, a prerequisite for TBs in zone scheme. Here's Green's runs out of shotgun vs. QB over center:

    Shotgun: 3, 21, 6, 4, 2

    QB Over Center: 2, 2, 5, 2, 0, 6

    Starks, on the other hand, ran out of shotgun just once out of his 17 carries.

    Alternating looks/styles/sets/change of pace with these two guys could be an effective formula. There could be some upside with Starks as he works his way into game contact condition.

    It may not be pretty, and they don't give you 2-fers in fantasy football, but it might work out.
     
  14. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,640
    Ratings:
    +1,481
    Not really. It is the same problem if you have a complete back that gets hurt or you have one half of a platoon system that gets hurt. You're still dealing with an injury.

    I think that's your strongest argument. I want that too, but we don't have it anymore without Benson so we are making the best with our lemons instead of complaining that we really wanted oranges.
     
  15. slaughter25

    slaughter25 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Ratings:
    +211
    I dont know why it is but every time he gets hit by a big guy he seems so much more fragile than the other small backs in the league. I think we have found the right balance out our rushing attack (at least for 1 week) now we just need to see consistency.

    I also hope to see the packers getting some of the missing pieces on the offensive side of the ball back to hopefully see more no huddle with Cobb in the back field. That's where I think he is the biggest value to the team. A guy that can take a quick pitch for 20+, motion out of the backfield wide and actually command a DB's coverage, or take the ball between the tackles find the lane make a move and burst past the first wave of defenders on a draw. The only downside of having him as the primary back during no huddle situations is I'm pretty sure he isn't the stoutest of pass blockers if he was called to block a blitzing LB or S I would fear for him and Rodgers.
     
  16. SpartaChris

    SpartaChris Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,042
    Ratings:
    +965
  17. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    I don't mind the platoon, like the Saints, Patriots, Steelers are employing.
    But I don't want to overuse Cobb, don't want to lose the little guy there...... EVERY RB gets hurt eventually, so limit his carries.
     
  18. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    2,683
    Ratings:
    +1,056
    If you want to mull over options, how about picking up Tebow next season? I think he could become another Hornung if he were put at running back. He's a heck of a player, and should be on the field--running back, linebacker, safety--somewhere. Just not at QB, although he could fill in as an emergency if Rogers were injured. Kind of like Tom Matte for the Colts in '65.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Creative Creative x 1
  19. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,640
    Ratings:
    +1,481
    Actually, that's one of the funniest ideas that I've ever heard of because there aren't many places besides New England or Green Bay where Tebow could be on the roster without ANY fan inclination to make Tebow the quarterback!
     
  20. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
  21. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,767
    Ratings:
    +2,994
    He has a point...Every week we hear same thing..We ALL know we need a Rb..But people insist on saying it every week
     
  22. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,991
    Ratings:
    +1,013
    K, so when we find a rb then we won't have to talk about it every week.
     
  23. SpartaChris

    SpartaChris Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,042
    Ratings:
    +965
    Or we can all accept the fact that we KNOW we don't have an all-purpose running back and can stop talking about it every week.
     

Share This Page