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

Starks or Grant?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Emperor_Xyn, Jan 28, 2011.

  1. Emperor_Xyn

    Emperor_Xyn Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    192
    Ratings:
    +1
    Next year who do you think should be our number 1?

    It's been a while since i've seen Grant but what from I remember Starks is a little bit better and seems to pick up a yard or 2 more than Grant would of been able to... Plus Starks is a little bit faster.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,836
    Ratings:
    +3,483
    Different runners I think Grant can hit harder..

    They will both compete for the job
     
  3. Emperor_Xyn

    Emperor_Xyn Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    192
    Ratings:
    +1
    Yeah I was thinking about bringing that up... But I disagree they both get the job done... Starks > Grant
     
  4. PackisBack

    PackisBack Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2010
    Messages:
    102
    Ratings:
    +13
    Grant had back to back 1,200 yard rushing seasons before the injury. Starks had 101 yards this season. He's been a breath of fresh air into our running game, but when Grant comes back it will be his job to lose; he's the proven runner of the 2.
     
  5. brett2520

    brett2520 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2011
    Messages:
    192
    Ratings:
    +32
    Starks has more upside in that he will have a healthy offseason. Also, he has not been through a training camp yet to learn everything like he should and do the drills. Grant though is more consistent and if healthy, i think he could be a terror after being out a year. I think if they are competing at week 1, give grant the starts and let starks learn the system better until grant's contract is up.
     
  6. BigBayBlues

    BigBayBlues Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    98
    Ratings:
    +34
    Agreed.

    I'd say Grant based on what hes shown in the past. Obviously it all depends how he comes back form this injury. I for one am not too thrilled about Starks so far...and yes, I know he's young.
     
  7. GO PACK GO

    GO PACK GO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    11
    Ratings:
    +5
    James really seems to avoid tackles better than Ryan, and can get a couple extra yards, but like what was said above I believe Ryan can hit harder. It'll be interesting to see next season how it works out.
     
  8. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    have them split carries. Who would have thought we would be debating this 3 months ago?
     
  9. Emperor_Xyn

    Emperor_Xyn Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    192
    Ratings:
    +1
    Wow I looked up Starks stats and only 100 yards. Feels like he should have around 200... lol. Yeah idk, had a change in heart Starks is still young but deffiently think we will see split carries between them. I like Starks on first down running.
     
  10. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,266
    Ratings:
    +1,074
    I would let Grant start and Starks relieve him. I think they will still have an even amount of carries until a hot hand is established.
     
  11. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,836
    Ratings:
    +3,483

    Ted Thompson
     
  12. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,836
    Ratings:
    +3,483

    263 for playoffs
     
  13. 98Redbird

    98Redbird Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2010
    Messages:
    806
    Ratings:
    +240
    Yeah, I think Grant gets his job back. Let Starks relieve him. Give him time. Let him get through a training camp and we will see what he can do.
     
  14. arrimike

    arrimike Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2010
    Messages:
    76
    Ratings:
    +12
    It is simple, Grant has proven himself over the years and Starks has shown us a little of what he COULD be. He hasn't played enough to show us that he is a consistent player like Grant. I don't think that Starks takes the #1 spot until we see a side effect of the Grant injury, or Starks shows us that great potential that we all see.
     
  15. Powarun

    Powarun Big Bay Blues fan

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,048
    Ratings:
    +420
    ivo I was thinking we would have a Starks/Grant debate when I saw that the Packers got him as a running back. Though I figure the Nance/Grant/Starks argument would precede it.

    Though my favorite scenario is: Bone Formation: Starks on the strong side of the line, Kuhn on the weak side, and Grant in the back. That would be the best of all worlds.
     
  16. Eis Bowl

    Eis Bowl Touchdown Artist

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Messages:
    134
    Ratings:
    +18
    Start out with Grant at least. He's proven. Let Grant pound the D and then Starks can come in and run around a tied, bruised up D.
     
  17. JBlood

    JBlood Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2004
    Messages:
    3,157
    Ratings:
    +1,312
    It will be Grant's job to lose, but I think Starks is quicker to the hole, makes cuts that Grant doesn't, breaks tackles that Grant doesn't, and accelerates faster than Grant. If he stays healthy, he could be our primary running back. And if our offensive line learns to dominate the line of scrimmage every game, we should have quite a ball control offense.
     

Share This Page