Starks has had two good games in three opportunities. As a rookie. Jackson has had two or three good games in 17 opportunities, or maybe something like 12 or 13 if you consider that the Packers were very pass-oriented at times this season. And this is Jackson's fourth season. Not a lot of upside there.
Starks is already a better runner than Jackson, and because he is so young, he has way more potential and is therefore way more valuable than Jackson. I don't think there will be much of a bidding war for Jackson during free agency. However, it sounds like he may not be comfortable with having been passed up twice now by players who started their careers at a much lower point than he did, so maybe it will be best for him to go elsewhere. I'd love to keep him around as our third down back, with Grant and Starks as the top two RBs.
"dfosterf" wrote:
+1
Jackson.
He jitterbugs too much, imo. His production (or lack of it, dependent upon how you want to look at it) is in the context of defenses that are scheming against the pass, not the run. Not only does he not legitimize our running game to an acceptable degree (On OUR team, with OUR line--another discussion) whatever production he HAS had is somewhat suspect in that defensive coordinators are not exactly game-planning to stop him. We are way too "one dimensional" with him in there when viewed from the opponent's perspective. They (defenses) SHOULD be "paying" for not scheming against our run game. Sadly, with him in there, they do not have to pay far too often.
I understand he has value, the question is -for me- is it worth the cost in non productive runs way too often in critical situations, coupled with unfavorable downs and distances as a result of "giving him the rock" to try and keep defenses "honest".
He has had 4 years to scare a defense. Starks has had 3 games. Who do you think scares a defense more right now?
I don't know what will happen with Starks, Grant and Jackson, but I do know my answer right now with the information in front of me.
Grant would scare them, imo. Starks does scare them, imo . Jackson does not, imo.
The Starks factor could change this Saturday, but at least it's there right now, and that in and of itself is an improvement over where we were a week ago.
Eagles had to pay. Atlanta is paying too, even before the game begins.
I feel bad for Jackson, because I'm sure he heard those comments of praise from his teammates regarding Starks, which were probably viewed by Brandon as a vote of no confidence in him...
This is the NFL, and he did not step up...sorry, but that's the way it goes.
"Greg C." wrote: