sschind
10 years ago

I would stop short of saying Franklin "can't play" in the NFL, but I certainly don't think has the ability already shown by Starks and to a lesser extent, by Harris.

Wade, I disagree. Of the two Jameses, I'm glad they apparently are keeping Starks and letting Jones go.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Initially I would have rather seen Jones retained but you are probably right. Having Starks' established, performance to back up Lacy is more important. If Lacy were to go down I haven't seen enough from Franklin or Harris to be very confident of either of them to be a long term fix. If Cobb OR Nelson were to go down Rodgers might be able to make any of the other guys we have on the roster a semi serviceable replacement.

In fact, we should let Nelson and Cobb walk after this year, use their money to fix the defense and replace them with 6th round draft choices and go with Boykin as our #1. After all the passing game is all Aaron Rodgers anyway. He can make any WR look like an all pro.

The second paragraph was sarcasm. The first was not.
DoddPower
10 years ago

Initially I would have rather seen Jones retained but you are probably right. Having Starks' established, performance to back up Lacy is more important. If Lacy were to go down I haven't seen enough from Franklin or Harris to be very confident of either of them to be a long term fix. If Cobb OR Nelson were to go down Rodgers might be able to make any of the other guys we have on the roster a semi serviceable replacement.

In fact, we should let Nelson and Cobb walk after this year, use their money to fix the defense and replace them with 6th round draft choices and go with Boykin as our #1. After all the passing game is all Aaron Rodgers anyway. He can make any WR look like an all pro.

The second paragraph was sarcasm. The first was not.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



Well, Ted Thompson has also proven he's very capable of drafting/obtaining talented wide receivers. I'm not sure the same can be said for running back, outside of Lacy and possibly Starks (Maybe Grant? Among several duds). I have no doubt Ted Thompson can find more talented wide receivers to at least come close to providing what James Jones did to the offense. It's one of his strengths as a talent evaluator.

nerdmann
10 years ago
We're deeper at RB than at WR. But Starks is younger.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
sschind
10 years ago

We're deeper at RB than at WR. But Starks is younger.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



Right now but going into FA I'd say no which is why he may have been the better player to keep than Jones.

Our passing game does have Aaron Rodgers. While I think too many people feel he can turn bad WRs into good ones at the drop of a hat (or a football) it does help to have someone with his ability throwing the ball. It would take up a bit of the hurt if Jordy or Randal goes down as opposed to Lacy if we didn't have Starks to back him up.
porky88
10 years ago

Initially I would have rather seen Jones retained but you are probably right. Having Starks' established, performance to back up Lacy is more important. If Lacy were to go down I haven't seen enough from Franklin or Harris to be very confident of either of them to be a long term fix. If Cobb OR Nelson were to go down Rodgers might be able to make any of the other guys we have on the roster a semi serviceable replacement.

Originally Posted by: sschind 


It wasn’t a one or the other type of deal. You assign a value to a player and you don’t exceed that value. That’s how the Packers (and most teams) conduct business. Starks and Jones had different values. The Raiders exceeded the value Green Bay placed on Jones, while nobody did for Starks. That’s why Starks is back and Jones is in Oakland. Had nobody exceeded Green Bay’s value on Jones, they both would be back.


sschind
10 years ago

It wasn’t a one or the other type of deal. You assign a value to a player and you don’t exceed that value. That’s how the Packers (and most teams) conduct business. Starks and Jones had different values. The Raiders exceeded the value Green Bay placed on Jones, while nobody did for Starks. That’s why Starks is back and Jones is in Oakland. Had nobody exceeded Green Bay’s value on Jones, they both would be back.

Originally Posted by: porky88 



I understand that. I know that Packers didn't say "we are only going to bring one of these guys back and its going to be Starks because he will be cheaper" I'm talking about assigning that value to a player. We don't know what value Ted assigned to Jones but IMO it was too low. My thinking was around 2 million for Starks and 3.5 up to 4 for Jones. Obviously Jones got close to that so the Packers were thinking less, how much less we don't know and we may never know.

it's possible the Packers didn't even assign a value to Jones because from what I have heard then never offered him a deal. Whether he got the offer from the Raiders and gave the Packers a chance to match and they said no is not known and that also may never be known. Truth be told, if I didn't even get an offer from my current team I don't know if I would go back to them with a chance to match either.

But even all that is not really what I was talking about. I was talking about simply getting players back. Initially I thought Jones would be the better player to retain if we had a choice or had to make a choice but now I am not so sure.
DakotaT
10 years ago
What I like about Starks is that he has a lot younger legs than his age would indicate. We've already gotten the best out of James Jones. If there was a decision between the two, retaining Starks is a no brainer.

As I've said before, WR is one position I do not worry about. The worst I've ever seen was Freeman, Corey Bradford, and Billy Schroeder - and Schroeder and Bradford got paid. Then Driver stepped up and we drafted Javon Walker.

Do not be terribly surprised if the Packers spend their first rounder on a WR. It would have to be the right guy though.
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
10 years ago

With only 3 WR's with much experience, anyone think The Packers may show some looks with Franklin or Harris teaming with Lacy or Starks in the backfield then splitting out to create a mismatch on a LB'r or Safety in the passing game/

I like the thought of having 4 rb's who have shown they can play.

I know Franklin and Harris have not had a lot of playing time due to injury, but both proved to be effective when in the lineup.

Lot's of different looks with 3 experienced WR's and 4 experience rb's.

Hell up until last year the Packers were lucky to keep 1 rb healthy, so it's not a bad thing to have 4 that are available.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
nerdmann
10 years ago

With only 3 WR's with much experience, anyone think The Packers may show some looks with Franklin or Harris teaming with Lacy or Starks in the backfield then splitting out to create a mismatch on a LB'r or Safety in the passing game/

I like the thought of having 4 rb's who have shown they can play.

I know Franklin and Harris have not had a lot of playing time due to injury, but both proved to be effective when in the lineup.

Lot's of different looks with 3 experienced WR's and 4 experience rb's.

Hell up until last year the Packers were lucky to keep 1 rb healthy, so it's not a bad thing to have 4 that are available.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



If I recall, Harris has that 4.3 type speed, doesn't he? I know Mike wanted him to be a Darren Sproles type dude. Wouldn't surprise me a bit. He's a little on the short side, though.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
beast
10 years ago

If I recall, Harris has that 4.3 type speed, doesn't he? I know Mike wanted him to be a Darren Sproles type dude. Wouldn't surprise me a bit. He's a little on the short side, though.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



No... more like 4.45 or so... he just looks faster because he's really small and quick.

And Harris is no Sproles and Sproles is no Harris...

Sproles is a 5'6" WR in the back-field. He has no power, and needs space and open field to get work or he's done. (kind of like Franklin, though as Franklin, Cobb and Sproles have shown a WR in the backfield can work if you protect them, use them wisely and get them extra spot to work their quickness, speed and magic.)(also Franklin showed he could effectively block which surprised me, it wasn't great but it was decent and good enough).

Harris is a true small RB with surprising power for his size and while he's no short yardage back he can run between the tackles normally and work at times with no space and make something happen out of nothing.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (7m) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (21m) : Yes
Zero2Cool (1h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (3h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (4h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (7h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (8h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (18h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
10m / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.