Running Back Rumors

[sheepshead]

given the state of the Green Bay rushing attack, you have to think coach Mike McCarthy will give the 6-foot-2, 218-pounder (Starks) a chance. "He's a big, athletic running back, and I think he has the ability to be a three-down player," McCarthy said on Sept. 16.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

What I want to know is, how in the hell is Joe Arrigo even employed? I've never seen him hit a "rumor," ever. Sure, he isn't that bad of a writer, and he knows what his audience craves, but the guy is complete shit.

Someone please explain this to me.

[vince]

I don't know if or where he works, but I promise you he's not getting paid for his Packers intel.

[gbgary]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

No way do you trade Driver, you need his leadership if we are serious about making a strong push in the playoffs this season.

no, never DD!! i like Jones but he'd be gone if they wanted him for Lynch if it was up to me. Driver is as good today as he's ever been...maybe better.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I disagree, Driver seems to have declined. I would much rather keep Jones than Driver at this point.

[Smidgeon]

I'm not sure that he's declined, but with the way Jones has been playing (minus the fumble), who has the better odds of being a better player in two years? Next year?

[Joemailman]

Whether Jones or Driver are more important to the Packers is a moot point. The Packers are a pass-first team. There is no way they would trade away a key ingredient of the passing game (Jones, Driver or Nelson) to shore up an alleged problem at RB.

[mission]

What I want to know is, how in the hell is Joe Arrigo even employed? I've never seen him hit a "rumor," ever. Sure, he isn't that bad of a writer, and he knows what his audience craves, but the guy is complete shit.

Someone please explain this to me.

He's a horrible writer.

I'm a bad writer, and when I read his stuff, I can't get through the first paragraph without seeing a bunch of errors. Couple that with the cheesy web design and you have the perfection combination of internet blogger guy with no legitimate connection to the team.

[Smidgeon]

Whether Jones or Driver are more important to the Packers is a moot point. The Packers are a pass-first team. There is no way they would trade away a key ingredient of the passing game (Jones, Driver or Nelson) to shore up an alleged problem at RB.

Oh, I definitely agree there.

[gbgary]

Whether Jones or Driver are more important to the Packers is a moot point. The Packers are a pass-first team. There is no way they would trade away a key ingredient of the passing game (Jones, Driver or Nelson) to shore up an alleged problem at RB.

i agree and wouldn't have it any other way...but to get something you have to give up something. without a better running game we're only an alleged superbowl team.

[Joemailman]

Keep in mind the Packers under MM start slow in the running game. In the first 3 games of the great 2007 season, the Packers rushed 59 times for 171 yards for a 2.9 YPC. In the 1st 3 games of 2010, the Packers have rushed 75 times for 285 yards, for a 3.8 YPC. Even if you take away Grant's carries, its 67-240 for 3.6. The running game has not been as bad as some people think, and is not why the Pack lost to the Bears.

[mraynrand]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

[Joemailman]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

Holmgren often used it in Green Bay as well, especially in the early years. After Sterling Sharpe, the top receivers were RB's and TE's.

[mraynrand]

We're lucky we run West Coast. A lot of the short passes act as a run game for us and help us pick up chunks of yards. .

I've heard this can work.

Holmgren often used it in Green Bay as well, especially in the early years. After Sterling Sharpe, the top receivers were RB's and TE's.

So did Shermy: when Freeman and Schroeder sucked in 2000 and 2001, Green was the #1 receiver.

[woodbuck27]

i think standing pat will be a mistake. we need to be able to take some pressure off the passing game. we need to have a running game we can count on a little more. at this point we need lynch more than we need hawk and/or a middle draft pick so do it.

We have 8 LBs on the roster of a 3-4 team that sometimes puts 5 LBs on the field at the same time. We cannot trade away a LB. We cannot afford to put Bishop on the field for any extended amount of time. We don't have LB depth to trade away.

We could afford to trade away a TE or a WR.

fine with me. let's do it!

Dispassionately, it should be Driver that is traded. He has only a few years left anyway. Better to trade an old player a year too early than a year too late.

Ahhh come on Patler. DD will retire with our team. He's also still very solid and isn't going anywhere.