If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Starks got reinjured yesterday, which went uncommented by the announcers. He didn't look 100%, frustrating. Grant looks entirely different player compared to first 10 or 12 games.
This is pretty much it in a sentence. It was a real blessing for Grant to have Starks carry the load for the first half of the season. Grant looks noticeably better the last couple games and I don't know if that would have been the case had Grant been carrying the ball 15 times a game all season.
Now that Grant is back. . . part of what makes him a good player is that he's reliable. He had that injury where a guy just toppled his ankle. I don't know if any player could have come out of that healthy, but by and large, he's durable as heck and pretty good.
I'd take a 100% Starks, but now that we have a 100% Grant, we can afford the bi-weekly Starks injury.
Starks is a tease. He is an enthusiastic player, but then seems to lose decisiveness when he gets stoned a couple times. I really hope he settles into a groove. His challenge is between the ears.
I am afraid on both sides dealing with the running game. The worst OL in pro football, and the 4th string RB for chicago ate up our defense. I don't care they didn't score TD's or whatever...SF will, NYG will. Scares me badly. And still, McCarthy refuses to run the ball. It isn't that our running game is bad, and it isn't that our RB's are bad...if you look at the over all stats our running game statisitcally is pretty good....it's just that McCarthy refuses to run the ball, and it could cost us at home in the playoffs.
Its a passing league...no need to run the ball anymore.
The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary -- Vince Lombardi
Starks got reinjured yesterday, which went uncommented by the announcers. He didn't look 100%, frustrating. Grant looks entirely different player compared to first 10 or 12 games.
Against KC Grant ran square into Sitton on a 3rd and short play where the ENTIRE left side of the field was unoccupied. It helped cost us the game. He always plays very well against chicago (can't explain it), but he has looked very average this year. I actually LIKE our run blocking most of the time, we just need to call more running plays.
The only time success comes before work is in the dictionary -- Vince Lombardi
Starks is a tease. He is an enthusiastic player, but then seems to lose decisiveness when he gets stoned a couple times. I really hope he settles into a groove. His challenge is between the ears.
Grant is playing aggressive & confident.
The Bears are one of the most veteran, disciplined run defenses in the NFL. A guy like Grant who has almost no hesitation (you could also call it patience when it's working) runs well against the Bears it seems. Starks needs to adjust his game to the defense he's playing. You have to be yourself, but you also have to adjust to the conditions a little too. The Bears are going to be in their gaps. You're probably not going to have a lot of time to get the seam. Just get the ball and go forward, maybe you'll slip off a guy.
I'm worried about Starks' ankle. When you re-injure your ankle it becomes even weaker (I speak from experience). They better rest him until the playoffs. It also looks like Starks screwed up in the backfield at least once. It appeared Rodgers was going to hand it off to Starks but he wasn't where he should have been and Aaron had to scramble to get past the LOS. You could see Rodgers after the busted play express his displeasure to James big time.
Grant does look good right now. He's running hard. In the Chicago game he had a nice gain near the sideline, had a chance to go out of bounds but didn't - he ran over another tackler. Starks looks mostly ineffective lately, due I think to those ankle problems. I would guess he's going to get two weeks of rest now.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
Comment