running backs

[Harlan Huckleby]

Why do the Packer running backs suck so bad? I know Lacy is above average, but he only is available half the time.

Been watching some other teams. Chicago plugs in a backup, Jordan Howard, who is supposed to be nothing special. Boom! Look at Minnesota's backups, Assiata and McKinnon, both are effective. Alfred Morris is pretty decent behind the golden boy there in Dallas, Elliott.

It's not fair, I tell you. It's just not fair.

[King Friday]

Thompson does not value the position of RB...which is probably fine since his selections for the most part have been mediocre at best on the whole.

[Maxie the Taxi]

This past draft was pretty deep in running backs. I truly expected TT to draft one late. I was hoping for Tyler Ervin.

Really, the problem is, I think, TT and/or Stubby really don't have a firm idea of what type RB they want, i.e., a Lacy clone, a scat back, etc.

[beveaux1]

I think the biggest problem has been pass protect. The smaller, quicker 3rd down backs have to be able to blitz pick up first. If you don't trust them to block a blitzer, they can't see the field. It's a lot tougher for a small back to do well at blocking.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think the biggest problem has been pass protect. The smaller, quicker 3rd down backs have to be able to blitz pick up first. If you don't trust them to block a blitzer, they can't see the field. It's a lot tougher for a small back to do well at blocking.

They don't seem to use Starks as a blocker - although maybe he has to stay home on blitzes. Starks doesn't even run pass patterns, he just drifts downfield on pass plays as the check down. Kind of sad how predictable his role is.

There always seems to be a glut of decent running backs; it's the easiest position on the team to fill. Yet all we got is a battered starter and a worthless #2.

[King Friday]

There always seems to be a glut of decent running backs; it's the easiest position on the team to fill. Yet all we got is a battered starter and a worthless #2.

It is a position where very few guys last more than 3-4 years in the league. You almost have to find a RB every year to add to the roster that can contribute as a runner. This is even more true for Green Bay, because you damn well know Ted ain't spending money on any RB equivalent to the top 10-15 at the position or bringing in a free agent...so we will ALWAYS be rotating guys there.

Ted's drafted 2 guys in the last 7 years who have been contributors to the running game. He hasn't brought in anything in free agency over that period either. As a former LB, Ted simply hates RBs even if they are being put on his team.

[Maxie the Taxi]

I think the biggest problem has been pass protect. The smaller, quicker 3rd down backs have to be able to blitz pick up first. If you don't trust them to block a blitzer, they can't see the field. It's a lot tougher for a small back to do well at blocking.

All true. However, nowadays a quick, pass receiving "3rd down back" doesn't necessarily have to be small or a weak blocker. And then you have to weigh the benefits against the costs. I think a really good pass receiving 3rd down back that can make people miss would improve the team's chances to gain 1st downs, as opposed to one who's primarily a blocker. I'm thinking of James White of the Patriots and a former Badger. He's not a blocker of the caliber of John Kuhn, but he could help us immensely in 3rd and long, especially if we need to beat an all out blitz.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The party line is that they have two 3rd down backs, Cobb & Montgomery. I call bullshit.

[texaspackerbacker]

I suppose this is a bad time to mention it - after a good week last week, but I'd say the reason the Packers get less benefit out of Lacy and Starks than the Vikings do out of their couple of journeymen and the Bears maybe with Howard as well as a lot of other teams with pretty much no name RBs is our O Line. The exception to that, though, is Ezekiel Elliot, who is the real deal - a rare combination of speed and power and instinctiveness - not to mention the great O Line he has to run behind.

There's a LOT of things I don't like about Ted Thompson, but his tendency to "not value" or at least seldom draft high RBs is one thing I agree with. More often than not, great college RBs are either not so great in the NFL or else burn out quick or both.

I do like the idea of Cobb and/or Montgomery as 3rd down type backs, but it seems like McCarthy hardly ever uses them that way - pass patterns out of the backfield, safety valve, etc.

[Zool]

Asiata and McKinnon were both drafted by the Vikings. Asiata would have a tough time beating Kuhn in a footrace, but McKinnon looks like the real deal.

[pbmax]

Starks blocks a lot. On almost everything but a called screen he checks pass pressure/blitz first then releases for a pass.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Starks blocks a lot. On almost everything but a called screen he checks pass pressure/blitz first then releases for a pass.

He does not block alot. I watched him closely last week on pass plays. I agree he will pick up a blitz if he is in position to catch it. But he quickly makes his way past blockers. Look next week, you can school me if I am wrong.Most passplays he appears to be meandering down field like it's bar time.

[Rutnstrut]

The way Kuhn has looked for the Saints it would have made more sense to let Starks go and keep Kuhn. I know he's a FB, but he could always be an emergency RB. Plus he can block well. They should have kept Kuhn and picked up a young RB. Yet another brain dead move by TT, and stubby.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Releasing Kuhn was a no brainer, not a dead brainer. Kuhn has scored some TDs for New Orleans. Is his overall play still at high level? Maybe so. If so, I still say TT made a reasonable choice by keeping 1 FB. I'm not moved by Kuhn's emergency RB potential. But pretty much everybody and their uncle agrees that Starks has been a dud, they should have gone younger and quicker.

[Patler]

Is everyone forgetting that Starks had his best season in 2015?

601 yards rushing with a 4.1/carry average.
392 yards on 43 receptions for a 9.2/reception average.

Maybe Starks fell off the cliff over the off-season, but from his performance last year he should have been expected to be more than adequate as a backup this year, and a decent receiver out of the backfield. He was good as a receiver in college (127 receptions in 3 years) but never had a lot of opportunities with the Packers until 2015.

Whether the fans like it or not, Cobb and Montgomery WILL be used out of the backfield. So long as that continues, there is no reason for a 3rd RB on the roster if the first two are healthy. If Lacy is out this week, GB probably will sign another RB, but it is a wasted roster spot if the #1 and #2 are healthy so long as Cobb and Montgomery continue being used out of the backfield as they have been. It would be different if the #3 RB was the primary KO or punt return man, or was otherwise a beast on special teams, but that not being the case the #3 RB won't be active on game days anyway. If they need him active due to injuries, they will sign one for the week(s) he is needed.