Packers Activate Starks, Release Francois
by Brandon on Nov 9, 2010 6:00 PM CST
in Green Bay Packers News
Email
PrintAccording to Packers.com, the Green Bay Packers have activated rookie 6th round RB James Starks from the PUP list and released LB Robert Francois. This was the second time the Packers released Francois this season. If you still consider John Kuhn a fullback, this marks the first time this season they've had three running backs on the active roster. They had left Francois inactive last week, and he had apparently fell down the depth chart behind all three linebackers they signed just a couple weeks ago. He looked undersized when forced to play in place of injured LB Brady Poppinga during the Dolphins game.
This is somewhat of a surprise since I expected them to try and slip either Starks or RB Dimitri Nance past waivers and onto the practice squad. Mike McCarthy has said that Starks still has a lot to learn while Nance finally got some touches during garbage time against the Cowboys. Maybe they didn't expect either player would clear waivers unclaimed. It's likely that Starks will be left inactive on most game days.
The back story to this is that they kept Starks over veteran CB Al Harris. Kevin Seifert thought this was a classic Packers roster move to keep the young guy over the old veteran. Mike McCarthy acknowledged as much when he said the decision to release Harris was based on "overall depth and the future of our roster." They have future plans for Starks, but none for Harris.
77 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Releasing Harris
We all have to pray every night that Woodson, Williams and Sheilds can stay healthy for the rest of the season and the playoffs. If they can’t J. Busch could be a starting corner. That just scares the crap out of me. What do you think?
Haven't seen Bush exposed yet this season
so it’s hard to say. If he was playing as poorly as he did last year you’d think we’d be hearing his name a lot more.
As for Al Harris, I’ll miss him, but isn’t he the most likely player to get injured? 36, coming off a major injury with a rebuilt knee . . . And he was already in obvious decline as early as 2008. So two years later, minus one knee, I guess it’s disappointing to see him go, but not a surprise. As for whether or not it was a good decision, we won’t know for a little while yet.
I am excited to see Starks out there. Hopefully he’s fully healthy and can learn enough to get a few carries. For the last 3 seasons this has been about the time of the year when McCarthy remembers that the run was not banned with the advent of the forward pass. Let’s hope that trend continues.
"We've got Hank Baskett"
by I voted for Kodos on Nov 9, 2010 6:36 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
That's because they rarely let him on the field on defense.
Tough to get torched on the sideline.
BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.
by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Nov 9, 2010 10:24 PM CST up reply actions
Philosophy
As many of you know I’ve been expecting this for awile.. Basically since it was announced that Starks was going on PUP! It goes w/ the Packers and Thompsons thinking of getting rookies and young players time to grow and gain experience! Little surprised that Harris was released, but again that goes to the same philosophy.
Will be interesting to see how much, if any, playing time Starks gets… He has some talent and would have been a likely 2nd rd pick in the draft if not for the injury! Will the Packers elevate him over Nance? That kinda depends on how assignment sure Starks is… It’ll take another couple weeks for him to get used to the hitting and speed of the NFL game, but I"m hopeful Starks can get on the field down the stretch and show some of the ability that I think he has!!!
You've been Stroh'd!!!
I am glad to see the move…if for nothing else, just to have some more depth at the position. If we were to lose Jackson our season would have probably been toast with just Kuhn and Nance on the team. At least this gives us some depth and hopefully it gives starks some carries to get a feel for the game at the pro level. I hope he can shake the injuries and be a solid player for us down the line.
Favre prob'ly hasn't lately, either. :D
Haven’t seen Bush exposed yet this season
TT bashers - turning my stomach since 2005!
The glass is way more than half-full!
oh that's good
Clever
"We've got Hank Baskett"
by I voted for Kodos on Nov 11, 2010 11:42 AM CST up reply actions
With all the injuries we have, there are now numerous positions where we have the same situation. Now RB isn’t one of them. What would have happened if Jackson got injured???
by TrevorR on Nov 9, 2010 7:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
i like this.
The way I see it, Harris would’ve a)been on the bench until someone got hurt or if Shields declined, or b) displaced Shields who is playing well and getting much needed experience. I don’t like either of those situations especially since Harris wouldn’t be able to contribute on ST or elsewhere.
On the other hand Starks and Nance gives us a couple of legitimate RB’s who could spell Jackson if they are able to step up. Unlike anyone else on the roster though, Starks gives the potential for the big play. B Jak has some ability there but just doesn’t have the speed to out run a defense for 20+ yds. Hopefully Starks will be able to step into the offense sooner rather than later. While it’s a gamble, I think it’s one that has a much bigger payoff than keeping Harris in a what if mentality.
Does anyone know if Starks has had access to the playbook while he was out? Is that legal by PUP rules?
TBD
The other possibility is for Starks to contribute in PR or KR duties. I’m all for him taking over for Tramon if he has some ability as that would lessen Tramon’s exposure to injury.
TBD
How do we know if Starks or Nance are 'legitimate?'
Just wondering.
It appears as if my signature carries a certain weight with the Suns front office. I called for Jared Dudley to be extended, and they obeyed. I'm kind of a big deal. So BSotS, what should I demand next?
EXTEND JASON RICHARDSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
His word, not mine.
It appears as if my signature carries a certain weight with the Suns front office. I called for Jared Dudley to be extended, and they obeyed. I'm kind of a big deal. So BSotS, what should I demand next?
EXTEND JASON RICHARDSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Practice time
I would guess that one reason to activate Starks is that he needs to practice and play some football this year, or it’s likely to be a similar situation next year. While he is being carried on the roster for this reason, he can always play some special teams, and maybe even catch a few screens and get a few carries.
And now it's time for another edition of "Really?" with PA
You’re activating Jamie Starks but cutting Al Harris. Really?
So the guy who hasn’t played a meaningful snap in two years is more important to the team than a former Pro Bowler who can make sure that the Packers aren’t shredded by “elite” quaterbacks in the playoffs. Really?
Really!? You think that this is the time of year to take a look at the big picture? Really? Hey TT, take a moment and think about THIS season…you know the one where NFC is ridiculously wide open and we actually have a chance to win a Super Bowl. Really!
As you can tell this move boggles my mind….
Perhaps Harris isn't qualified to be the guy "who can make sure that the Packers aren’t shredded by "elite" quaterbacks in the playoffs" anymore.
Won’t know till we see him with another team. If that happens.
TBD
But ask yourself this....
Who would you rather be in coverage in a pinch….
Jarret Bush (who may not have been exposed much so far but really hasn’t been test by high end QB’s either)
Pat Lee with his high ankle sprain
Brandon Underwood who is MIA apparently.
or Al Harris.
The real crux of the argument is how are the Packers better off with Starks, a guy who hasn’t played football in two years and has some hefty injury concerns of his own.
by PackApologist on Nov 9, 2010 10:12 PM CST up reply actions
Special teams
play and RB play will tell the Starks half of the equation.
At most, dime play would have show the Harris half of the equation. No ST play there.
So which p[layer would be helping out the most?
Do you really think Al Harris at age 36 would prefer being a #4 CB over going to a different team of his choice to start? I don’t think so.
The #4 CB always has Special Teams responsibilities. In fact, that is his primary job. Harris is not a Special Teams player. So if we keep Harris, we lose Special Teams contributors. Quite frankly, that department is a little thin right now…
We have more needs at HB than CB. So why wouldn’t we give Starks a chance?
This is 2010, not 2009. Bush has held his own. Underwood when playing has held his own. The pass rush is likely the biggest reason why though. Al Harris is coming off a severe injury. There’s still no telling as to how healthy he is. All we know is the last time he was 100% was in early 2009, which was clearly a dissapointing year for him. He is 3 years removed of his Pro Bowl performance and is 36 years old. The logical choice is to cut him. It’s best for the team and it’s best for him. I’m sure he appreciates that too, because he gets an opportunity to start.
"No player is greater than a team."
-Vince Lombardi
by Jabooty on Nov 10, 2010 3:17 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, really!
I sure am glad TT is our GM, rather than you!
TT bashers - turning my stomach since 2005!
The glass is way more than half-full!
I am too
Fans shouldn’t be GM’s. Jerry Jones and Dan Synder have proved that many times over.
by PackApologist on Nov 9, 2010 10:05 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Excellent point
I often find myself questioning TT but he usually seems to make very good long-term choices.
"We've got Hank Baskett"
by I voted for Kodos on Nov 10, 2010 1:22 AM CST up reply actions
I totally agree with you PackApologist
The way our season has been going with all these injuries, I honestly think there is gonna come a time this season where one of our corners goes down at a crucial moment n his replacment (likely Jarrett Bush) is gonna come in and get raped all game long like he’s always done. Then we are all gonna sigh n say to ourselves “if only we still had 31”.
More important to the future of the team!!!
Harris is 36, in decline and coming off a devastating knee injury, while Starks would have been a 2nd rd pick if not injured and has a bright future!!!
You've been Stroh'd!!!
How do you know Al will “make sure that the Packers aren’t shredded by "elite" quarterbacks in the playoffs”? Were you in practice? I don’t know why someone sees him getting cut and draws the conclusion that Al is still playing at a pro bowl level or something. He was already a poor fit for the system, you factor in his age and declining skill set, and then add in that he’s coming off a brutal knee injury. He made it through waivers too so no one else was interested at that “low” figure. He’ll sign on somewhere for vets minimum but I don’t see the guy making an impact…he might even be a liability.
by TrevorR on Nov 10, 2010 6:33 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
'Brutal'
is an understatement.
TT bashers - turning my stomach since 2005!
The glass is way more than half-full!
a 36 yr old with knee reconstruction? even woodson has lost some coverage ability this year i imagine harris doesnt have much left in the tank
But at least give the man a chance! Remember this is the same guy who was suppose to go out for the season with a spleen injury, yet came back after only missing 4 games n basically shut down every receiver he went against for the rest of that season. If anyone can come back from an injury like this, it would be Al Harris.
a spleen doesnt affect coverage ability like a complete knee reconstruction
and what position would he play? 4th cornerback? would a probowl corner really accept that
Seems like the other teams weren't willing to give him a chance either...
I can only assume that there may have been more of a problem physically than we know. I wish I could watch Al practice during those times.
by Bush League All Star on Nov 9, 2010 11:45 PM CST up reply actions
He's been in contact with multiple teams
I don’t think that not getting claimed off of waivers says anything about his physical condition. I think it’s more about teams doing due diligence about bringing him in for a try-out before signing him so they can see where he’s at recovery-wise.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
Or so says his agent
Not saying he’s lying, but on the other hand, his agent is out to make Harris look good. And being in contact with a team can always mean you cold-called a GM, not the other way around.
At this point it doesn’t matter who says what, it depends on who ultimately signs him… or not.
Fair enough point I suppose
I have little doubt he’ll be signed by someone though.
Towlieppan: "You wanna throw high?"
Only for one year,
as I’m sure you must know by now.
TT bashers - turning my stomach since 2005!
The glass is way more than half-full!
But at least give the man a chance!
They’ve been giving him a chance, for the last three weeks on the practice field, to show McCarthy, Capers, Perry, et Al – who have seen far more of him during that time than you or I have – where he is at.
Remember this is the same guy who was suppose to go out for the season with a spleen injury, yet came back after only missing 4 games n basically shut down every receiver he went against for the rest of that season.That was then, when he was younger – this is now, which is when he was younger than. :)
TT bashers - turning my stomach since 2005!
The glass is way more than half-full!
Starks
the FO seems to be putting an awful lot of faith in a guy that hasn’t played for 2 yrs. and seems to be injury prone. The hits don’t get any easier in the NFL. And, Nance hasn’t shown anything in the few carries he’s had. I guess we have to trust TT/MM to know what’s best. The fact that no team picked up Al tells me all I need to know on him.
Injury prone
I guess you would have to make the same conclusion about CM3, He’s had 2 injuries in 2 years too! Just one of Starks happened to be a shoulder injury that required surgery…
Why shouldn’t the FO give Starks a chance? He’s as healthy as Matthews now, and has alot of talent! He has to get reacclimated to the hitting, but thats not that big a deal… I think they should start trying to find ways to use him almost immediately!
You've been Stroh'd!!!
Three
has been nicked up for a couple games but he hasn’t basically been off the field for 2 yrs. I admit that I’ve never seen Starks play. I guess by ‘faith’, I mean that they drafted him even tho he didn’t play much lately and after he got hurt they stick with him. I’d sure like to see this guy on the field. I, for one, would like to see a back that has the POTENTIAL to break some big gainers. But, my gut tells me we won’t see him in a game this yr. If that’s true, then we invested a draft pick and a lost yr. I hope he’s worth it.
by bigbill992001 on Nov 10, 2010 5:39 PM CST up reply actions
We'll probably see on him ST this year
and if he ends up as some type of returner, we can get a feel for what he’s capable of in terms of acceleration, speed, and being able to find/hit holes
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Nov 10, 2010 8:04 PM CST up reply actions
That, and he was actually projected as a 2nd-3rd round pick before his injury his senior season which tells me that scouts obviously felt he was very talented.
by packallday555 on Nov 11, 2010 12:50 PM CST up reply actions
Good, because
I admit that I’ve never seen Starks play.
the scouts (before he was drafted), TT (before and since) and the coaches have, and they know better than you.
TT bashers - turning my stomach since 2005!
The glass is way more than half-full!
bad comparison
Mathews has had the same hamstring injury actually 3 times in 2 years including camp….however none were as serious as James starks one hammy or his shoulder…..I just wouldn’t say that Mathews is injury prone….lets try “NFC player of the week” prone…
by SpaceGhost34 on Nov 12, 2010 10:55 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Al Harris signs with the Dolphins
Well now we are gonna see if he is truly done or not. I honestly don’t think so. This is great news for me since he went from my favorite team to my hometown team (im from South FL) n since we have already played the Dolphins we don’t have to play against him. He could have signed with the Vikings or Lions but he chose Miami, which shows he has class unlike some other players we’ve had over the years.
Could have signed with the Vikings?
The Vikings all but said they didn’t want him. Where did you come up with the Vikings and Lions both offering contracts to him?
It says in the article “Beside the Dolphins, other teams that were interested in pursuing Harris included the Minnesota Vikings, the Detroit Lions and the Houston Texans.” Not sure if they offered him a contract but im sure they were pretty interested. Come on now, the Vikings not wanting a former Packer is like a fat kid not wanting his haagen daz ice cream!
I'll assume you mean the NFP article
Being interested is not the same as offering a contract. All a team had to do to be “interested” is return his agent’s phone call.
As I mentioned earlier, it is in his agent’s best interests to make Al sound like he is the creme de la creme of free agents, even if it’s a big smoke and mirrors act. If there was no contract on the table, there was no chance he played for that team, period.
Bears vs. Dolphins, Thursday Nov. 18th!
The Dolphins cut one of their starting CBs so I’m guessing Harris will see significant playing time immediately (if he’s not already the starter). So we’ll probably get to see what he’s got left, and with Cutler on the field there’s a decent chance he’ll get a pick.
"We've got Hank Baskett"
by I voted for Kodos on Nov 10, 2010 4:06 PM CST up reply actions
The other thing about Harris, is that he was never a great fit for the 3-4 scheme. His strength was bump-and-run, and he didn’t play as well in zones (as opposed to Woodson who flourished).
Add that to the age/injury/depth chart/lack of special teams play. It just added up to the end of the line for Al. Football is a game where productivity can drop off in a hurry. – just ask KGB…
34 scheme
Its not the 34 scheme… Its the coverage schemes. Harris is purely a Press Man cover CB. When Capers arrived his 34 D uses a variety of coverages… Some Press, some off man and some zone. Harris struggles in both off man and zone coverages! He needs to be a Press CB playing at the LOS and disrupting the routes of the WR. He doesn’t have the instincts for zone and he doesn’t have the quickness for off man! Never did…
Should be a good fit for him in Miami… Pretty sure they play almost exclusively press coverage!
You've been Stroh'd!!!
Yeah, Miami plays a lot of press coverage, or at least they have in most of the games I’ve seen.
by packallday555 on Nov 10, 2010 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
Right. Technically the 3-4 isn’t necessarily a zone or soft coverage, but Capers scheme rarely has the corners bumping on the line. Like Kampman, he had less impact with the scheme change, though both could still play effectively in it.
CB bumping
Last year they still played mostly press coverage, and this year it seems they are playing alot of it as well… All the CB on the roster, w/ the exception of Shields were here last year and played press. They just don’t play it as much. With CB like Williams and Shields they don’t have the physicality to play as much press. But both are still best at man… So instead of getting physical they just get in the hip pocket of the WR and run w/ them instead of trying to take them off their routes, like Harris is best at…
Perfect example is Shields INT vs Dallas… He was in man coverage, but instead of pressing the WR, he used his athelicism to stay right w/ Bryant and make the INT.
You've been Stroh'd!!!
I like Al Harris but
there is no way he has the speed to keep with Austin and make that pick. Of course, one could argue that Harris never would have let him get going like that, but I think Shields has played exceptionally well for a converted WR with two years CB experience.
"We've got Hank Baskett"
by I voted for Kodos on Nov 10, 2010 4:10 PM CST up reply actions
Nance..
Is Nance just horrible or what? I can’t believe he hasn’t gotten more of a look than he has.
Sometimes nothin is a real cool hand.
Yeah
I gotta believe he’s just a cheap insurance policy in case one of our backs go down, otherwise we would have seen more of him. He’s been here long enuf to know the system, or at least a good portion of it.
by bigbill992001 on Nov 10, 2010 5:47 PM CST up reply actions
We haven't gotten a longer look
because by the time he learned the playbook and would’ve been ready to contibute, we were playing the Vikings in a close game, then the Jets in a close game, and then he got a few touches in the Cowboy game.
You don’t pull your starters to see what you’re backups can do in close games… otherwise, why not throw Matt Flynn in against the Jets to see what he can do?. In the Vikings game, he was supposed to get a screen pass that Jared Allen picked and was used as a decoy in a couple other short yardage plays.
Its not that the coaches think he’s horrible… they just haven’t had a good opportunity to get him on the field
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Nov 10, 2010 8:09 PM CST up reply actions
The Flynn analogy is pretty weak..
I get your point, but it’s not like Jackson or Kuhn are going to threaten for an MVP award anytime soon like Rogers should.
That said, if they think he’s good what difference does the score of the game make if they are going to give him a look? His look could be near the start of the game, it doesn’t have to be in the last 2 minutes of a 3 point game.
Sometimes nothin is a real cool hand.
Nance is a 3rd stringer
you don’t play your back-ups over your starters unless you have too… but that doesn’t mean they’re complete garbage. How about someone like Desmond Bishop or Charlie Peprah… neither were starters before this season and we never just threw them into the game just to get a look at them
Also, the reason you don’t play a back-up over a starter just to test them out, is it can’t be good for the psyche of the people involved.
Imagine MM telling BJack, we’re not gonna start you today because we want to see what this kid can do… BJack can’t be feeling good about that. Furthermore, lets say we face a 3rd and 1 w/ Nance in and he doesnt convert it for whatever reason… that play will then be scrutinized by everyone about how, I bet Jackson or Kuhn make it, which isn’t good for Dmitri
by Goldenarmadillo4 on Nov 11, 2010 3:58 PM CST up reply actions
Haven’t really gotten a look. He got those 4 carries last week against the Cowboys but that was in a situation where they knew we were going to run four times in a row. It’d be great to see him get some carries on a meaningful play. And too be honest, I don’t understand why he hasn’t. It’s not like he could do much worse than Jackson does most of time.
by packallday555 on Nov 11, 2010 12:52 PM CST up reply actions
What about Starks?
Do you think he’s there for insurance purposes only? Or do you think they will actually give him some chances to see what he can do?
I’’ve maintained they would activate Strarks to the 53 since he went on PUP. And now that he has been elevated I think in a week or two they start trying to find ways to get him involved! What do you think?
You've been Stroh'd!!!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Acme Packing Company
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SBNation.com Recent Stories
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Erin Andrews reportedly dating ‘Gossip Girl’ actor Chace Crawford, who also happens to be Tony Romo’s brother-in-law
- Madden ’13 will include ‘Tebowing’
- Deep Posts: Winslow not wanted in Tampa Bay?
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Juron Criner, WR, Oakland Raiders
- Beyond the Shutdown 50: Gino Gradkowski, C/G, Baltimore Ravens
