Packers Question of the day - Don Jackson Time?

With Eddie Lacy's status still up in the air with the ankle injury he suffered in Sunday night's win against the Giants and James Starks being the only available running back on the roster, should there be caution?

Better yet, should the Packers look Don Jackson's way and possibly promote him from the practice squad? In order to do so, their 55-player roster would need to be reduced by three players, as Jackson would be the 53rd active addition. It would also leave one open practice squad slot that currently stands at its maximum of 10 players. 

With the returns of Mike Pennel and Demetri Goodson from suspension, some roster moves could be on the horizon. But should Jackson be one of them?

__________________________

Zachary Jacobson is a staff writer/reporter for Cheesehead TV. He's the voice of The Leap on iTunes and can be heard on The Scoop KLGR 1490 AM every Saturday morning. He's also a contributor on the Pack-A-Day Podcast. He can be found on Twitter via @ZachAJacobson or contacted through email at [email protected].

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (55)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Hematite's picture

October 12, 2016 at 09:23 am

Feed the ball to Ripkowski.
The Starks decision is beginning to haunt Thompson.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
mnklitzke's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:17 am

I would agree feed the ball more to Rip if he carried the ball before but he had 13 career yards at Ok and never ran the ball in high school... I don't find the FB drives but to think he can carry the load is crazy.... Couldn't agree more with Starks! TT whiffed big time here.. Our options are Jackson and..... Spiller?? Forset just got picked up by Lions...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:14 am

Spiller signed with the Seahawks (and caught a TD pass in his first game). He is not an option.

I highly doubt TT goes outside the organization as he is loathe to do so unless he absolutely must.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

October 12, 2016 at 01:54 pm

The advantage to staying with PS guys is that they've been introduced to the system and will be less limiting to the offense early on...although you're settling for PS talent.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 12, 2016 at 02:30 pm

Jackson got hurt in camp so we never really got to see how well he looked in preseason.
With them not signing Spiller, cutting Pressley loose, I have to really wonder if they really like what they see in Jackson.

If he gets brought up I have to believe they do.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

October 12, 2016 at 08:42 pm

It gets interesting: Starks was a DNP today and Lacy was limited.

http://www.packers.com/team/injury-report.html

Methinks there's a roster move on the horizon...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 12, 2016 at 09:28 pm

I think so as well.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

October 13, 2016 at 07:43 am

Yes,,if Lacy can't go what they have left is Starks and Rip and Ripkowski would be the better option

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 13, 2016 at 07:46 am

And per the reports yesterday Starks appears to be more injured then Lacy. So we could be down to just Ripkowski.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

October 13, 2016 at 10:30 am

Ya I just read that Starks has a knee injury but no mention yet of how serious, it will be interesting to see how this will go in the next few days,will they put Starks on IR and bring up Jackson? If not they will be in a pinch if Lacy's ankle doesn't hold up

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

October 12, 2016 at 09:52 am

Well they could cut Schum and just go for it on 4 th down can't be much worse.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 12, 2016 at 09:55 am

as sad as it is.. When they are netting 30 yards on the punt, it really isn't that much different. Hell I'm sure Rodgers could punt it 30 yards.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
mnklitzke's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:19 am

I would be ok with Crosby trying it. Hell he can't be any worse.... Thought TT learned his lesson with Jon Ryan.... But NO does the same thing going struggle all season with this guy and bring in some camp leg that Schum beats out to only continue to suck...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:32 am

I realize that you're joking about Crosby, but I wouldn't want to do anything to jeopardize the health or the zone this guy is in.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:30 am

Heck,anyone on the team could punt 30 yards,cut Shum and open a roster spot! LOL
Unfortunately with Pennell and Goodson coming back someone has to go,it will be interesting to see,my guess is one will be Ringo but you never know,this is where TT and the coaching staff have to make some tough decisions

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
fastmoving's picture

October 12, 2016 at 02:28 pm

so maybe its time to switch positions..............

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Kyle Graham's picture

October 12, 2016 at 09:52 am

I mean they have to. They can't go into a game expecting Starks to carry the load. He is fumble prone and looks unsure of himself this season. I think at this point I would take just about anyone into this game and feel more comfortable than I do with Starks. We can't go into a game with only Starks and rip. That's not gonna work. Nor do I want Cobb back there taking a beating.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:20 am

Starks has been productive in the past when he's received enough carries. I think the Packers will roll with him for at least a game before they give up on him. Failing that, it seems likely they will feed the ball more to Cobb and Montgomery out of the backfield. I agree that would be a mistake but I think it is far more likely than the Packers promoting Don Jackson.

Personally, I couldn't tell you a dang thing about Don Jackson other than his height/weight/speed stats. Those don't look promising. I'm a fan of bigger backs to go with the Packers offense because I think it better stresses opposing defenses. If they go with larger personnel it advantages the passing attack. If they go with faster/lighter personnel then Lacy can punish them. I don't see guys the size of Cobb, Montgomery or Jackson creating that dilemma.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:23 am

If Jackson is ready to go, bring him up. Starks has been dreadful. How can Lacy look so great, and Starks look so lousy?

IMO, I don't bring Goodson back. Basically all he offers is being a gunner. He is a liability in coverage. That being said they kept Bush for many years even though he was a liability in coverage.

The players that could possibly be released I think are Price, Callahan, Abbrederis.
Or does someone go to IR?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:33 am

Starks may have hit the running back wall, which typically happens around age 30. If Jackson doesn't fumble, might as well bring him up and get rid of Abbrederis, who the aren't using anyway.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:05 am

Cutting Abbrederis would be insane at this point. Could not understand why they would after this preseason unless they were trying to dangle him as trade bait, which in itself doesn't make sense.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:11 am

I personally think its dumb to cut him as well... But he is receiving no playing time. So I can see why the argument is being made.

I mean depending on the snaps the offense has, I see no reason why they can't get Abbrederis, Montgomery, Davis and Janis all around 10 snaps a game.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:31 am

Rodgers doesn't operate that way. He wants to go to Nelson, Cobb, and Adams. No point in having the other guys run around pointlessly.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4zone's picture

October 12, 2016 at 01:41 pm

Abby not getting snaps, especially in light of the problem receivers are having getting open when AR has 5 and 6 seconds to throw the ball is ridiculous. Precise route running is his specialty. Sadly, TT wants to push Davis instead because of speed. Sadly, speed running the wrong route does no one any good. What we need are guys who can fight their way open. Having said that, Abby will probably be the first one cut loose. With DBs hobbled right now, I don't see any of those UDFAs getting cut right now. Unless for Goodson which would be a shame.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

October 12, 2016 at 12:29 pm

Well they are going to need two roster spots for Pennel and Goodson, and your seventh WR isn't playing anyway, so draw your own conclusions. Not to mention we seem to have a shortage of DB's all of a sudden due to this injury disease that strikes every year about this time, so it isn't likely they won't activate Goodsen, even though he's nothing special.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

October 13, 2016 at 05:43 am

I'm affraid that you are right regarding Abby. But, if they cut Abby, it might bew huge mistake...
Packers are now 52 on the roster, MIke Pennel would come instead of Price, who goes back to PS, so there is enough room to upgrade Johnson and have Goodson (mostly because of the ST gunner job!)...
Let's hope everything will be settled down soon with no significant loss...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:21 am

Everyone knows that TT is incapable of admitting he made a mistake so the only way we get a new punter or RB is if there is an injury. Maybe they can do one of those pretend injuries and put Starks and Schum on IR so Teddy can save face.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sonomaca's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:38 am

Where's Alonzo Harris? Was he banished for all time?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

October 12, 2016 at 12:14 pm

Good question, I wonder if he had an opportunity with another team in the pre-season. Where are all the fans of Crockett now, you would have thought by their comments that he was the next Forte, surprising based on that no one else even took a look at him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

October 12, 2016 at 12:48 pm

Possibly Crockett has not reached an injury settlement with the Packers may be why he has not gotten another chance, the point is I still believe he was highly over rated.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Point Packer's picture

October 12, 2016 at 10:02 pm

According to the extreme homers, Crocket was the next Emmit Smith. "Brought great energy". A "change of pace". "Shifty like Emmit Smith". "Power and speed". Ok....

Stsrks resigning has been a disaster. Guy looks like he never played football so far this year.

Great work from TT at RB position.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

October 13, 2016 at 10:36 am

It always seems he comes up short somewhere,always putting a finger in the dam trying to plug holes,tough job being a GM

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:57 am

I like the looks of this Jackson fellow. He may be the change of pace RB that we need but with good power and strength. Since our running game is between the tackles, he could easily handle the running part of the equation. Is he smart enough to understand this unnecessarily complex offense? Can he protect Aaron Rodgers may be the bigger question?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Finwiz's picture

October 12, 2016 at 12:18 pm

Unnecessarily complex.....you mean the one that a typical college receiver can't seem to figure out, after having GONE TO COLLEGE? Unreal....you gotta make an offense SO DIFFICULT in schematic concept that it takes your average, talented college receiver YEARS to figure out.
Just SMDH

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:58 am

Packers Question of the day - How Ridiculous is the situation on Offense going to get?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Point Packer's picture

October 12, 2016 at 12:51 pm

Get ready for the "super sneaky MM special sauce offense set" - i.e. a WR in the backfield (whoa - no way!) often against Dallas. Its super sneaky, they won't even know what hit em. Mike is so creative.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
guzzi2000's picture

October 12, 2016 at 02:04 pm

I've always liked Starks and am reluctant to admit he may have lost it. I still want to believe if forced into a starting roll he will rise to the occasion. To me it seems
like he is pressing to much and not so much that he has
hit that 30 year old decline. I hope I'm correct, because
I'm not optimistic that Packer management can come up with a viable alternative. Given up on trying to figure out what the hell the plan is for the wide receiver situation.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lou's picture

October 12, 2016 at 03:13 pm

Agreed on Starks, he has been so productive in his role for 6 years, if he gets more consistent carries and still struggles that is another issue, however even if he comes back to his normal production and still fumbles that is another story and then they won't pick up his option for next year. No doubt a RB will be taken high in the draft next year based on Stark's play and Lacey being a free agent. Hopefully they have a plan like they did with Kuhn, it looks like Ripowski is ready as is the case with Lane Taylor.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

October 12, 2016 at 04:56 pm

The answer (not my opinion) is that they will roll with Starks. But the mere fact of the matter is, Lacy won't miss any considerable time. He will most likely play this week even, which is why they haven't made a move. So the question is moot. If he can host a bowling tourney, and walk onto the lanes, it can't be that bad.

As far as Starks goes. He might be closer to 30, but remember, he missed his entire senior year and then his entire rookie year. He should have one good year left in theory. If Jonathan Franklin hadn't been injured, this would all be moot as well. As for now, I trust Starks in pass pro for any down more than anyone else not named Lacy on the roster right now.

There's no question they address RB in the draft next year. Third or fourth rounder.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

October 13, 2016 at 10:38 am

WR first rd,RB or TE second rd is my guess

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

October 13, 2016 at 08:08 am

Recall how ineffective Lacy was a year ago on a gimpy ankle...

Maybe I didn't have to qualify that statement with the gimpy ankle part.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Icebowler's picture

October 12, 2016 at 05:05 pm

I suspect Cobb and Montgomery will get a lot of practice reps in the backfield this week. If Starks fails in the first half, and Randall and Ty replace him, Abbrederis may finally get his shot playing in the slot.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Christopher Gennaro's picture

October 12, 2016 at 05:06 pm

Hmmm lets just say it, the pack have 7wrs. and only three play on a regular basis. now why is that? I'll tell you MM genius!!!!, he knew eddie would get hurt and starks would fall of a cliff, concerned HELL NO!!! He now will unleash the now five wide 2.0 package. janis and davis only fly patterns, cobb shallow cross, nelson deep middle, and abby, yes that's right abby doing the 15 yard out. no one will see it coming until its tooo late. I call the JAWS package. seriously if o-line can handle their front 7, like those guys did last week, why not try to limit starks touches, by just rolling out fresh wrs, every few plays. I understand Mike love of 11 or zebra package, but any package that allows rodgers to hold the ball for 5 seconds, is doing him no favors, right now.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Curry Rambeau's picture

October 12, 2016 at 07:12 pm

Starks has a knee injury and didn't practice today. Lacy practiced a bit and will be in the rehab group this week. McCarthy is tight lipped about the ground game so it's all speculation.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
oregonpacker's picture

October 12, 2016 at 08:14 pm

I am wondering why we are so excited about penned coming back. Our defensive front seven have been absolutely terrific and why would we want to mess with that chemistry?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

October 13, 2016 at 05:49 am

Because Mike Pennel was one of the best DL against run last season among Packers... They also hope/see/know he is improved for this season, so they might be little unpatient to see Mike Pennel there...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
oregonpacker's picture

October 12, 2016 at 08:15 pm

I meant Pennel...sorry

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Ken Late Hit Stills's picture

October 12, 2016 at 11:16 pm

Don Jackson is one tough dude. I hope he gets a chance.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packrulz's picture

October 13, 2016 at 04:19 am

Cobb can play HB, we have lots of healthy wide receivers.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Donster's picture

October 13, 2016 at 07:10 am

Well now that Starks is injured, and Lacy with the ankle issue, though he did practice, doesn't look like they have a lot of choice not to bring up Don Jackson from the Practice Squad. Having Cobb or Montgomery in the backfield more than needed is asking for injury. Losing Cobb would be a big blow. Especially with his latest neck injury.

Lord lets just beat the Cowdungs!!! I think we can all agree on that! Go Pack!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rdent's picture

October 13, 2016 at 08:07 am

Strange how Starks came up injured,with that the best case scenario would be the injury Is serious enough to put him on IR,bring Jackson up and see how it shakes out

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
L's picture

October 13, 2016 at 11:25 am

It's Ty Montgomery's time to shine in the Backfield! He could be our version of T.Riddick; someone you don't want to hand the ball off to expecting smash mouth, hard yardage runs between the tackles, but he could be an excellent receiver out of the backfield and someone who could potentially tote the ball outside the Tackles plus on some delayed hand-offs (aka draws) up the middle. He just needs to demonstrate that he can be relied on to provide some adequate pass protection when called upon here and there to do so; he does have the body composition, mass, and general size to be successful and not a huge injury risk.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

October 13, 2016 at 12:07 pm

While I agree that using Montgomery or Cobb out of the backfield as receivers (wheel routes...match up with a LB...etc.), I don't think they should be getting the ball any more often as runners until the offense forces the defense to respect the pass out of those sets. Putting one of those two in the backfield currently telegraphs run to the defense and (as you note) exposes them to big hits from big bodies.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
L's picture

October 13, 2016 at 02:37 pm

I'm a lot more reluctant to see R.Cobb do anything more than be an occasional pass catcher out of the backfield as he's too valuable as our primary slot receiver, but T.Montgomery is severely lacking in finding ways to contribute to the offense and it would seem he's a pretty ideal candidate for getting some additional time in the backfield. Hopefully, in the future it'll be J.Starks who's role lessens to allow Lacy and Montgomery to increase their snap counts.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
sheppercheeser's picture

October 14, 2016 at 04:54 am

I like the idea of Cobb playing HB. He hasn't been stellar as a WR and we have plenty of depth in that position (can you say Abby?). Packers offense is so stale- how do they (TT/MM) not see that? Don't they watch what their peers are up to i.e. Pats?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.