You seem to forget that we are not a west coast 4 and 5 wide receiver set offense. Green Bay does not run the same system that we do so using them to discuss our situation is not an apple to apples comparison. Secondly they do have 2 good running backs- Starks and Grant who have 57 and 39 carries respectively. Compare that to Williams and Stewart who have 47 and 37 carries respectively.
Green Bay is built on 3 and 4 wide looks and frequent use of a tight end like Finley. They stretch the field largely horizontally with some deep passing. We on the other hand stretch the field vertically with more deep passing and some working to the edges. We run a 12 or 22 personnel and only on third down or the 2 minute offense do we run an empty backfield. All passing attacks don't require 4 or 5 wide receivers. We do have 4 receivers on the field much of the time but that includes 2 wides and 2 tight ends.
Chud does not run a Green Bay style offense and instead typically uses tight ends as primary receivers. So we are really configured just as our offense is supposed to run. We don't need 5 wide receivers because we don't run those sets. Even in 5 wide sets we typically put Olsen out wide and often put a running back in the slot along with 3 wide receivers.
Again we are 5 games into the season and are still installing the offense and developing chemistry. Compare us to teams in the same boat not ones like Green Bay who are running the same scheme for years and have had no turnover in coaching or personnel.
Lastly I don't know how you can decide what our offense will look like after 5 games or whether we are running too much or too little. Even within that time span our offense has changed quite a bit. In the first 2 games the defense put 9 guys in the box and running was difficult at best. In the last 2, the defenses have played more cover 2 and kept 7 in the box after they decided that Newton would burn them. Consequently we have run more with better success. Right now we are ranked in the top half in rushing yards at 116 yards a game which is 13th.
I fully realize we aren't running the same scheme as GB....doesn't change the fact our current roster around Cam still is more suited for a running offense than a passing one.
How much was invested in Starks/Grant....in terms of draft picks and contracts. Starks/Grant is a perfect example of my point.....you don't need 2 1st round draft picks w/ big contracts in today's NFL......
and yes, we are 5 games in and installing the new scheme....but the days of needing to invest like we did under Fox in the RB position are over. They simply don't get the reps for it to be worth it. Money is now better spent to fit the passing league (and money can be spent on both sides of the ball in regards to keeping up w/ the this passing era of football)
Williams (once he deemed a "starter)
2008 - averaged 18.4 touches a game
2009 - averaged 18.5 touches a game
2010 - averaged 16.3 touches a game
2011 (big contract) - averages 10.6 touches a game.
It is nothing against DeAngleo...but you don't spend more to make someone a smaller part of your offense. No reason to believe that DeAngelo's role is going to get bigger......new direction.