PDA

View Full Version : grant



LEWCWA
09-08-2008, 09:47 PM
He didn't return after his long run. Did he get hurt?

falco
09-08-2008, 09:48 PM
He didn't return after his long run. Did he get hurt?

no, i think they kept trying to force jackson in there, and he got stuffed behind the line every time

Partial
09-08-2008, 09:53 PM
Man, he is a good runner though. I'm becoming more and more sold. Fast, and powerful, and that stiff arm he had is what opened up the field!

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 09:54 PM
He didn't return after his long run. Did he get hurt?

No, but he's still recovering from his hammy injury. I'm sure the coaches just told him he was done for security reasons. All Jackson did was run down the clock anyway, so no real importance to Grant being in there.

mission
09-08-2008, 09:54 PM
Stats?

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 09:56 PM
Stats?


Grant had 92 yards on 12 carries.

LEWCWA
09-08-2008, 09:57 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 09:59 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

Not worth the chance of injury. Better to give it to the defense to win, especially this early in the season.

texaspackerbacker
09-08-2008, 10:03 PM
I've said it consistently: the difference between Grant and Jackson is HUGE. Grant is right there with Adrian Peterson in quality, while Jackson doesn't even come up to ordinary.

Harlan Huckleby
09-08-2008, 10:05 PM
I generally agree with you, Tex, except Grant is a notch below Peterson.

Packers have no depth at QB or RB.

Harlan Huckleby
09-08-2008, 10:05 PM
..

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 10:05 PM
I've said it consistently: the difference between Grant and Jackson is HUGE. Grant is right there with Adrian Peterson in quality, while Jackson doesn't even come up to ordinary.


That's why Grant is starting and Jackson is not. People have to remember that they are keeping Grant's carries to a minimum until he's fully healed. He only had 12 carries tonight. Jackson is going to see plenty of PT until Grant is 100%.

LEWCWA
09-08-2008, 10:05 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

Not worth the chance of injury. Better to give it to the defense to win, especially this early in the season.

This doesn't even make sense.

RashanGary
09-08-2008, 10:06 PM
I generally agree with you, Tex, except Grant is a notch below Peterson.

Packers have no depth at QB or RB.

Disagree. QB true. I'm not so sure about RB, although I'm respecting you more and more (and I always respected you). You could be right on like you are many times.

red
09-08-2008, 10:07 PM
I've said it consistently: the difference between Grant and Jackson is HUGE. Grant is right there with Adrian Peterson in quality, while Jackson doesn't even come up to ordinary.
absolutely

i couldn't believe all the folks that said during the offseason that we could plug anyone in and they would be as good as grant. they said it was the o-line getting better.

for me i saw grant as a much much much better runner then anyone else we had or have

he is very important to this team

Partial
09-08-2008, 10:07 PM
Grant can't touch Peterson. Peterson scores that touchdown every time, by a significant margin. He looks good though.

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 10:09 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

Not worth the chance of injury. Better to give it to the defense to win, especially this early in the season.

This doesn't even make sense.

The first down they needed to ice the game was not important enough to warrant reaggravating his hammy. So they ran the clock down and left it up to the defense to win the game by coming up with a stop. That is absolutely the right call IMO. You don't take that risk this early in the season. Suppose Grant would have reinjured his hammy... We'd likely have Jackson starting the next couple of weeks. Why take that chance when you have a defense that is quite capable of coming up with a stop?

LEWCWA
09-08-2008, 10:09 PM
Grant can't touch Peterson. Peterson scores that touchdown every time, by a significant margin. He looks good though.

agreed--grant is good, but c'mon, thats not Kool Aide tex has its Mexican ditch weed! 8-)

billy_oliver880
09-08-2008, 10:10 PM
jackson needs to make a decision and stick with it. Stop dancing and waiting.

LEWCWA
09-08-2008, 10:11 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

Not worth the chance of injury. Better to give it to the defense to win, especially this early in the season.

This doesn't even make sense.

The first down they needed to ice the game was not important enough to warrant reaggravating his hammy. So they ran the clock down and left it up to the defense to win the game by coming up with a stop. That is absolutely the right call IMO. You don't take that risk this early in the season. Suppose Grant would have reinjured his hammy... We'd likely have Jackson starting the next couple of weeks. Why take that chance when you have a defense that is quite capable of coming up with a stop?


Yeah lets keep our guys on the bench cause they might get hurt. Its crunch time. players play!

mission
09-08-2008, 10:11 PM
Grant can't touch Peterson. Peterson scores that touchdown every time, by a significant margin. He looks good though.

you might be right from a wide scale sort of perspective but come on ... who made the greater impact this evening?

you can talk all you want about talent and physical ability but that one man (AP, he on my FF team too!) isnt winning any important games by himself. neither is grant, but damn, cant argue with production, yadig?

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 10:12 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

Not worth the chance of injury. Better to give it to the defense to win, especially this early in the season.

This doesn't even make sense.

The first down they needed to ice the game was not important enough to warrant reaggravating his hammy. So they ran the clock down and left it up to the defense to win the game by coming up with a stop. That is absolutely the right call IMO. You don't take that risk this early in the season. Suppose Grant would have reinjured his hammy... We'd likely have Jackson starting the next couple of weeks. Why take that chance when you have a defense that is quite capable of coming up with a stop?


Yeah lets keep our guys on the bench cause they might get hurt. Its crunch time. players play!

Ugh... we already had the lead. We didn't NEED that first down. We didn't get it, yet we won anyway. Had it been a first down we absolutely needed to get I'm sure Grant would have been in there. But we didn't absolutely need it, so Jackson got the nod.

Lurker64
09-08-2008, 10:14 PM
Yeah lets keep our guys on the bench cause they might get hurt. Its crunch time. players play!

I was always under the impression that it was poor form to second guess decisions when they work out for you. The best possible scenario was the one where "Grant doesn't get hurt and the Packers win the game" which is what happened. Grant's not exactly in game shape, so it helps to bring him along slow if you can... which we could, because we won.

Winning forgives a great number of sins.

LEWCWA
09-08-2008, 10:15 PM
Yeah it wasn't important....I don't know 2 minutes to score seems pretty probable to me. Just because they choked and threw a pick means nothing.

Harlan Huckleby
09-08-2008, 10:16 PM
jackson needs to make a decision and stick with it. Stop dancing and waiting.

BJ may just not be very good.

Cheesehead Craig
09-08-2008, 10:17 PM
Jackson was facing a box of about 40 Vikings at the end there he had no chance. They are good enough against the run without knowing full well it's the only thing you're going to do. The Packers were not about to get a first down in that series without throwing the ball.

Lurker64
09-08-2008, 10:26 PM
Yeah it wasn't important....I don't know 2 minutes to score seems pretty probable to me. Just because they choked and threw a pick means nothing.

Except the thing was, and I'm sure that McCarthy noticed this, that the Vikings were unable to score quickly the entire game. They were able to score, but they were the sort of long, plodding, methodical drives with 7 first downs that the Childress offense is designed to do. Against some teams you play this differently, confident in their ability to score quickly if they need to, but Minnesota has not shown an ability to score quickly at the ends of games this year or last, so relying on your defense to keep them from doing something they're not good at isn't necessarily a bad idea.

texaspackerbacker
09-08-2008, 10:31 PM
I've said it consistently: the difference between Grant and Jackson is HUGE. Grant is right there with Adrian Peterson in quality, while Jackson doesn't even come up to ordinary.


That's why Grant is starting and Jackson is not. People have to remember that they are keeping Grant's carries to a minimum until he's fully healed. He only had 12 carries tonight. Jackson is going to see plenty of PT until Grant is 100%.

I have no quarrel with that. I'm just saying, we still see not enough respect for Grant and probably too much for Jackson.

And when I said Grant is "right there with Peterson", I meant "close". IMO, NOBODY is as good as Peterson, not even Tomlinson, and Grant is a very small notch lower.

No depth at QB? Hopefully this question will NOT have to be answered, but I really think Flynn could do the job if he had to.

No depth at RB? Jackson isn't THAT bad, and if Grant DID go down, I think we would see the sudden emergence of ....... I can't even think of his name--the 3rd RB.

Gunakor
09-08-2008, 10:32 PM
Yeah it wasn't important....I don't know 2 minutes to score seems pretty probable to me. Just because they choked and threw a pick means nothing.

You gotta trust your defense to get that stop. If you don't, what the hell are they being paid for?

texaspackerbacker
09-08-2008, 10:36 PM
Hopefully nobody will EVER inform Childress of the existence of a play called "screen pass"--to Peterson. Also, if I was him, I'd consider some of that college shotgun spread type stuff. Can you imagine Peterson and Jackson doing that?

Lurker64
09-08-2008, 10:37 PM
Well, the Packers and the Vikings both tried a screen pass in the first quarter. Both defenses played it well enough that the offense accomplished essentially nothing on that play. Neither went back to it.

HarveyWallbangers
09-08-2008, 11:00 PM
I would say trying to get a first down to ice the game is fairly important!

I doubt it was to save him from injury. I'm guessing it was because he hasn't had much contact, and they thought Jackson would be less likely to fumble.

Brohm
09-08-2008, 11:07 PM
jackson needs to make a decision and stick with it. Stop dancing and waiting.

Exactly, he just aggravates the hell out of me when I see him run. May be a better pass receiver but damn, pick and run you ain't Barry Sanders :P

Harlan Huckleby
09-08-2008, 11:09 PM
great running backs are born, not made

GoPackGo
09-09-2008, 10:20 AM
It wasn't a suprise to me that Grant was held back last night because I read this before the game:

ESPN's Wendy Nix reports that Ryan Grant will "split time" in the Packers' backfield on Monday night against Minnesota.

Grant claims he's "100%," but coach Mike McCarthy says Grant has experienced lingering soreness and his reps will be "monitored closely." In a matchup against the NFC's top run defense, Grant could struggle for production on limited carries. It sounds like Brandon Jackson will see 10+ touches.

Cheesehead Craig
09-09-2008, 10:31 AM
I just watched that long Grant run again on NFL.com. I totally missed the first time when Hall lays out Sharper on the block. That was so sweet!

The Leaper
09-09-2008, 10:36 AM
Grant is right there with Adrian Peterson in quality

Tex...you are crazy.