Brandon Jackson

[Joemailman]

http://www.packerupdate.com/pu/2009/02/jackson-deserved-more-carries.html

Interesting article making the case that Jackson deserved more carries in 2008. I don't expect Jackson to have a shot at the starting job in 2009, but I am hopeful that will be rewarded with carries when he plays well. I'm not convinced Grant is the type of back who gets better the more carries he gets. He might be more explosive if he gets a break once in a while

[Bossman641]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

[rbaloha1]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

[Bossman641]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

So could Rodgers

[Joemailman]

Grant clearly lacked the breakaway burst he had in 2007, and that had nothing to do with who the QB was. Perhaps the hamstring injury never allowed him to have the explosiveness he had in 2007. The question is whether he can get it back. If not, Jackson could be a better option because he has more ability to break tackles, and is a better receiver.

[Waldo]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

[sheepshead]

Don't be surprised if we take an RB in the first round.

[Joemailman]

I'd be very surprised if TT took a RB at #9. Too much talent at OT, DE, DT and LB for it to happen. TT is known for 1st round surprises, but the other time he had an early 1st round pick, he took the guy most people thought he would take (Hawk). Now, if he were to trade down into the middle of the 1st round and Chris Wells were still available, then it might happen.

[Packnut]

Grant clearly lacked the breakaway burst he had in 2007, and that had nothing to do with who the QB was. Perhaps the hamstring injury never allowed him to have the explosiveness he had in 2007. The question is whether he can get it back. If not, Jackson could be a better option because he has more ability to break tackles, and is a better receiver.

I'm not convinced on the burst thing. In 07, he ran the same way but was able to run over or through DB's. Last season, he always went down on contact. It is possible that he had a career year in 07 due to a combination of things like the Favre factor and he's just an average skilled back.

[HarveyWallbangers]

He lacked top speed early because of his injury. Remember his run in the first game vs. Minnesota where he admitted he couldn't go full throttle. That would have been a TD in 2007. He's not an Edgar Bennett-like slowpoke. Part of it early was his injury. Some of it is just the way it goes. He was lucky in 2007. Not so lucky in 2008. I think he'll settle in somewhere in between.

[rbaloha1]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

So could Rodgers

Unaware that Rodgers had that option. If Rogers did its unlikely he could be as masterful as Favre.

Recall earlier in the season defenses were placing more players in the box daring the Packers to throw. Obviously more players in the box makes it more difficult to run.

Corey Hall was also injured more in 08. Was Bubba Franks part of 07 team. Bubba was a very good run blocker and missed in 08.

[rbaloha1]

Don't be surprised if we take an RB in the first round.

Only as a trade down. Knowshon Moreno would be a nice addition. The Oregon rb would also be a later draft pick.

[rbaloha1]

He lacked top speed early because of his injury. Remember his run in the first game vs. Minnesota where he admitted he couldn't go full throttle. That would have been a TD in 2007. He's not an Edgar Bennett-like slowpoke. Part of it early was his injury. Some of it is just the way it goes. He was lucky in 2007. Not so lucky in 2008. I think he'll settle in somewhere in between.

Injury played a role earlier in the year. Progressed as the season moved on.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I like Jackson and I think he was way underutilized last year. He had a much more noticeable burst than Grant did. I hope he gets at least 100 carries this coming season as I think he's a solid runner.

[Guiness]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

Come on Waldo, you know better than that. Lies, damn lies and statistics, right? You can't judge an O based on points, or 3rd down efficiency, or turnovers, etc.

IMO (but that's all it is) the offense was better in the second half of '07. Purely anectotal, but I feel better trusting that than a stat. They can be useful, but are no good for making a final judment of any importance.

[rbaloha1]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

Stats aside the 07 offense functioned much better due to Hall of Fame Favre vs. Rookie Rodgers. The o-line, fullbacks and tes also were healthier in 07 vs. 08.

Nonetheless Rogers played well and expect AR to have a good career in Green Bay.

[rbaloha1]

I like Jackson and I think he was way underutilized last year. He had a much more noticeable burst than Grant did. I hope he gets at least 100 carries this coming season as I think he's a solid runner.

Jackson improved. Never goes down on initial contact. Reads blocks well. Deserves more playing time.

[sharpe1027]

I like Jackson and I think he was way underutilized last year. He had a much more noticeable burst than Grant did. I hope he gets at least 100 carries this coming season as I think he's a solid runner.

Jackson improved. Never goes down on initial contact. Reads blocks well. Deserves more playing time.

Agreed, to some extent. However, he still doesn't hit the holes between the tackles very well. Much of his yardage and his good runs were the result of bouncing the run to the outside. To be an every down player he is going to need to get more of the tough 2-4 yard runs that Grant pounds out on a regular basis.

[Patler]

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

Not entirely accurate. The team scored 16 more points in 2007 than in 2008, but in 2008 they had 9 TDs that were not scored by the offense. In 2007, I believe there were only 6 TDs that were not scored by the offense. If you account for those, the difference in offensive point production is greater than you suggest, but still not a huge difference in my opinion.

[Waldo]

Good point, I missed that, I forgot that NFL.com doesn't have any rollup offensive scoring stats.

The '08 Packers were better than the '07 Packers in th 4th qtr and in the red zone, the '07 Packers were better in the 3rd qtr and the 1st qtr, which was an Achilles heel for the '08 Packers.

[Patler]

Good point, I missed that, I forgot that NFL.com doesn't have any rollup offensive scoring stats.

The '08 Packers were better than the '07 Packers in th 4th qtr and in the red zone, the '07 Packers were better in the 3rd qtr and the 1st qtr, which was an Achilles heel for the '08 Packers.

An interesting comparison would be to look at the points/offensive possession, ignoring end of the half run-out-the-clock ones.

[Joemailman]

I like Jackson and I think he was way underutilized last year. He had a much more noticeable burst than Grant did. I hope he gets at least 100 carries this coming season as I think he's a solid runner.

Jackson improved. Never goes down on initial contact. Reads blocks well. Deserves more playing time.

Agreed, to some extent. However, he still doesn't hit the holes between the tackles very well. Much of his yardage and his good runs were the result of bouncing the run to the outside. To be an every down player he is going to need to get more of the tough 2-4 yard runs that Grant pounds out on a regular basis.

All of which is why in my opinion Jackson should be getting more carries. He provides an excellent change of pace to Grant. Grant pounding the ball inside and Jackson bouncing it outside could be an excellent combination. As stated earlier, I also think Grant would be better if he got more of a breather now and then. I know MM seems to want Grant to be a workhorse. I'm not sure that Grant has the physical ability to do that effectively.

[sharpe1027]

All of which is why in my opinion Jackson should be getting more carries. He provides an excellent change of pace to Grant. Grant pounding the ball inside and Jackson bouncing it outside could be an excellent combination. As stated earlier, I also think Grant would be better if he got more of a breather now and then. I know MM seems to want Grant to be a workhorse. I'm not sure that Grant has the physical ability to do that effectively.

Sounds like a plan! Let's get this to MM.

[Cheesehead Craig]

All of which is why in my opinion Jackson should be getting more carries. He provides an excellent change of pace to Grant. Grant pounding the ball inside and Jackson bouncing it outside could be an excellent combination. As stated earlier, I also think Grant would be better if he got more of a breather now and then. I know MM seems to want Grant to be a workhorse. I'm not sure that Grant has the physical ability to do that effectively.

Sounds like a plan! Let's get this to MM.
Jackson can run the ball inside and isn't just a speedster. He's got more explosive burst than Grant does and I'm not fully convinced Grant is a "tougher inside runner". Granted, with Grant's injury last season it sure seemed that Jackson had much more burst.

[MadtownPacker]

I like Jackson and I think he was way underutilized last year. He had a much more noticeable burst than Grant did. I hope he gets at least 100 carries this coming season as I think he's a solid runner.

Jackson improved. Never goes down on initial contact. Reads blocks well. Deserves more playing time.

Agreed, to some extent. However, he still doesn't hit the holes between the tackles very well. Much of his yardage and his good runs were the result of bouncing the run to the outside. To be an every down player he is going to need to get more of the tough 2-4 yard runs that Grant pounds out on a regular basis.What? 2-4 yds on a regular basis?? When was that? Ryan "arm tackle me" Grant is a farce and BJax should have replace him half way thru the 08 season. I agree with Craig & Rb, Jackson needs and deserves more playing time. Might as well also draft a guy cuz Grant is not the future.

[bigcoz75]

I like Jackson and I think he was way underutilized last year. He had a much more noticeable burst than Grant did. I hope he gets at least 100 carries this coming season as I think he's a solid runner.

Jackson improved. Never goes down on initial contact. Reads blocks well. Deserves more playing time.

Agreed, to some extent. However, he still doesn't hit the holes between the tackles very well. Much of his yardage and his good runs were the result of bouncing the run to the outside. To be an every down player he is going to need to get more of the tough 2-4 yard runs that Grant pounds out on a regular basis.What? 2-4 yds on a regular basis?? When was that? Ryan "arm tackle me" Grant is a farce and BJax should have replace him half way thru the 08 season. I agree with Craig & Rb, Jackson needs and deserves more playing time. Might as well also draft a guy cuz Grant is not the future.
I agree, maybe in 2007 Grant had some tough 2-4 yd runs in the middle, but in 2008 it appeared his better runs came off the edge. His middle runs seemed to go nowhere as he was typically brought down by the first person who touched him. I'd love to see some stats that prove otherwise.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Grant was better late than early, so I'm expecting a bounce back year in 2009. I still don't think Jackson would be a good every down RB, but he I think he's a good third down/change of pace RB. That's much better than I thought the year before. This coming from a guy who absolutely loved the Jackson pick at the time. To me, he was a disappointment. He seemed to lack instincts. In 2008, he showed me some of the reasons I liked the pick.

[sharpe1027]

I agree, maybe in 2007 Grant had some tough 2-4 yd runs in the middle, but in 2008 it appeared his better runs came off the edge. His middle runs seemed to go nowhere as he was typically brought down by the first person who touched him. I'd love to see some stats that prove otherwise.

2-4 yard runs are not going to be his better runs, so yes his better runs might have been off the edge, after having been setup with a bunch of inside runs.

Don't get me wrong, I like what Jackson brings, but the comparisons aren't really fair. They passed a lot more of the time with BJack in the game. It is one thing to run when the D is expecting pass and another when it is the third straight run on 1st and 10.

[texaspackerbacker]

There's an old saying, everybody loves the second string QB. Well, around here, it seems like everybody loves the second string RB in the same way.

I have nothing against Jackson. He played very decent at times. But no way in hell he's anywhere near as good as Grant.

[MadtownPacker]

There's an old saying, everybody loves the second string QB. Well, around here, it seems like everybody loves the second string RB in the same way.

I have nothing against Jackson. He played very decent at times. But no way in hell he's anywhere near as good as Grant.Man, we are finally gonna get it on here on PackerRats Tex. It is like shooting it out with Billy the kid, Davey Crockett or some other old skool legend.

The 2nd string QB never gets to touch the ball unless the starter gets busted up. RBs can be rotated out with great success. In fact seems like most teams now have a main guy and another near starter type backing him up. GB does not. Why? Well it aint Jackson's fault. He is getting better and I expect to see alot more from him in 09.

Grant, if he doesnt go and fall over a table again and hurt himself, he will just continue to run down as the game goes on. He is kinda tall but no way is he built to run down defenses into the 4th quarter. He is always on the absorbing end of hits instead of dishing it out and pummeling DBs. BJax can, Grant gets knocked on his ass.

I dont think Grants bad to have on the team but his is a change of pace back at best and not the kind that will wins games and ultimately, championships. The teams is growing up now and to make the mistake of betting all your chips on Grant would be terrible. That is a mistake TT will not make. As it is Im sure he wasnt happy on what he got for his money in 08.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I have nothing against Jackson. He played very decent at times. But no way in hell he's anywhere near as good as Grant.

Based on this past season, I see Grant and Jackson are roughly of the same pedigree. Decent backs, nothing special as starters.

[The Leaper]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

I disagree. The 2007 offense often loaded up on points early and put the game away...and the team ate clock in the 4th quarter instead of trying to score. That team could've scored another 30-50 points if they had tried to.

This year's offense was always playing from behind and tossing the ball around a lot. They weren't nearly as efficient, even if total points look similar.

[Gunakor]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

I disagree. The 2007 offense often loaded up on points early and put the game away...and the team ate clock in the 4th quarter instead of trying to score. That team could've scored another 30-50 points if they had tried to.

This year's offense was always playing from behind and tossing the ball around a lot. They weren't nearly as efficient, even if total points look similar.

Just because you are playing from behind doesn't mean it's the offenses fault. Up 24-17 with 2 minutes to go in the game means you can run the clock out. Down 27-24 with 2 minutes to go means you have to play aggressive. The number that changed from '07 to '08 is our opponents score, not ours. That means we've been playing from behind more often, but it has little if anything to do with offensive efficiency. It has everything and more to do with defensive production.

[SnakeLH2006]

Good point, I missed that, I forgot that NFL.com doesn't have any rollup offensive scoring stats.

The '08 Packers were better than the '07 Packers in th 4th qtr and in the red zone, the '07 Packers were better in the 3rd qtr and the 1st qtr, which was an Achilles heel for the '08 Packers.

An interesting comparison would be to look at the points/offensive possession, ignoring end of the half run-out-the-clock ones.

Maybe I'm a stat loving fiend, but seeing Patler go toe-to-toe with the "new" Patler (Waldo) is damn entertaining if you ask Snake. :D You guys are both awesome with stats and hope to see more of this.

But seriously, Grant, IMO, had a career year in 2007, as injuries aside he looked none the part as I stated for the past year regardless of contract, injuries, etc. from 2007. I'm not a huge fan of Grant and had another topic months ago where most agreed Grant's carries should come down as he's not as effective with 30 carries a game.

Would Grant be best served rushing 20 times for 82 yards while BJack got 10 carries (caught 2-3 passes as the 3rd down back) for 45 rushing yards and 15-25 yards receiving? Yes. He lacked a burst because he's not WI Badgers Ron Dayne where you give him the ball 40 times for 225 yards...He's Ryan Grant, and I really don't like him as our #1 ball carrier at RB. Never liked the contract, but it is what it is.

Do I want Wells at #9? No, I'd rather have Raji or one of the top 3 OT's for sure, but I don't doubt that is what TT does, given his unpredictability.

Grant is not a #1 back on a great team. The Dorsey comparisons are valid to a point, but I remember (watched EVERY Packer game since 1989) Dorsey, and don't think Grant could hold his jock strap. Give BJack some carries and even Wynn and the injured rook FA from 2008 too.

I don't think we need a high draft pick at RB at all, just a limit to Grant's carries if they are committed to him, but those bursts were mostly because no one respected the RB/Grant at that point of 2007 cuz the Packers were the worst rushing team at 65 yards a game at one point/one of the best at time under Brett's toasting of secondaries with the WR's at that time in the passing game....There's where Grant got his break cuz NO ONE wes paying attention to him. NFL defenses catch up in a hurry. Grant is an average starting RB (maybe below avg.) that does NOT get better with more carries. BJack looked great late 2007 and even better in 2008. Give him the damn ball.

[Gunakor]

Grant was a top 10 back in 2008, even after defenses had caught up. 1200 yards is not a farce. Only 8 other backs in the league had more.

What exactly do we expect out of our starting RB?

Grant's YPC for 2008 was about 3.9. Not great, but not awful either. 4 yards gives you 2nd and 6, 3rd and 2. Optimal down and distance. Fine by me. Maybe not as exciting as the guy who rattles of 60 yard runs consistently, but plenty good enough to get the job done. And that avg. should go up a bit this year, as long as Grant can stay healthy through TC and preseason, because he'll be in better shape and have put more prep work in with his offense. He's fine as our workhorse.

Those bitching about Grant getting too many carries, remember that he wasn't getting 30 per game every game this season. For the first month he was held to about 15 carries per game while his hamstring healed. Our running game didn't look any better when he was splitting time with Jackson than it did when he became the workhorse. Ever think that Jackson might be benefitting from the extra time off? Same shit last year, when he was the starter he looked like garbage, then late in the season after being held to spot duty he started to come on stronger. Ask him to play more snaps, and his production goes down. He's not the one to carry the load.

I'd like to see a 25/10/5 split between Grant, Jackson, and Lumpkin. I don't like Wynn at all and expect him to be demoted back to the PS if Lumpkin is healthy. I still think Grant can carry the load, with Jackson and Lumpkin spelling him occasionally and Jackson in on 3rd downs.

[ND72]

I've never made it hidden my love of Brandon Jackson. My love of Notre Dame aside here, but I was calling all season to have a "change" of pace or just another back to bring in...aka, Jackson. I just didn't understand the thought process by MM. Especially mid season, Jackson was really hitting stride, and while Grant was also starting to get some good carries, it just seemed as though Jackson was seeing things, or hitting things a lot clearer than Grant was. I know Grant had a huge game against chicago at home, but even everyone in the stands were saying that Jackson was really seeing the holes that day...10 carries 50 yards.

I like Grant. Do I think he's a #1 back? No. Do I think he can handle being the #1 back in GB? I do....if we play Jackson a bit more. I think the mixture of the 2 could be dangerous.

I think one big thing MM needs to know is how Grant runs...He's going to have a short career based on how hard he runs the ball. Gotta let the legs rest and heal.

[3irty1]

I disagree that Brandon Jackson is a 3rd down/change of pace back. Jackson does some things well, he breaks tackles, secures the ball but I've been unimpressed with him as a receiver. What the Packers could use is a true scat back like a Leon Washington, or Darren Sproles.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Maybe I'm a stat loving fiend, but seeing Patler go toe-to-toe with the "new" Patler (Waldo) is damn entertaining if you ask Snake. :D You guys are both awesome with stats and hope to see more of this.

I think of them as Shamrock I and Shamrock II.

[Pugger]

I find it interesting that you folks point out Grant's injuries but you ignore BJax's. I don't know if Jax can be an every down back. He started to play more towards the end of last season but he ended up hurt again. :( Let's see how Grant plays this coming year before we decide he's no good either.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I find it interesting that you folks point out Grant's injuries but you ignore BJax's. I don't know if Jax can be an every down back. He started to play more towards the end of last season but he ended up hurt again. :( Let's see how Grant plays this coming year before we decide he's no good either.

Nobody cared about Jackson's injuries at the time because Jackson had a dissapointing rookie year. I never expected Jackson to show as well as he did in 2008.

And on the other hand, Grant was the conquering hero in 2007 that saved the Packers season. The bar was higher for him, and we assumed that his injuries were a big loss.

After 2008, I consider those guys about equal contributors for the future, and the PAckers will keep a sharp eye out for an upgrade at running back.

[sharpe1027]

Just because you are playing from behind doesn't mean it's the offenses fault. Up 24-17 with 2 minutes to go in the game means you can run the clock out. Down 27-24 with 2 minutes to go means you have to play aggressive. The number that changed from '07 to '08 is our opponents score, not ours. That means we've been playing from behind more often, but it has little if anything to do with offensive efficiency. It has everything and more to do with defensive production.

Yeah. I don't disagree that '07 offense was a little bit more effective than the '08 offense, but the biggest different between '07 and '08 was the defense.

[Waldo]

For me, one of the great mysteries of the 2008 season was "where are Grant's long runs?"

I don't get it. Was he injured? Was he simply lucky in 2007?

The offense was better in 07. Recall Favre could change to a running play at any time.

The '07 offense scored 16 more points (1 ppg more) and averaged 19.6 more ypg.

It wasn't that much better.

I disagree. The 2007 offense often loaded up on points early and put the game away...and the team ate clock in the 4th quarter instead of trying to score. That team could've scored another 30-50 points if they had tried to.

This year's offense was always playing from behind and tossing the ball around a lot. They weren't nearly as efficient, even if total points look similar.

The 2008 Packers were winning or tied 13 of 16 weeks with 5:00 left to go in the game, the 2007 Packers were winning or tied 12 of 16 weeks with 5:00 left to go in the game.

If games were 55 minutes long, the 2008 Packers would have had a better record than the 2007 Packers.

[Patler]

It is pretty well known that Grant was not himself early in the season due to the hamstring. Some articles indicated that he really wasn't himself physically until after the bye, when he finally was practicing on a regular basis. In the 9 games after the bye he had 175 carries for 739 yards, a 4.22 yds/carry average. Grant is not the best back in the league, far from it, but the Packers could do a lot worse than having Grant.

I like Jackson as a role player, but lets be a little realistic about what he really did last year. The guy only had 45 carries. I'm not sure it proved a whole lot. Jackson's longest run was for 32 yards. Without the one single run his average drops to 4.9 per carry from the lofty 5.5. He saw very limited action, yet was inactive on game day for the Seattle game and for the last two games of the season due to injuries. He missed three games while Grant, who came into the season injured, missed none.

I'm not ready to put a lot of reliance on Jackson just yet.

[Farley Face]

It is pretty well known that Grant was not himself early in the season due to the hamstring. Some articles indicated that he really wasn't himself physically until after the bye, when he finally was practicing on a regular basis. In the 9 games after the bye he had 175 carries for 739 yards, a 4.22 yds/carry average. Grant is not the best back in the league, far from it, but the Packers could do a lot worse than having Grant.

I like Jackson as a role player, but lets be a little realistic about what he really did last year. The guy only had 45 carries. I'm not sure it proved a whole lot. Jackson's longest run was for 32 yards. Without the one single run his average drops to 4.9 per carry from the lofty 5.5. He saw very limited action, yet was inactive on game day for the Seattle game and for the last two games of the season due to injuries. He missed three games while Grant, who came into the season injured, missed none.

I'm not ready to put a lot of reliance on Jackson just yet.

How do you feel about Wynn? I personally had him pegged as being out of the league by now. Not due to a lack of talent but due to a lack of want-to and/or toughness. The fact he is still hanging around either signals a lack of depth at the position or more optimistically that the light may have come on for him.

If we enter training camp with Grant and Jackson as 1-2, and Wynn and Lump fighting for 3 are we covered? Some say Lump projects better to FB, and I can see the benefit of expanding our offense to include the creative deployment of the talents of a scatback type which we currently do not have on the roster.

Should I be more closely studying FA RBs and the upcoming crop of RB talent in the draft? I will admit to this point I have been content to stay with the status quo at RB and focused more on our transitioning defensive needs.

[Bossman641]

It is pretty well known that Grant was not himself early in the season due to the hamstring. Some articles indicated that he really wasn't himself physically until after the bye, when he finally was practicing on a regular basis. In the 9 games after the bye he had 175 carries for 739 yards, a 4.22 yds/carry average. Grant is not the best back in the league, far from it, but the Packers could do a lot worse than having Grant.

I like Jackson as a role player, but lets be a little realistic about what he really did last year. The guy only had 45 carries. I'm not sure it proved a whole lot. Jackson's longest run was for 32 yards. Without the one single run his average drops to 4.9 per carry from the lofty 5.5. He saw very limited action, yet was inactive on game day for the Seattle game and for the last two games of the season due to injuries. He missed three games while Grant, who came into the season injured, missed none.

I'm not ready to put a lot of reliance on Jackson just yet.

How do you feel about Wynn? I personally had him pegged as being out of the league by now. Not due to a lack of talent but due to a lack of want-to and/or toughness. The fact he is still hanging around either signals a lack of depth at the position or more optimistically that the light may have come on for him.

If we enter training camp with Grant and Jackson as 1-2, and Wynn and Lump fighting for 3 are we covered? Some say Lump projects better to FB, and I can see the benefit of expanding our offense to include the creative deployment of the talents of a scatback type which we currently do not have on the roster.

Should I be more closely studying FA RBs and the upcoming crop of RB talent in the draft? I will admit to this point I have been content to stay with the status quo at RB and focused more on our transitioning defensive needs.

I too thought Wynn would be out of the league by now. I think he's gotten by on a little bit of luck as well as some hard work. There were numerous quotes from Edgar Bennet last year talking about Wynn showing up and doing the little things, and how he had taken a more professional approach. The guy does have some talent, it's just a matter of if he has the desire to work hard and if he shows the ability to be able to play through the nicks and injuries that have always slowed him down.

[Patler]

Even if Wynn's attitude improved, his durability remains suspect. He was cut originally because he was unavailable during the preseason. He got another chance when Lumpkin went out, but missed a couple weeks the second half of the season with another injury. If he can't stay healthy during the upcoming preseason, there will not be room for him on the roster.

[texaspackerbacker]

There's an old saying, everybody loves the second string QB. Well, around here, it seems like everybody loves the second string RB in the same way.

I have nothing against Jackson. He played very decent at times. But no way in hell he's anywhere near as good as Grant.Man, we are finally gonna get it on here on PackerRats Tex. It is like shooting it out with Billy the kid, Davey Crockett or some other old skool legend.

The 2nd string QB never gets to touch the ball unless the starter gets busted up. RBs can be rotated out with great success. In fact seems like most teams now have a main guy and another near starter type backing him up. GB does not. Why? Well it aint Jackson's fault. He is getting better and I expect to see alot more from him in 09.

Grant, if he doesnt go and fall over a table again and hurt himself, he will just continue to run down as the game goes on. He is kinda tall but no way is he built to run down defenses into the 4th quarter. He is always on the absorbing end of hits instead of dishing it out and pummeling DBs. BJax can, Grant gets knocked on his ass.

I dont think Grants bad to have on the team but his is a change of pace back at best and not the kind that will wins games and ultimately, championships. The teams is growing up now and to make the mistake of betting all your chips on Grant would be terrible. That is a mistake TT will not make. As it is Im sure he wasnt happy on what he got for his money in 08.

So I finally get to go toe to toe with the big kahuna around here?

I wasn't aware that you felt so strongly about Jackson--or Grant, for that matter.

I've been saying for a long time that Grant could be a superstar. If we get the Grant of '07, that's a slam dunk. If we get the Grant of '08, superstar is a bit of a stretch, but he was still damn decent. As somebody said, Grant played with lingering injuries last season. Also, time after time, it seemed like he came within an eyelash of breaking big runs like in '07--stopped by the last guy. I'm expecting a big year from him in '09. As for his height, he reminds me of Eric Dickerson.

Jackson IMO is just a guy. When healthy, he was a decent blue collar back, but no way he has that unique burst like Grant. I see Jackson, Wynn, and Lumpkin as all fairly equal. I hope they find a way to keep all three, but that may not happen without one of them going on IR.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Even if Wynn's attitude improved, his durability remains suspect. He was cut originally because he was unavailable during the preseason. He got another chance when Lumpkin went out, but missed a couple weeks the second half of the season with another injury. If he can't stay healthy during the upcoming preseason, there will not be room for him on the roster.

ya, but look how much Grant and Jackson were hurt last fall. Running backs seem to be injured a lot.

[Patler]

Even if Wynn's attitude improved, his durability remains suspect. He was cut originally because he was unavailable during the preseason. He got another chance when Lumpkin went out, but missed a couple weeks the second half of the season with another injury. If he can't stay healthy during the upcoming preseason, there will not be room for him on the roster.

ya, but look how much Grant and Jackson were hurt last fall. Running backs seem to be injured a lot.

Sure they get injured, but some seem to get injuries they can play with, others do not play with the types of injuries they get. Wynn has gotten the types of injuries he couldn't play through. Grant didn't miss a game.

[cpk1994]

Even if Wynn's attitude improved, his durability remains suspect. He was cut originally because he was unavailable during the preseason. He got another chance when Lumpkin went out, but missed a couple weeks the second half of the season with another injury. If he can't stay healthy during the upcoming preseason, there will not be room for him on the roster.

ya, but look how much Grant and Jackson were hurt last fall. Running backs seem to be injured a lot.

Sure they get injured, but some seem to get injuries they can play with, others do not play with the types of injuries they get. Wynn has gotten the types of injuries he couldn't play through. Grant didn't miss a game.But Jackson, on the other hand........

[Patler]

Even if Wynn's attitude improved, his durability remains suspect. He was cut originally because he was unavailable during the preseason. He got another chance when Lumpkin went out, but missed a couple weeks the second half of the season with another injury. If he can't stay healthy during the upcoming preseason, there will not be room for him on the roster.

ya, but look how much Grant and Jackson were hurt last fall. Running backs seem to be injured a lot.

Sure they get injured, but some seem to get injuries they can play with, others do not play with the types of injuries they get. Wynn has gotten the types of injuries he couldn't play through. Grant didn't miss a game.But Jackson, on the other hand........

Yup, Jackson also missed three games playing in a limited role.

[ND72]

There's an old saying, everybody loves the second string QB. Well, around here, it seems like everybody loves the second string RB in the same way.

I have nothing against Jackson. He played very decent at times. But no way in hell he's anywhere near as good as Grant.Man, we are finally gonna get it on here on PackerRats Tex. It is like shooting it out with Billy the kid, Davey Crockett or some other old skool legend.

The 2nd string QB never gets to touch the ball unless the starter gets busted up. RBs can be rotated out with great success. In fact seems like most teams now have a main guy and another near starter type backing him up. GB does not. Why? Well it aint Jackson's fault. He is getting better and I expect to see alot more from him in 09.

Grant, if he doesnt go and fall over a table again and hurt himself, he will just continue to run down as the game goes on. He is kinda tall but no way is he built to run down defenses into the 4th quarter. He is always on the absorbing end of hits instead of dishing it out and pummeling DBs. BJax can, Grant gets knocked on his ass.

I dont think Grants bad to have on the team but his is a change of pace back at best and not the kind that will wins games and ultimately, championships. The teams is growing up now and to make the mistake of betting all your chips on Grant would be terrible. That is a mistake TT will not make. As it is Im sure he wasnt happy on what he got for his money in 08.

So I finally get to go toe to toe with the big kahuna around here?

I wasn't aware that you felt so strongly about Jackson--or Grant, for that matter.

I've been saying for a long time that Grant could be a superstar. If we get the Grant of '07, that's a slam dunk. If we get the Grant of '08, superstar is a bit of a stretch, but he was still damn decent. As somebody said, Grant played with lingering injuries last season. Also, time after time, it seemed like he came within an eyelash of breaking big runs like in '07--stopped by the last guy. I'm expecting a big year from him in '09. As for his height, he reminds me of Eric Dickerson.

Jackson IMO is just a guy. When healthy, he was a decent blue collar back, but no way he has that unique burst like Grant. I see Jackson, Wynn, and Lumpkin as all fairly equal. I hope they find a way to keep all three, but that may not happen without one of them going on IR.

To me...Grant is "just a guy". And saying Jackson, Wynn, & Lumpkin as fairly equal is just not smart. Jackson will keep improving, and he showed his ability in limited action last year. Wynn is what he is. He does get the long run, but he's a get & go guy, no vision, no cut. Lumpkin I like a lot, because he's a true zone runner, like Jackson, but is very raw compared to Jackson.

I don't see Grant being any better than what we've seen of him. His injury had very little to do with many problems I saw from him this year. He has ZERO vision. Last year we saw a lot of Grant making the cut back to the weakside of the field, AKA, how a zone is to be ran. This year, he NEVER cut to that backside, except maybe a couple times. That has nothing to do with injury, that has to do with IQ.

[Bossman641]

There's an old saying, everybody loves the second string QB. Well, around here, it seems like everybody loves the second string RB in the same way.

I have nothing against Jackson. He played very decent at times. But no way in hell he's anywhere near as good as Grant.Man, we are finally gonna get it on here on PackerRats Tex. It is like shooting it out with Billy the kid, Davey Crockett or some other old skool legend.

The 2nd string QB never gets to touch the ball unless the starter gets busted up. RBs can be rotated out with great success. In fact seems like most teams now have a main guy and another near starter type backing him up. GB does not. Why? Well it aint Jackson's fault. He is getting better and I expect to see alot more from him in 09.

Grant, if he doesnt go and fall over a table again and hurt himself, he will just continue to run down as the game goes on. He is kinda tall but no way is he built to run down defenses into the 4th quarter. He is always on the absorbing end of hits instead of dishing it out and pummeling DBs. BJax can, Grant gets knocked on his ass.

I dont think Grants bad to have on the team but his is a change of pace back at best and not the kind that will wins games and ultimately, championships. The teams is growing up now and to make the mistake of betting all your chips on Grant would be terrible. That is a mistake TT will not make. As it is Im sure he wasnt happy on what he got for his money in 08.

So I finally get to go toe to toe with the big kahuna around here?

I wasn't aware that you felt so strongly about Jackson--or Grant, for that matter.

I've been saying for a long time that Grant could be a superstar. If we get the Grant of '07, that's a slam dunk. If we get the Grant of '08, superstar is a bit of a stretch, but he was still damn decent. As somebody said, Grant played with lingering injuries last season. Also, time after time, it seemed like he came within an eyelash of breaking big runs like in '07--stopped by the last guy. I'm expecting a big year from him in '09. As for his height, he reminds me of Eric Dickerson.

Jackson IMO is just a guy. When healthy, he was a decent blue collar back, but no way he has that unique burst like Grant. I see Jackson, Wynn, and Lumpkin as all fairly equal. I hope they find a way to keep all three, but that may not happen without one of them going on IR.

To me...Grant is "just a guy". And saying Jackson, Wynn, & Lumpkin as fairly equal is just not smart. Jackson will keep improving, and he showed his ability in limited action last year. Wynn is what he is. He does get the long run, but he's a get & go guy, no vision, no cut. Lumpkin I like a lot, because he's a true zone runner, like Jackson, but is very raw compared to Jackson.

I don't see Grant being any better than what we've seen of him. His injury had very little to do with many problems I saw from him this year. He has ZERO vision. Last year we saw a lot of Grant making the cut back to the weakside of the field, AKA, how a zone is to be ran. This year, he NEVER cut to that backside, except maybe a couple times. That has nothing to do with injury, that has to do with IQ.

I'm not disagreeing with you, because I feel the same exact way about Grant, but what happened to him then?? In 2007 there were numerous times where Grant cut back against the grain and got a big run out of it. In 2008, there was virtually none. Did he lose his vision? Did he not have confidence in what he was seeing?

[Waldo]

It was his sync with the line, he was overrunning his blocking ("patience"), something that B Jax struggled with early on as a rookie. Unless it is a zone run right up the gut, the back drifts outside as the blocking develops, then slices through the line once he sees a lane. By overrunning the blocking, he drafts too far outside before the lanes open up, won't see them, and is poorly positioned to cut once they do open, taking him close to the end that the T is having a hard time stretching out (both Clifton and Tausher were had big trouble with it all year, which is why we ran so much better with Colledge at T, he could push the ends outside and keep the POA open).

With the T's struggling to push the ends wide, teams were gambling by sending the MLB on run blitzes through the strong A gap, effectively shutting down any cutback. Without push from the tackles, when the FB aims for the playside OLB he ends up getting bottled up at the POA because the T fails to get the push to open up the playside B gap for the FB.

Tausher was getting more push than Clifton (who was downright pitiful all year), but still not very good; most teams use an opposite interior DT alignment than the Packers, with the NT between Colledge and Wells and the UT over Spitz, even when Tausher got good push and the the FB could get through, the DT was making the play at the line, getting past Spitz.

Jackson got a lot of his yards on the outside backside of plays, especially when the offensive right was the play side. The ends would abuse Clifton and take themselves out of the outside contain necessary to stop Jacksons quick cut just outside of them. Grant doesn't have the short area agility and quickness to do that.

The bread and butter ZBS run, the outside zone, just wasn't working last year and probably won't until we replace the T's, especially Clifton. It was somewhat of a travesty that our best run blocker lines up right next to our worst, Colledge would be blowing guys up, only to have Clifton screw it up and let the end make the play to the inside. Sitton is gonna be a good one though, that kid can dominate at the POA and be even better than Colledge is now. He was beaten in the passing game by stunts and whatnot (somewhat expected since he was a small school rookie), but he is already a far better run blocker than Spitz and rarely got beat by straight ahead pass blocking.

It is no coincidence that the:
Clifton-Colledge-Spitz-Moll-Tausher line could only pull off 100 yds on the ground week 2 vs the Lions, but the:
Clifton-Barbre-Spitz-Sitton-Colledge line was able to roll up 212 week 17.
MM erred on the side of pass blocking caution at the expense of fielding the best alignment to run the ball all season, once our best run blocking alignment was out there (with last years guys that was the week 17 alignment, the only time it was used) they were able to slice through the defense with ease on the ground.

A Spitz-Sitton-Colledge side of the line is dominant to run behind, not all that far off from McKinney-Hutchinson-Birk.

On the subjects of the backs, IMO Grant is a decent runner that has a really screwed up style, Jackson is a natural that has superstar potential, that was raw as could be when we drafted him. I think that he displaces Grant as the starter in camp.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't see as a great zone runner. He still dances too much. He's not one cut and go guy.

[Bossman641]

I don't see as a great zone runner. He still dances too much. He's not one cut and go guy.

Yep, Jackson is still indecisive in his reads. The difference I saw between him and Grant in 2008 though was that when Jackson did make the correct read he hit the hole hard and also had the burst to get through it that Grant was lacking.

[rbaloha1]

I don't see as a great zone runner. He still dances too much. He's not one cut and go guy.

B. Jackson was drafted since Nebraska ran a zone blocking scheme in Bill Callahan's wco.

Agreed in his rookie year, Jackson danced too much. However, imo Jackson was more decisive since he understood the offense better and noticed the cutback lanes better.

While Jackson may not have Grant's vision or cutback ability Jackson is still an effective change of pace back and worthy of increased carries and screen plays.

[HarveyWallbangers]

B. Jackson was drafted since Nebraska ran a zone blocking scheme in Bill Callahan's wco.

Which is part of the reason I liked him.


Agreed in his rookie year, Jackson danced too much. However, imo Jackson was more decisive since he understood the offense better and noticed the cutback lanes better.

I agree, but I still wouldn't say he's a good zone runner. Many of his good runs last year were just the result of him breaking tackles--not that he saw a hole, took one cut, and hit it hard.


While Jackson may not have Grant's vision or cutback ability Jackson is still an effective change of pace back and worthy of increased carries and screen plays.

Agreed. I'm okay with Grant and Jackson as our RBs. I'm hoping Lumpkin can stay healthy. I was much more impressed with him in limited opportunities than Wynn. Then again, I think his injury list is about as long as Wynn's.

[sharpe1027]

On the subjects of the backs, IMO Grant is a decent runner that has a really screwed up style, Jackson is a natural that has superstar potential, that was raw as could be when we drafted him. I think that he displaces Grant as the starter in camp.

I agree about the line, I think that Barbre and Sitton (or possibly a new guy) are going to make a big difference this year.

I do not agree about Jackson. I have yet to see Jackson implement solid cut-backs. Grant did it consistently two years ago and while it happened less last year (arguably because it was not there due to blocking) he still set up his runs for it. Jackson's big runs were a result of A) pulling a houdini on a tackler, or B) out running someone on the edge. Both are admirable traits, but I don't see him as having superstar potential without setting up his runs better. Is that something he can learn? Maybe...or maybe not.

[Fritz]

It was his sync with the line, he was overrunning his blocking ("patience"), something that B Jax struggled with early on as a rookie. Unless it is a zone run right up the gut, the back drifts outside as the blocking develops, then slices through the line once he sees a lane. By overrunning the blocking, he drafts too far outside before the lanes open up, won't see them, and is poorly positioned to cut once they do open, taking him close to the end that the T is having a hard time stretching out (both Clifton and Tausher were had big trouble with it all year, which is why we ran so much better with Colledge at T, he could push the ends outside and keep the POA open).

With the T's struggling to push the ends wide, teams were gambling by sending the MLB on run blitzes through the strong A gap, effectively shutting down any cutback. Without push from the tackles, when the FB aims for the playside OLB he ends up getting bottled up at the POA because the T fails to get the push to open up the playside B gap for the FB.

Tausher was getting more push than Clifton (who was downright pitiful all year), but still not very good; most teams use an opposite interior DT alignment than the Packers, with the NT between Colledge and Wells and the UT over Spitz, even when Tausher got good push and the the FB could get through, the DT was making the play at the line, getting past Spitz.

Jackson got a lot of his yards on the outside backside of plays, especially when the offensive right was the play side. The ends would abuse Clifton and take themselves out of the outside contain necessary to stop Jacksons quick cut just outside of them. Grant doesn't have the short area agility and quickness to do that.

The bread and butter ZBS run, the outside zone, just wasn't working last year and probably won't until we replace the T's, especially Clifton. It was somewhat of a travesty that our best run blocker lines up right next to our worst, Colledge would be blowing guys up, only to have Clifton screw it up and let the end make the play to the inside. Sitton is gonna be a good one though, that kid can dominate at the POA and be even better than Colledge is now. He was beaten in the passing game by stunts and whatnot (somewhat expected since he was a small school rookie), but he is already a far better run blocker than Spitz and rarely got beat by straight ahead pass blocking.

It is no coincidence that the:
Clifton-Colledge-Spitz-Moll-Tausher line could only pull off 100 yds on the ground week 2 vs the Lions, but the:
Clifton-Barbre-Spitz-Sitton-Colledge line was able to roll up 212 week 17.
MM erred on the side of pass blocking caution at the expense of fielding the best alignment to run the ball all season, once our best run blocking alignment was out there (with last years guys that was the week 17 alignment, the only time it was used) they were able to slice through the defense with ease on the ground.

A Spitz-Sitton-Colledge side of the line is dominant to run behind, not all that far off from McKinney-Hutchinson-Birk.

On the subjects of the backs, IMO Grant is a decent runner that has a really screwed up style, Jackson is a natural that has superstar potential, that was raw as could be when we drafted him. I think that he displaces Grant as the starter in camp.

A most awesome breakdown of the whole situation. I learned a lot - this is the kind of stuff I love to read on Packerrats. I say that we petition the offices at Lombardi Ave. to hire both Waldo and Patler in some capacity.

Waldo, are you suggesting moving Colledge to right tackle, then?

Waldo

[Waldo]

In order of value on the line I'd rank them LT > LG > RT > C > RG

He's more valuable at LG than RT, however I feel his best position is LT. He looked good there every time he lined up there in '08, better than Clifton each instance (Aaron looked more comfortable with him at LT than Clifton, IMO Aaron trusts Colledge A LOT, they have developed the bodyguard relationship that I don't see with Aaron and Clifton). Unless the guy is an absolute slam dunk prospect, I would have a hard time drafting someone over Colledge to play LT. I'd put one of the big 4 over there over him, but that is all in this draft, Colledge is a better LT than Beatty or Britton right now, there is no guarantee that they'd ever be better than him, and there is a good chance that he'd outplay all of the big 4 there in '09, though they all have very high ceilings (Colledge does as well though).

If we're replacing Clifton, IMO we'd be better off taking Duke Robinson or Max Unger to play LG in the 2nd and moving Colledge to LT than taking a big LT in the first, simply because I don't see that much of a quality difference between the two options, whereas the difference in quality between the available defenders is huge.

[Joemailman]

The possibilities of OL combinations are almost endless this year. I came up with eleven, and that is without having a rookie at LT. It could happen but I doubt it. Here are mine, I'm sure there are more. From left to right:

Clifton/Colledge/Wells/Spitz/Tauscher

Colledge/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Tauscher

Clifton/Barbre/Spitz/Sitton/Colledge

Colledge/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Tauscher

Clifton/Spitz/Wells/Sitton/Colledge

Clifton/Rookie/Spitz/Sitton/Colledge

Clifton/Colledge/Spitz/Sitton/Rookie

Clifton/Colledge/Spitz/Sitton/Giacomini

Colledge/Barbre/Spitz/Sitton/Giacomini

Colledge/Barbre/Spitz/Sitton/Tauscher.... My favorite! Let's run the ball!

Clifton/Colledge/Spitz/Sitton/Giacomini

[texaspackerbacker]

It would really tie everything together if Barbre comes through. It's still not clear what the deal was with Barbre last season. I hope he comes through, but somehow, I'm not optimistic.

It doesn't seem like Tauscher, if he's re-signed, will be 100% by the beginning of the season--it's too soon after the injury.

Giacomeini is also a hope, but supposedly, he's not a prototype ZBS OT.

The real key IMO is getting one more reasonably healthy, reasonably productive year out of Clifton.

The last combo on that list seems the best to me.

[Guiness]

The possibilities of OL combinations are almost endless this year. I came up with eleven, and that is without having a rookie at LT. It could happen but I doubt it. Here are mine, I'm sure there are more. From left to right:



And you even ignored the possibility of Moll at RT...not that any of us like it, but I think he's got more starts there than anyone outside of Tausch, doesn't he?

[Joemailman]

I think Tony Moll had his chance when Tauscher got hurt last year to show he could be a starter and failed. I suspect he's out of the picture as a starter unless injuries are a major factor.