Is Ryan Grant Really the Answer at Running Back?

[SnakeLH2006]

Is Ryan Grant really the answer at RB?

Yeah, Snake, and most liked his big runs in 2007. He got paid after holding out in 2008 preseason....and looks like he has SOME burst early on in 2009. But, there's a reason he didn't get drafted out of Notre Dame. Dude doesn't affect an NFL game....His "burst" is so-so healthy.

I feel he only got those 2007 yards based on the prolific, explosive Packer pass-attack under Brett in those last 8 games in 2007.

Dude (Grant) has not shown the ability to EVER elude a tackle. He's a tough dude, but his speed is pedestrian for a 1st string starter at RB in the NFL. I never cared much for his running style (smash mouth, but he rarely runs anyone over).

Here's a brand new article on Grant and the O-line:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/265225-green-bay-packers-ryan-grant-offensive-line-struggle-to-find-their-way

The Green Bay Packers running game has taken a lot of hits lately, both on and off the field. Sportswriters, bloggers and fans have all been lamenting the paltry number of rushing yards being gained. I dare to dissent and say it's been "good enough."

Everyone has been criticizing the Packers play calling for running 17 times on first down in the win against the St. Louis Rams. I dare to say that the Packers did a good job with the playcalling and were actually very aggressive on first downs. Huh? Don't worry, more on that later.

How can I come to these conclusions, you ask? Well first, you have to spend a few hours with the game tape. Last night I played back the Packers game, with heavy use of the rewind and slo-mo buttons. Because it seems to be the favorite post game topic of the Rams game, I specifically focused on the Packers running plays.

Albeit a bit bleary-eyed, I can distill the Packer's running game's struggles down to two major factors: Offensive linemen that aren't holding their blocks long enough and a running back that just takes too long to get to the line of scrimmage.

Now, there are certainly plenty of other contributing factors. Grant's lack of lateral movement, how easily he goes down when tackled very low and the lack of creativity in the running plays (seriously, 80 percent of the running plays look like the same play). But I just felt it was important to identify the top two.

Analyze the running plays closely, and you will see how many times Grant is tackled from behind or the side (often around the ankles) because an offensive lineman could not keep the backside sealed off or hold their block. Using freeze-frame, you can see that many times there are holes early on, but the Packers running plays are not designed as quick hits (with the exception of the fullback dive).

By the time Grant gets there, the hole is often gone. He then lacks the lateral movement and quickness to make a last minute change of direction. In my opinion, the Packers had two backs better suited to running in this scheme. But Tyrell Sutton is in Carolina and Kregg Lumpkin is languishing on the practice squad.

Having said all of that, after watching for hours, I'm actually not as upset with the running game as most people seem to be. If the Packers can average 3.8 YPC on 25 attempts per game, that's just about good enough. The Packers will never have the game breaking threat from the current running game, but it's OK. That's what Rodgers and the wide receivers are for.

As we all know, running the ball is necessary to keep the safeties honest and setup the deep play-action passes down the field. Although the running game didn't exactly burn it up, the plan still worked for the Packers. Every big pass play in the game was off of play action. The Rams linebackers and safeties bought the run fakes because the Packers had shown the run so much. Here are some examples:

2nd and six, Driver, 46 yard pass reception—I formation, play fake right, single coverage on Driver.
3rd and seven, Jennings, 50 yard pass reception—Shotgun with single back. Fake draw play, single coverage on Jennings.
1st and 10, Driver, 21 yard TD reception—I formation, play fake right, rollout left, single coverage on Driver.
1st and 10, Jennings, 53 yard pass reception—I formation, play fake right, single coverage on Jennings.
There were at least three other long passes attempted, two on first down. Jordy Nelson dropped one right in his hands and two were overthrown.

17 RUNS ON FIRST DOWN!!!
Now, for all of you screaming about the Packers running 17 times on first down versus 11 passes, look a little closer. Seven of those runs came in the fourth quarter, when they were protecting a lead—that's what your SUPPOSED to do! So through three quarters, the Packers were actually 10/11, run/pass on first down. And one of those runs was a reverse, which warms the cockles of my heart. In light of those facts, there is NOTHING wrong with a 17/11 pass/run ratio on first down, especially if four of those passes were long shots down the field and a fifth was a TD.

I have often accused Mike McCarthy of being too conservative, but this was not one of those times. And for the first time this season, the Packers won the time of possession battle over their opponent. Yes it was only the Rams, and yes they could stand to gain more yards on their first down runs, but it's a good start towards developing a serviceable running game.

My main criticism after watching this game is one that I have had before: the lack of originality in the running play design. The Packers' second play from scrimmage was a creatively designed play. Rodgers in the shotgun, Grant to his right. Nelson slot left, Lee tight end on the right side. Nelson goes in motion to the right. Ball is snapped, Lee blocks down on the DE, Barbre pulls around him to the outside, pitch out to Grant with Barbre and Nelson lead blocking. It worked beautifully and picked up 10 yards. They never ran it again. Every other running play to Grant was a straight hand off. But I digress—play design is a pet peeve of mine and a whole separate article.

The litmus test for McCarthy will come in situations like the Packers trailing by 10 points in the third quarter. Will he revert to his old ways and throw the running game out the window, or will he stay committed?

With the Favre-led 3-0 Minnesota Vikings next on the schedule, that test could very well come this week. The Packers' offensive line will have their hands full with the Vikings front four. That matchup will probably be the deciding factor in this game. Sorry Brett, but it's not ALL about you.

----------------

You decide as Rats. I'd love for the Pack to get an OT next year in the first, but if we get a stud RB. Sobeit. Grant is pedestrian at best. Not a starter on a winning team.

BTW. I was gonna vote Grant is deece, but we gotta look at an upgrade in the draft/FA in 2010 (BTW this doesn't take into account our OL in this topic, just his running skills). We need to upgrade here at RB, but on OL as, well. But a stud like AP would still get 1800 yards with our OL. Snake could do what Grant does if I was 2 years younger and a bunch faster...just saying....

Grant is not the answer short or long-term at RB.

[Rastak]

I voted the top....but TEX was channeling.....

[SnakeLH2006]

I voted the top....but TEX was channeling.....

LOL and WTF? AP who? Ras...you are the man, you are the man....... but way to rip it up on a poll, yo? Grant is Adrian Peterson? Wow. Just wow.

I love you, Patler, but I expected you (Patler) to be the first to vote at the top. Grant sucks. Damn. Homers..... :lol:

[MadtownPacker]

Good topic Snakey. I think Grant is not the guy and the lack of depth at RB could bite the Pack in the ass. He seem to take punishment much more then he dishes out. He is good for breaking off long runs when there is a big hole but come 3rd and 1 I have my doubts. Need to take a hard look at upgrading next year.

[SnakeLH2006]

Good topic Snakey. I think Grant is not the guy and the lack of depth at RB could bite the Pack in the ass. He seem to take punishment much more then he dishes out. He is good for breaking off long runs when there is a big hole but come 3rd and 1 I have my doubts. Need to take a hard look at upgrading next year.

:glug: :bow:

Wow, thanks Mad. Not to get into a long ass post, but thanks. I really do (and really mean it) think that there are very few of us Rats that can lay it out how it is (opinions) and not give a shit how it goes. Peace bud, I do like you Mad (always did...didn't mean we didn't always see eye to eye, but overall, yes, you are much like Snake and vice-versa).

Anyway, as far as Grant, the depth at RB is a farce (we NEVER should have kept Wynn....dude is a worthless turd). Grant is a dime-a-dozen type that capitalized with a deal (Favre letting him go wild late in 2007). Grant likes to (says the media) run with a mission/aka try to make contact....but that dude NEVER does shit with it. He can't/won't shed tackles, yet his running style is such that attracts tacklers.

Grant does not/will not have enough speed to separate nor have enough power to do ANYTHING when he makes first contact.

Grant (despite carries/yards) is one of the WORST NFL starting RB's in the NFL. Snake don't shy down from saying how it is. That is it.....Replace him soon, and move on.

[MadtownPacker]

Cant disagree with anything you said there. His upright running style is gonna get his ass took out one of these days.

[Tony Oday]

He runs well with no holes opening up for him...

[SnakeLH2006]

Cant disagree with anything you said there. His upright running style is gonna get his ass took out one of these days.

He ain't no AP or Eric Dickerson. He runs upright and doesn't do shit (Grant) at the POA (point of attack) to shed/run over like an AP. His running style will run him out the league in 2 years. I agree. It's not like Grant just destroys ANYONE (even a DB) when he makes contact. Don't wanna call Grant a pussy, cuz he seems tough enough (going full-on into a tackle) but the prob. is he doesn't do shit with it. NEVER shakes a guy/runs OVER....so what is the point with Grant's running style? He is not fast enough/quick enough/strong enough? His running style regardless of the OL is garbage. Grant is DAMN lucky to be getting some millions....his running style is moot.

Grant WILL NOT be resigned....and prob. out the league in a few years. We really need to UPGRADE the RB position. All of our RB's are turds.

[Gunakor]

Let me put it this way. If another Adrian Peterson or Eric Dickerson became available to be had, of course I'd look to make a change. But I dont' think Grant is that horrible that I'd throw darts to see who's gonna take his place next year. Grant isn't elite, but unless an elite back could be had then I don't think making a switch is necessarily a good thing. Swapping average for average accomplishes nothing.

[SnakeLH2006]

Let me put it this way. If another Adrian Peterson or Eric Dickerson became available to be had, of course I'd look to make a change. But I dont' think Grant is that horrible that I'd throw darts to see who's gonna take his place next year. Grant isn't elite, but unless an elite back could be had then I don't think making a switch is necessarily a good thing. Swapping average for average accomplishes nothing.

I hear ya, Gun, as Snake loves your opinion (and one of the rare late night guys like Snake, Lurker, etc.) But Grant is a dime a dozen. I'd take one of those average ass RB's as a rookie in 2010 (comparable to Grant now in his prime at 27). Those guys have upside. Grant has none.

[PlantPage55]

Let me put it this way. If another Adrian Peterson or Eric Dickerson became available to be had, of course I'd look to make a change. But I dont' think Grant is that horrible that I'd throw darts to see who's gonna take his place next year. Grant isn't elite, but unless an elite back could be had then I don't think making a switch is necessarily a good thing. Swapping average for average accomplishes nothing.

Wow, I came in to post the exact same sentiment. I would only be looking for a guy that's elite, or has the potential to be as such. I'm not that interested in any running back that wouldn't be deemed a 1st, maybe 2nd rounder. I'm hoping that TT's board and our first pick in next year's draft align to get us a good'n.

[SnakeLH2006]

Let me put it this way. If another Adrian Peterson or Eric Dickerson became available to be had, of course I'd look to make a change. But I dont' think Grant is that horrible that I'd throw darts to see who's gonna take his place next year. Grant isn't elite, but unless an elite back could be had then I don't think making a switch is necessarily a good thing. Swapping average for average accomplishes nothing.

Wow, I came in to post the exact same sentiment. I would only be looking for a guy that's elite, or has the potential to be as such. I'm not that interested in any running back that wouldn't be deemed a 1st, maybe 2nd rounder. I'm hoping that TT's board and our first pick in next year's draft align to get us a good'n.

Plant, I'm not sure what you are saying? Yeah, we want an elite at RB? NO? That's not the question....is Grant the answer.....NOPE...now that is the question? I'd take any 2010 1st rounder over that undrafted turd Grant. No shit we want an RB upgrade., no? Swapping average for average is absurd when you think that a 21/22 year old 1st rounder RB can prob. do things that a 28 year old average starting RB Grant CAN do. Absurd. Grant is/was garbage.

Who said the RB must be elite? Just better than Grant, no?

Plant? What are you saying?

[mmmdk]

Excellent thread! :)

I voted for drafting a 1st round RB in 2010; you actually need 2 good backs and that guy might be better than Grant. I think Grant is OK and nice to have...but let's get a Felix Jones type of back without the injuries though.

Lots of NFL teams that emphasis the run draft high for RBs even with one guy already in the stable...now about that OL too.... :roll:

[Gunakor]

Let me put it this way. If another Adrian Peterson or Eric Dickerson became available to be had, of course I'd look to make a change. But I dont' think Grant is that horrible that I'd throw darts to see who's gonna take his place next year. Grant isn't elite, but unless an elite back could be had then I don't think making a switch is necessarily a good thing. Swapping average for average accomplishes nothing.

Wow, I came in to post the exact same sentiment. I would only be looking for a guy that's elite, or has the potential to be as such. I'm not that interested in any running back that wouldn't be deemed a 1st, maybe 2nd rounder. I'm hoping that TT's board and our first pick in next year's draft align to get us a good'n.

Plant, I'm not sure what you are saying? Yeah, we want an elite at RB? NO? That's not the question....is Grant the answer.....NOPE...now that is the question? I'd take any 2010 1st rounder over that undrafted turd Grant. No shit we want an RB upgrade., no? Swapping average for average is absurd when you think that a 21/22 year old 1st rounder RB can prob. do things that a 28 year old average starting RB Grant CAN do. Absurd. Grant is/was garbage.

Who said the RB must be elite? Just better than Grant, no?

Plant? What are you saying?

Grant isn't garbage. He's average, same as most green as grass rookies will be coming out of the draft.

Besides, this team has bigger problems than at RB. I'd be seriously disappointed if they used their first round pick on one. A tackle, either right or left, would be a better investment with that pick. A CB or SS would likewise be better investments.

Grant can get the job done with adequate blocking. Therefore to upgrade at the position would require an elite back - one that can get the job done without adequate blocking. An average back can't do that. So if that's all your rookie is - average - then we don't get any better and a position of greater need suffers as a result of the wasted pick.

[Gunakor]

Excellent thread! :)

I voted for drafting a 1st round RB in 2010; you actually need 2 good backs and that guy might be better than Grant. I think Grant is OK and nice to have...but let's get a Felix Jones type of back without the injuries though.

Lots of NFL teams that emphasis the run draft high for RBs even with one guy already in the stable...now about that OL too.... :roll:

But we already have two. Brandon Jackson is injured, but he showed flashes last season when healthy. He'll be back. Our RB stable is not so bare as some would make it seem.

[SnakeLH2006]

Excellent thread! :)

I voted for drafting a 1st round RB in 2010; you actually need 2 good backs and that guy might be better than Grant. I think Grant is OK and nice to have...but let's get a Felix Jones type of back without the injuries though.

Lots of NFL teams that emphasis the run draft high for RBs even with one guy already in the stable...now about that OL too.... :roll:

But we already have two. Brandon Jackson is injured, but he showed flashes last season when healthy. He'll be back. Our RB stable is not so bare as some would make it seem.

I'll agree to that. But the poll question is this...is Grant the answer? NOPE. Move on. He's 28 soon and couldn't run over/shake a tackle if his life depended on it, no? Grant is NOT the answer at RB. Our OL is average. I'm only looking at Grant's RB skills.....there is not a whole lot via topic/poll. No, Gun?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

How many yards (season) did the 2 starting RBs have for the 2 teams in last year's superbowl have.

[SnakeLH2006]

How many yards (season) did the 2 starting RBs have for the 2 teams in last year's superbowl have.

No one cares, but I bet we all laugh/bow to this:

http://achievements.schrankmonster.de/Achievement.aspx?text=Ty%20is%20smarter%20than%20A LL.%20Einstein%20FAILS.

[Gunakor]

Excellent thread! :)

I voted for drafting a 1st round RB in 2010; you actually need 2 good backs and that guy might be better than Grant. I think Grant is OK and nice to have...but let's get a Felix Jones type of back without the injuries though.

Lots of NFL teams that emphasis the run draft high for RBs even with one guy already in the stable...now about that OL too.... :roll:

But we already have two. Brandon Jackson is injured, but he showed flashes last season when healthy. He'll be back. Our RB stable is not so bare as some would make it seem.

I'll agree to that. But the poll question is this...is Grant the answer? NOPE. Move on. He's 28 soon and couldn't run over/shake a tackle if his life depended on it, no? Grant is NOT the answer at RB. Our OL is average. I'm only looking at Grant's RB skills.....there is not a whole lot via topic/poll. No, Gun?

Well, our OL is god awful right now. Far below average.

He can run over/shake a tackle. If you watch, he normally hits first contact behind the LOS, yet is rarely stopped for negative yardage. He can carry DB's 5 or more yards downfield if he could only get to that second level. I've seen him do it on more than one occasion. Against good rush defenses to boot. Whether its 125 against the Bears (last season) or 200 against the Seahawks (2 seasons ago) I've seen him get the job done.

There's always room for improvement, but he's not garbage. Is he the answer? Maybe, maybe not. This offense isn't driven by the RB anyway. A decent back who can average 4 ypc behind a decent OL is all the answer we need out of the position anyway. Just something to keep defenses honest so AR can do his thing. That's the answer. And it's something I honestly feel Grant could do consistently if we had a halfway decent line blocking for him.

[Gunakor]

How many yards (season) did the 2 starting RBs have for the 2 teams in last year's superbowl have.

No one cares, but I bet we all laugh/bow to this:

http://achievements.schrankmonster.de/Achievement.aspx?text=Ty%20is%20smarter%20than%20A LL.%20Einstein%20FAILS.

That's kinda messed up Snake, it's a legitimate question. Especially where the Cardinals are concerned, because their offense is driven by the passing game same as ours is. If Tim Hightower can be the answer for them, Ryan Grant can be the answer for us. It's a fair point to make.

[SnakeLH2006]

Well, yeah, Gunakor (my late night homie). Grant can be good game to game.....but the point of this poll is Grant the godsend, no? I agree, Grant has some deece games, but EVERY starting NFL RB should, no? He's below average by far, and should/WILL be replaced.....hopefully.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

How many yards (season) did the 2 starting RBs have for the 2 teams in last year's superbowl have.

No one cares, but I bet we all laugh/bow to this:

http://achievements.schrankmonster.de/Achievement.aspx?text=Ty%20is%20smarter%20than%20A LL.%20Einstein%20FAILS.

That's kinda messed up Snake, it's a legitimate question. Especially where the Cardinals are concerned, because their offense is driven by the passing game same as ours is. If Tim Hightower can be the answer for them, Ryan Grant can be the answer for us. It's a fair point to make.

Actually, Edge took the job back for the playoffs. But that just tells you how bad the Cards rushing offense was. They just hoped it would be mediocre so you had to at least consider that they might run.

And, Fast Willie was the other part of the equation..for the winning team..which supposedly was a running team, but Wilie had 791 yards with 3.8 ypc.

2nd leading was Mewelde Moore (who Ty has always liked) with 588 yards and 4.2 ypc.

Hardly awe inspiring.

[Gunakor]

Well, yeah, Gunakor (my late night homie). Grant can be good game to game.....but the point of this poll is Grant the godsend, no? I agree, Grant has some deece games, but EVERY starting NFL RB should, no? He's below average by far, and should/WILL be replaced.....hopefully.

I think you just set your expectations too high. We don't need a godsend at RB. We don't. We need a 4 ypc guy. Grant is a 4 ypc guy. He could very well be the answer.

Let's work on protecting AR before we focus on a newer/better RB.

[SnakeLH2006]

Well, yeah, Gunakor (my late night homie). Grant can be good game to game.....but the point of this poll is Grant the godsend, no? I agree, Grant has some deece games, but EVERY starting NFL RB should, no? He's below average by far, and should/WILL be replaced.....hopefully.

I think you just set your expectations too high. We don't need a godsend at RB. We don't. We need a 4 ypc guy. Grant is a 4 ypc guy. He could very well be the answer.

Let's work on protecting AR before we focus on a newer/better RB.

LOL. Yep. Gun, you are the late night voice of reason. Snake really likes you dude. I agree. But again, this poll was not if Grant could get us 4 yards avg. This poll was if Grant is the ANSWER. I still say no.

[Gunakor]

Well, yeah, Gunakor (my late night homie). Grant can be good game to game.....but the point of this poll is Grant the godsend, no? I agree, Grant has some deece games, but EVERY starting NFL RB should, no? He's below average by far, and should/WILL be replaced.....hopefully.

I think you just set your expectations too high. We don't need a godsend at RB. We don't. We need a 4 ypc guy. Grant is a 4 ypc guy. He could very well be the answer.

Let's work on protecting AR before we focus on a newer/better RB.

LOL. Yep. Gun, you are the late night voice of reason. Snake really likes you dude. I agree. But again, this poll was not if Grant could get us 4 yards avg. This poll was if Grant is the ANSWER.

That's the point Snake. 4 yards avg. IS the answer. If Grant is 4 ypc, he's the answer. That's how I justify it.

[SnakeLH2006]

Well, yeah, Gunakor (my late night homie). Grant can be good game to game.....but the point of this poll is Grant the godsend, no? I agree, Grant has some deece games, but EVERY starting NFL RB should, no? He's below average by far, and should/WILL be replaced.....hopefully.

I think you just set your expectations too high. We don't need a godsend at RB. We don't. We need a 4 ypc guy. Grant is a 4 ypc guy. He could very well be the answer.

Let's work on protecting AR before we focus on a newer/better RB.

LOL. Yep. Gun, you are the late night voice of reason. Snake really likes you dude. I agree. But again, this poll was not if Grant could get us 4 yards avg. This poll was if Grant is the ANSWER.

That's the point Snake. 4 yards avg. IS the answer. If Grant is 4 ypc, he's the answer. That's how I justify it.

That's cool, Gun, where did you vote? The OL is shit...but I was just concentrating on Grant's RB skills.....

I'm OK with Grant at RB.....but damn if I don't want an upgrade somewhere/somehow? No? Grant really underwhelms me?

[Gunakor]

Well, yeah, Gunakor (my late night homie). Grant can be good game to game.....but the point of this poll is Grant the godsend, no? I agree, Grant has some deece games, but EVERY starting NFL RB should, no? He's below average by far, and should/WILL be replaced.....hopefully.

I think you just set your expectations too high. We don't need a godsend at RB. We don't. We need a 4 ypc guy. Grant is a 4 ypc guy. He could very well be the answer.

Let's work on protecting AR before we focus on a newer/better RB.

LOL. Yep. Gun, you are the late night voice of reason. Snake really likes you dude. I agree. But again, this poll was not if Grant could get us 4 yards avg. This poll was if Grant is the ANSWER.

That's the point Snake. 4 yards avg. IS the answer. If Grant is 4 ypc, he's the answer. That's how I justify it.

That's cool, Gun, where did you vote? I'm OK with Grant at RB.....but damn if I don't want an upgrade somewhere/somehow? No? Grant really underwhelms me?

I voted that he's a deece RB but worth an upgrade if we can. But that's not to say we should go overboard with it. If someone is there and it fits the overall plan for the offseason then pull the trigger. But it's not worth a 1st round pick. Not right now.

There's so many other positions in dire need of that first round talent. Offensive tackle, strong safety, another top flight cornerback. All much more needed improvements than at RB. Now, if there's someone sitting there in the 3rd round that should have been taken in the 2nd, definitely pull the trigger. Worst case scenario you have the best 3rd string RB in the NFL. But I wouldn't waste a first rounder on a RB, and we already have a 2nd rounder on the roster who looks pretty decent himself. Day one should be spent on protecting our QB.

[SnakeLH2006]

Day one should be spent on protecting our QB.

Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no? Arod in 2009 will still get 30 TD's 4000 yards, but it's misleading....He's doing that on his talent alone. Need another thread for that.

Grant sucks as starting RB in the NFL. Had to restart it. He really underwhelms.

[Gunakor]

] Day one should be spent on protecting our QB.

Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no?

I'm guessing this is Cliffy's last year whether he gets healthy or not. So we need 2 OT's. Even if Ted Thompson was Daniel Snyder he couldn't fill 2 OT positions with adequate players thru FA in the same offseason. We're gonna need at least one through the draft, and it had better come from either of the first 2 rounds.

I was happy with the Raji pick. We needed OT's and there were some to be had, but lets be honest. Going into the draft, most of us would have been delighted if TT spent every one of his picks on the defensive side of the ball. That defense was horrible last year. Change in scheme meant we needed players that could get the job done in that scheme. And Raji is gonna be a stud NT in the future when Pickett is done. I loved that pick. And Matthews looks like he might just be worth the fleecing Thompson took to get him here. I'm very happy with the way the first round turned out this year.

[SnakeLH2006]

] Day one should be spent on protecting our QB.

Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no?

I'm guessing this is Cliffy's last year whether he gets healthy or not. So we need 2 OT's. Even if Ted Thompson was Daniel Snyder he couldn't fill 2 OT positions with adequate players thru FA in the same offseason. We're gonna need at least one through the draft, and it had better come from either of the first 2 rounds.

I was happy with the Raji pick. We needed OT's and there were some to be had, but lets be honest. Going into the draft, most of us would have been delighted if TT spent every one of his picks on the defensive side of the ball. That defense was horrible last year. Change in scheme meant we needed players that could get the job done in that scheme. And Raji is gonna be a stud NT in the future when Pickett is done. I loved that pick. And Matthews looks like he might just be worth the fleecing Thompson took to get him here. I'm very happy with the way the first round turned out this year.

Again....you have so much knowledgable shit to agree with...I agree to all of it, as usual, Gunakor....but again, this thread is about Ryan Grant.

He sucks.....much ass.

[Gunakor]

] Day one should be spent on protecting our QB.

Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no?

I'm guessing this is Cliffy's last year whether he gets healthy or not. So we need 2 OT's. Even if Ted Thompson was Daniel Snyder he couldn't fill 2 OT positions with adequate players thru FA in the same offseason. We're gonna need at least one through the draft, and it had better come from either of the first 2 rounds.

I was happy with the Raji pick. We needed OT's and there were some to be had, but lets be honest. Going into the draft, most of us would have been delighted if TT spent every one of his picks on the defensive side of the ball. That defense was horrible last year. Change in scheme meant we needed players that could get the job done in that scheme. And Raji is gonna be a stud NT in the future when Pickett is done. I loved that pick. And Matthews looks like he might just be worth the fleecing Thompson took to get him here. I'm very happy with the way the first round turned out this year.

Again....you have so much knowledgable shit to agree with...I agree to all of it as, usual....but again, this thread is about Ryan Grant.

He sucks.

Hey, I was just responding to your post.


Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no?

[SnakeLH2006]

] Day one should be spent on protecting our QB.

Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no?

I'm guessing this is Cliffy's last year whether he gets healthy or not. So we need 2 OT's. Even if Ted Thompson was Daniel Snyder he couldn't fill 2 OT positions with adequate players thru FA in the same offseason. We're gonna need at least one through the draft, and it had better come from either of the first 2 rounds.

I was happy with the Raji pick. We needed OT's and there were some to be had, but lets be honest. Going into the draft, most of us would have been delighted if TT spent every one of his picks on the defensive side of the ball. That defense was horrible last year. Change in scheme meant we needed players that could get the job done in that scheme. And Raji is gonna be a stud NT in the future when Pickett is done. I loved that pick. And Matthews looks like he might just be worth the fleecing Thompson took to get him here. I'm very happy with the way the first round turned out this year.

Again....you have so much knowledgable shit to agree with...I agree to all of it as, usual....but again, this thread is about Ryan Grant.

He sucks.

Hey, I was just responding to your post.


Well said, Gun. We gotta get some 1at round OTs. I still like Raji, but damn those OT's look like fucking sieves, no?

I know buddy, but trying to get this Grant train rolling one way or the other. I agree with EVERYTHING you said, but Grant is a sieve at RB. He ain't shit.

[sheepshead]

Never thought he was and I was very surprised TT didnt address it in the draft. Of course-I was almost alone with those posts.

[3irty1]

What I wouldn't give to see Grant bust off a long run like back in the 2007 days. If it happened Monday it would be extra sweet.

[retailguy]

Never thought he was and I was very surprised TT didnt address it in the draft. Of course-I was almost alone with those posts.

Say what? Lots of us on this train. But the small vocal "Ted can do no wrong crowd" kind of drown us all out. (which you are largely a part of)

Grant is at best serviceable. But he needs a line to run behind. We don't have one. Therefore, Grant can't run.

[get louder at lambeau]

I see Grant as a guy who doesn't have a lot of talent, but works his ass off to be able to compete at a starting NFL level. He's not very shifty or fast, but he's a good, tough, one-cut downhill runner. He's very good when there's a hole to run through inside. Doesn't break tackles, but hits defenders hard and can wear them down if given enough carries. Great guy to have on the team with his work ethic and leadership, and he seems like a perfect match for Edgar Bennett's coaching.

That said, I'd love to see the Packers get a talented guy high in the draft who could split carries with him, and give the Packers a strong 1-2 punch running attack. I'd love a shifty 230 pound power back. I think it's better to have an RB by committee, because RBs get injured all the time. Ryan Grant should have been able to rest his hammy last year, instead of going out there on a bad leg.

[bobblehead]

Last year grant missed his cutback lanes all season. This year he is missing them early as well (even in preseason).

I'm no fan of Tampax Wynn, but he is a good runner. I would start using him on FIRST down some. BJack might be good enough as well, he was MUCH better than Grant last season and deserves a lot of carries. He isn't as explosive as grant, but his vision improved dramatically from year one to year two, I only hope he gets healthy fast.

[bobblehead]

Never thought he was and I was very surprised TT didnt address it in the draft. Of course-I was almost alone with those posts.

Don't make me bump the youtube link that you posted in my thread where I was begging TT not to give him much of a deal.

[bobblehead]

Never thought he was and I was very surprised TT didnt address it in the draft. Of course-I was almost alone with those posts.

Say what? Lots of us on this train. But the small vocal "Ted can do no wrong crowd" kind of drown us all out. (which you are largely a part of)

Grant is at best serviceable. But he needs a line to run behind. We don't have one. Therefore, Grant can't run.

say what? I have been a huge TT supporter and I HATED the grant deal. Me and JH were the only 2 on this forum who vocally were screaming not to give him shit.

LOTS of us on this train..hardly.

[MJZiggy]

I see Grant as a guy who doesn't have a lot of talent, but works his ass off to be able to compete at a starting NFL level. He's not very shifty or fast, but he's a good, tough, one-cut downhill runner. He's very good when there's a hole to run through inside. Doesn't break tackles, but hits defenders hard and can wear them down if given enough carries. Great guy to have on the team with his work ethic and leadership, and he seems like a perfect match for Edgar Bennett's coaching.

That said, I'd love to see the Packers get a talented guy high in the draft who could split carries with him, and give the Packers a strong 1-2 punch running attack. I'd love a shifty 230 pound power back. I think it's better to have an RB by committee, because RBs get injured all the time. Ryan Grant should have been able to rest his hammy last year, instead of going out there on a bad leg.

:bclap:

[Pugger]

Grant is a decent average NFL back. With a back like Grant his biggest problem is his O line. Only the elite ones like Steven Jackson and AP can make something out of nothing.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Grant is a decent average NFL back. With a back like Grant his biggest problem is his O line. Only the elite ones like Steven Jackson and AP can make something out of nothing.

I posted his stats..go check them out sometime.

Even an elite back like Jackson only gets 1000 with an average line.

With Grant...and his way lower salary...we lose maybe 250 yards and 2-3 tds.

No point in having a great back with a crappy line or crappy QB.

[superfan]

I voted decent, look to upgrade.

He was definitely worth the 6th round pick in trade, probably not worth the contract extension, although I don't know how much he is paid in relation to other #1 RBs throughout the league. If he is paid something around average, then the contract is worth it.

He does a good job of running downhill, one cut and go. He doesn't have a lot to offer other than that. My favorite Grant traits:

1. Cut and go forward, don't dance behind the line. Make that extra yard or two after contact.

2. When daylight appears, put the head down, protect the ball, and run full throttle until crossing the goalline. In 2007 on his long runs, it was fun to see him running all out with nobody else within 15 yards. That's kind of refreshing - no high stepping, showboating or other stupid stuff as the goalline approaches.

Will those traits get him into the HOF? Probably not, but I'm satisfied with him and would prefer to see the team focus on other priorities such as OL and Safety. I'd like to see some improvement in his vision, pass catching, and blocking, but he is what he is - a decent, not great, NFL RB.

[Bossman641]

I think the main problem with Grant is that currently have no other backs to compliment him. Wynn is too similar to Grant and hasn't done much of anything this year.

Grant just looks so stiff and awkward going out for routes and catching the ball. Jackson isn't a natural, but he looks a lot better than Grant.

[Pugger]

Unfortunately for Jackson the young man can't stay healthy. :?

[SnakeLH2006]

I think the main problem with Grant is that currently have no other backs to compliment him. Wynn is too similar to Grant and hasn't done much of anything this year.

Grant just looks so stiff and awkward going out for routes and catching the ball. Jackson isn't a natural, but he looks a lot better than Grant.

Wynn has done plenty:

-Looked lost.
-Couldn't catch a pass if someone laid it in his hands.
-Looks absolutely burstless for a guy some had said had some real speed/size combos rare to RB's.
-Gives dumb glares up and down the field when he makes a bonehead play.

The problem is the backups, Wynn, and BJack (hurt) haven't shown much.

The OL sucks, yea, I get that, but it did for the last few years under Big Teddy T. It is what it is. But somehow, someway, Grant DID make some big bursts/big runs his first year in 2007? He's healthy now. Is the problem that he's about 28 and already going downhill physically, or did we pay him and he doesn't want to get hurt?

I dunno. Either way. Not impressed with 3.8 yards a carry this year (esp. when most of those BIG runs came on 3rd and 18 yard draws. I could run for 12 yards if the Defense is not expecting it. When we need him to get 2 yards on 3rd and 2. He's balled up like the pizza corner guy on the Soprano's who owes some money.

He's reallly underwhelmed. Some of that is on the OL. But he simply is not a good starter consistently for a winner. The last time he performed well was 2007 (13-3). We are 8-12 since then, and Grant has underwhelmed. Nuff said.

[bobblehead]

Link to MM calling a running play on third and 18 please...it would be news to me since 1st and 10 (up by only 3) is a must pass situation all of a sudden.

Grant got decent yardage in this one. I still saw a monster cut back he missed in the first half then when he could have run 10 yards for a first he cut back into the hole that was gone by then thus gaining about 6 yards.

Not a grant fan, haven't been all along. I think Wynn has better vision to be honest. He would be my first down back at this point.

[channtheman]

Fuck no. Grant misses every cutback lane it seems, and if he finds it he doesn't have the talent to cut sharp enough and make a big play.

[SnakeLH2006]

Fuck no. Grant misses every cutback lane it seems, and if he finds it he doesn't have the talent to cut sharp enough and make a big play.

QFT

[channtheman]

Fuck no. Grant misses every cutback lane it seems, and if he finds it he doesn't have the talent to cut sharp enough and make a big play.

QFT

There was this play early on where he found the cutback lane and it looked like he had a big run going, then a defender reaches out with his arm and slows him down completely and it ends at like 6 yards. AP would have seen the cutback that Grant did but cut it way sharp outside where there was a huge opening up the sideline.

At this point, I don't even think Grant is serviceable. I was of the opinion that we should pay him when he held out. That was stupid of me, and I wish TT had played hardball and said "fuck you". Grant would have tried out for a few teams and then been cut and out of the league.

[SnakeLH2006]

Fuck no. Grant misses every cutback lane it seems, and if he finds it he doesn't have the talent to cut sharp enough and make a big play.

QFT

There was this play early on where he found the cutback lane and it looked like he had a big run going, then a defender reaches out with his arm and slows him down completely and it ends at like 6 yards. AP would have seen the cutback that Grant did but cut it way sharp outside where there was a huge opening up the sideline.

At this point, I don't even think Grant is serviceable. I was of the opinion that we should pay him when he held out. That was stupid of me, and I wish TT had played hardball and said "fuck you". Grant would have tried out for a few teams and then been cut and out of the league.

I dunno. He is "good Packer people". So, I'm sure he'd at least get a fair shake with his talent like Ruvell Martin did when the Packers cut him and show his INACTIVE status worthiness on a roster for a powerhouse like the Rams, somewhere, somehow. :roll:

Anyone remember former Packer WR, Sanjay Beach, the 49er's castoff WR with good hands/work ethic from the early 90's. I get the same vibe. Tries hard, but can't shake a tackle. Good guy, but can't finish plays. Same vibe. Grant....