Ryan Grant on the bubble!?

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/128290998.html

If Cement Shoes Nance really does take away Ryan Grant's roster spot, Tom Silverstein will be set for life as a packer football genius. This is truly out of left field.

[smuggler]

This is fantasy. Grant is on the team, because he's currently the starting running back.

[Bossman641]

Nance as the 3rd down back? Yuck. Is Noah Herron unavailable or what?

I really wonder why they keep Nance around. They keep saying he shows up in practices but I've seen nothing in games.

[bobblehead]

I've been on the cut Grant bandwagon, but once we paid that bonus after the lockout I assume he is a lock.

[Brandon494]

I say cut Rodgers and keep Harrell. Harrell is really been coming on in practice.

[Joemailman]

Starks is too much of an injury risk for the Packers to cut Grant this year. It might be different if Green had had the benefit of a normal offseason program. He's just not ready to step in.

[VermontPackFan]

No chance Grant goes anywhere this year

[Packers4Glory]

Yeah i read that article thinking wtf? really? Just didn't see the dots they were trying to connect. It would be a huge mistake to cut him and rely on green and Nance should something happen to Starks. I like the idea of Grant and Starks sharing the ball.

[bobblehead]

Starks is too much of an injury risk for the Packers to cut Grant this year. It might be different if Green had had the benefit of a normal offseason program. He's just not ready to step in.

Really? I think Grant is the one who has only had 2 healthy seasons since 8th grade.

[imscott72]

This is just a motivation ploy for Grant. He's not going anywhere..

[bobblehead]

This is just a motivation ploy for Grant. He's not going anywhere..

I doubt some first year reporter in town is going to motivate Grant anymore than Grant motivates himself. Look, bottom line is this. We paid the 1.75 mil, if he is starter quality (even low end starter quality) he stays. If he isn't, then he goes. I was on the waive him bandwagon early, but now that you paid over 1/3 his salary this year you keep him.

[vince]

This is Silverstein being a boob. He's an independent thinker, which is good, but this one is ridiculous. Hell, Grant's ball security alone is too valuable to cut. His touches are going to go way down from what he's used to, but it'll be Starks and Green eating into them, not Nance. Nance's only redeeming quality is his hard-nosed running style which would be good in short yardage, but Kuhn has that need filled, and Kuhn's versatility is far greater than Nance's.

[mraynrand]

controversy sells.

[Harlan Huckleby]

On the substance, is it possible that the coaches observing Grant up close think that he has lost a little bit? Is it possible that Nance is better in practice and on film than we see?

Every year there are some very strange cuts that leave the fans shaking their heads. Maybe nothing this unexpected in recent memory. I'd have to go back to the year that Forest Gregg announced he was clearing-out "the 8-8" players and cut Paul Coffman, Lynn Dickey??, I forget who all. Anyway, the 8-8 players were pruned and they went 4-12.

[Patler]

I'd have to go back to the year that Forest Gregg announced he was clearing-out "the 8-8" players and cut Paul Coffman, Lynn Dickey??, I forget who all. Anyway, the 8-8 players were pruned and they went 4-12.

So his plan worked?

[Upnorth]

If Grant returns to preinjury form he is easily one of the top 15 backs in the league. He must have had a deadline and just started typing.

[Cheesehead Craig]

It's just to bolster up Nance's value so he'll be able to find a job after he's cut.

[vince]

This is just a motivation ploy for Grant. He's not going anywhere..

It's just to bolster up Nance's value so he'll be able to find a job after he's cut.

So Silverstein and the JS are in cahoots with Packers management. It's the most brilliant long-standing cover-up in history.

[Yoop]

I've been on the cut Grant bandwagon, but once we paid that bonus after the lockout I assume he is a lock.

who cuts a 1000 yard RB? no one unless they have to, I dont think we are in that group, could Grant be traded before the trade deadline? possible, we are in better shape this year at RB than we where last year even without Grant, so it is a possibility.
Starks looks good, has nice vision, explodes into the secondary, and has improved at picking up his blocking assignments, Green will have to improve on his blocking, but seems to have all the other skillsets needed, this is a good tandem, Grant could become expendable.
But I look for us to carry all 3 this year, and Grant will be gone next year.

[sharpe1027]

The thing about making bold predictions is that nobody remembers when you are wrong, but you can gloat about that one time you were right for years. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? No.

[MadScientist]

This is a good team with few openings, so Silverstein came up with an out of the box idea for an article. This time in the preseason is too late to be doing puff pieces about UDFA's who are going to be cut before the ink is dry. They have to fill the space between ads somehow.

[smuggler]

bobblehead has serious issues with Grant hate. He's been hurt one time in 4 years with us. He was a very good back before he was hurt. If he is 90% of what he was in 2009, he's clearly the starter.

[Packers4Glory]

Its stupid to get rid of a quality back. Hell last yr we lost ours and didnt find a replacement until it was almost too late. Can't have enough, and if it weren't for Starks I'd lay odds that Grant would have a big season.

[mraynrand]

This time in the preseason is too late to be doing puff pieces about UDFA's who are going to be cut before the ink is dry.


Lori Nickel will try anyway!

[Harlan Huckleby]

The thing about making bold predictions is that nobody remembers when you are wrong, but you can gloat about that one time you were right for years.
Yes, I expect that is exactly what is going on here. The Ryan Grant Fan Club will remember, tho.

On an unrelated note, I just remember a great get-rich-quick idea I had. You start, say, 512 stock-picker newsletters. Half of them say "buy", the other half say "sell". You fold the half that are wrong. Well, after 8 rounds of this charade, you are the hot, brilliant financial whiz whose newsletter has been right-on a phenomenal 8 times in a row! This is how bobblehead got his start.

[hoosier]

On the substance, is it possible that the coaches observing Grant up close think that he has lost a little bit? Is it possible that Nance is better in practice and on film than we see?

I've seen several references in the JSO and GBPG TC blogs about Grant looking less quick or less explosive since he came back from the injury. But it's still early, and it is hard for me to imagine that anyone could know with certainty that his "slowness" (if it in fact exists) is really a sign of declining ability and not just rustiness or a natural part of the recovery process. I woudn't be at all surprised to see Starks overtake and supplant Grant as #1 back. But I would be shocked to see them cut Grant to keep Nance, who has never shown much of anything in his time on the field.

[mraynrand]

On an unrelated note, I just remember a great get-rich-quick idea I had. You start, say, 512 stock-picker newsletters. Half of them say "buy", the other half say "sell". You fold the half that are wrong. Well, after 8 rounds of this charade, you are the hot, brilliant financial whiz whose newsletter has been right-on a phenomenal 8 times in a row! This is how bobblehead got his start.

I paid $99.99 for that surefire success strategy fresh out of college. Best 100 bucks I ever spent.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Green is also part of the picture. Its concievable that MM sees Starks-Green as his most effective 1-2 punch.

I don't know.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I paid $99.99 for that surefire success strategy fresh out of college. Best 100 bucks I ever spent.



thank you for your business

[mraynrand]

thank you for your business

I sold the surefire success strategy to 100 people. Fastest 10K I ever made. Of course, I had to move out of town, but - details, details.

[hoosier]

Green is also part of the picture. Its concievable that MM sees Starks-Green as his most effective 1-2 punch.

I don't know.

Me neither but I think I have a pretty good idea just based on preseason stats. If you compare usage during the first to PS games, it looks very unlikely that Starks-Green is the team's immediate future. So far Grant's stats (8 carries, 36 yds, 4.4 ypc) are what you would expect of a starter. Green, meanwhile, has struggled (6 carries, 8 yards, 1.3) in limited time. Not to make too much of preseason stats, but I would think that if they were grooming Green for immediate action as #2 back he would seeing more carries right now.

[rbaloha1]

Green is also part of the picture. Its concievable that MM sees Starks-Green as his most effective 1-2 punch.

I don't know.

Its certainly the future. Also, Nance looks much more decisive and fluid.

Releasing/trading Grant clears up some cap space given the pending Sitton and Finley contracts.

[Smidgeon]

I've seen several references in the JSO and GBPG TC blogs about Grant looking less quick or less explosive since he came back from the injury. But it's still early, and it is hard for me to imagine that anyone could know with certainty that his "slowness" (if it in fact exists) is really a sign of declining ability and not just rustiness or a natural part of the recovery process. I woudn't be at all surprised to see Starks overtake and supplant Grant as #1 back. But I would be shocked to see them cut Grant to keep Nance, who has never shown much of anything in his time on the field.

I think I read somewhere that Grant lost some muscle in his legs (maybe another PR poster mentioned this?). If that's the case, I don't think Grant's going anywhere, but it may take a while to get back to where he was. And I don't think he'll be a 1000 yard rusher again due to opportunity.

[Patler]

McGinn thinks Grant looks like his old self:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/128114168.html

[Harlan Huckleby]

how many minutes would it take the Lions to sign Grant if he released?

[Upnorth]

how many minutes would it take the Lions to sign Grant if he released?
HOw many minutes would it take for Grant to get offers from 1/3rd of the league if released? Biggest knock on him is the injury. If he is in a platoon now, will he last the year? I think so, and I hope so as he is very reliable to churn out first downs without fumbling when required.

[smuggler]

Given their recent history of tampering, probably less than 5 good ones.

[Upnorth]

So I am big believer in Grants ability. Assuming this story is true and Grant is cut, do you put faith in Starks/green carrying the load for the season ? I think that senario would hold back the pack's true o potential for a second year . Who would that person be?

[vince]

http://thesidelineview.com/columns/caplans-nfl-corner/source-packers-grant-takes-pay-cut

Source: Packers' Grant Takes Pay Cut

By Adam Caplan
August 24, 2011

The Green Bay Packers have restructured the contract of veteran RB Ryan Grant’s contract, thesidelineview.com has learned.

Grant, who was to earn $3.5 million in base salary for 2011, had his base salary cut to $2.5 million earlier this month, a source confirmed.

Grant, who is on the final year of his contract, had a $1 million roster bonus due on the 15th day of the new league year on his previous deal plus $750,000 in total per game roster bonuses ($46,875/game). Grant has the same exact amount ($1.75 million) in bonuses due in the new contract, but it’s not known if the bonus structure is the same or if the roster bonus has been paid or if the date has been pushed back.

Grant’s salary cap number has been trimmed from $5.65 million to roughly $3.87 million.

RB Dimitri Nance, according to a local report, could push Grant off the roster this season.

Should Grant be released, second-year RB James Starks figures to have the best chance to start, with Nance and rookie Alex Green also pushing for carries and snaps.

[Guiness]

http://thesidelineview.com/columns/caplans-nfl-corner/source-packers-grant-takes-pay-cut

Source: Packers' Grant Takes Pay Cut



Tough to follow that.
I assume his minimum cap number went down, but since they're saying that the total bonus due is the same, his cap number will remain at $5.65 if he plays the year? Ok, maybe $1million less, since his base was cut. That lowering wasn't rolled into a potential bonus somewhere?

[vince]

It looks like Grant agreed to restructure his contract and take a $1 million pay cut before camp opened up, presumably in order to keep his spot on the roster, which makes Bobblehead look like a mad genius. It also would seem to dramatically reduce his chance of being cut now I'd think.

http://cn1.kaboodle.com/hi/img/c/0/0/e7/c/AAAADEtTAS4AAAAAAOfISQ.jpg?v=1282221832000

[Fritz]

This is not the same team nor the same situation of four or five years ago. Back then, IF Nance were, say, an unheralded but promising rook (from all descriptions he's more of a plugger) five years ago, then Thompson might have been tempted to cut the vet and keep the cheaper kid with lots of upside.

First, Nance does not seem to have much upside. He is what he is.

And this is a team that may still be reaching its peak, coming off a SB win. For the same reason they might've traded a Matt Flynn type four or five years ago but won't now, they will not cut Ryan Grant. Thompson knows the team is right there and he's not going to sacrifice an opportunity this year by trading a Flynn or cutting a Grant.

[mraynrand]

First, Nance does not seem to have much upside. He is what he is.

QFT. That's all that counts

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sounds like Grant took $1M less, but the contract is now fully guaranteed. It almost assuredly means he'll be with the team. If the Packers were thinking about cutting him, I doubt they would have agreed to fully guarantee almost $3M.

[sheepshead]

All this offense needs is about 80-100 yards per game rushing. We have the horses for that. This all makes sense.

[Fritz]

Sheep, your comment reminds me of what seemed a typical rushing yards statistical line from the Holmgren days; you'd have Edgar Bennett or Dorsey Levens with 15 to 17carries for maybe 60-80 yards.

[bobblehead]

who cuts a 1000 yard RB? no one unless they have to, I dont think we are in that group, could Grant be traded before the trade deadline? possible, we are in better shape this year at RB than we where last year even without Grant, so it is a possibility.
Starks looks good, has nice vision, explodes into the secondary, and has improved at picking up his blocking assignments, Green will have to improve on his blocking, but seems to have all the other skillsets needed, this is a good tandem, Grant could become expendable.
But I look for us to carry all 3 this year, and Grant will be gone next year.

LT? Teams cut RB's when they think they are losing a step. My prediction was based on grant being 29, coming off injury and being due a roster bonus (which incidentally was reported as 1.75 million, but was actually 1 million). TT is smarter than I in these things and he paid the mil. At that point I figure Grant is a lock. Now I just read Grant took a million dollar pay cut to gaurantee his 2011 salary. That too changes things. 750k is dependent on him being gameday active...or injury insurance. Given all this, I stand by what I posted above. Grant is pretty much a lock at this point. I hope he is still a 1k rusher and hasn't lost a step.

[bobblehead]

The thing about making bold predictions is that nobody remembers when you are wrong, but you can gloat about that one time you were right for years. Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? No.

I talk more about whiffing on my prediction of Allen Babre turning into a good guard than I do about my predictions that came true (Like when I said TT and MM would push Favre out after the 2007 season when Favre was pissing on MM).

[bobblehead]

bobblehead has serious issues with Grant hate. He's been hurt one time in 4 years with us. He was a very good back before he was hurt. If he is 90% of what he was in 2009, he's clearly the starter.

You are a moron. I do not hate Grant, I rather like him. He was hurt so much that he never got drafted. Yes, he strung together 2 solid uninjured seasons, and part of one before that. Those are the facts.

I also said that it might be in the teams best interest to cut one of my top 5 all time favorite players in DD. You have serious issues with reading comprehension and assuming that anyone that disagrees with you about a players worth "hates" that player. I simply think Grant is overpaid. Nothing more or less.

[bobblehead]

Yes, I expect that is exactly what is going on here. The Ryan Grant Fan Club will remember, tho.

On an unrelated note, I just remember a great get-rich-quick idea I had. You start, say, 512 stock-picker newsletters. Half of them say "buy", the other half say "sell". You fold the half that are wrong. Well, after 8 rounds of this charade, you are the hot, brilliant financial whiz whose newsletter has been right-on a phenomenal 8 times in a row! This is how bobblehead got his start.

Really? Personal attacks on the guy who talks more about his predictions that miss than the ones that hit? I would say you are better than this but......

[bobblehead]

It looks like Grant agreed to restructure his contract and take a $1 million pay cut before camp opened up, presumably in order to keep his spot on the roster, which makes Bobblehead look like a mad genius. It also would seem to dramatically reduce his chance of being cut now I'd think.

http://cn1.kaboodle.com/hi/img/c/0/0/e7/c/AAAADEtTAS4AAAAAAOfISQ.jpg?v=1282221832000

NO, I'm no genius. Just some idiot who shotguns wild ideas with no evidence to support them then crows when he gets one right....cock a doodle do.

PS...the only reason I made such a prediction was HATE and it had nothing to do with me thinking he was overpaid...which TT and Grant himself seemed to agree with.

[RashanGary]

bobble, you're one of the fun posters here because you're willing to say what your gut is and you admit when you're wrong. What fun is it when everyone sits around saying, "I don't have an opinion or feel for anything."

Big deal, you said Grant would be gone. I honestly thought there was no chance. The fact that he had a salary adjustment shows there was concern.


I know everyone was licking Starks jock after the Cleveland game, and I like Starks a lot too, but Starks ran two times behind Sitton and Bulaga while Grant ran a couple times behind Sherrod and Clifton. Grant ran hard against Cleveland. He looked strong. Looked good.

He's going to be fine this year. Him and Starks are going to be a nice duo for us and once Alex Green gets the playbook and blocking down, he could be a big late season weapon for us.

[bobblehead]

bobble, you're one of the fun posters here because you're willing to say what your gut is and you admit when you're wrong. What fun is it when everyone sits around saying, "I don't have an opinion or feel for anything."

Big deal, you said Grant would be gone. I honestly thought there was no chance. The fact that he had a salary adjustment shows there was concern.


I know everyone was licking Starks jock after the Cleveland game, and I like Starks a lot too, but Starks ran two times behind Sitton and Bulaga while Grant ran a couple times behind Sherrod and Clifton. Grant ran hard against Cleveland. He looked strong. Looked good.

He's going to be fine this year. Him and Starks are going to be a nice duo for us and once Alex Green gets the playbook and blocking down, he could be a big late season weapon for us.

Thanks JH...and for the record I remember the LT you said would go much higher than 3rd round or whatever it was that everyone gave you crap about. Everybody gave you shit, then he went 25? overall was it? Yea, you made a bold prediction, backed it with why you thought so, and were right.

[Scott Campbell]

I wonder if Driver might consider taking a pay cut.

[mraynrand]

What fun is it when everyone sits around saying, "I don't have an opinion or feel for anything."

We just have too many of those types here on this forum. :lol:

[sheepshead]

Sheep, your comment reminds me of what seemed a typical rushing yards statistical line from the Holmgren days; you'd have Edgar Bennett or Dorsey Levens with 15 to 17carries for maybe 60-80 yards.


Similar offense, its true. Just enough to keep 'em honest.

[rbaloha1]

I wonder if Driver might consider taking a pay cut.

HE should as well.

[Yoop]

LT? Teams cut RB's when they think they are losing a step. My prediction was based on grant being 29, coming off injury and being due a roster bonus (which incidentally was reported as 1.75 million, but was actually 1 million). TT is smarter than I in these things and he paid the mil. At that point I figure Grant is a lock. Now I just read Grant took a million dollar pay cut to gaurantee his 2011 salary. That too changes things. 750k is dependent on him being gameday active...or injury insurance. Given all this, I stand by what I posted above. Grant is pretty much a lock at this point. I hope he is still a 1k rusher and hasn't lost a step.

true, but it remains to be seen if Grant has lost a step, imo he's a low mileage RB at 29 yrs. old, there will be teams in need of a back like Grant before the trade dead line, there is every year, we where one last year, so It could be possible locking Grant to a more avordable contract would make him easier to trade, so if Mac has faith in Starks, Green, and Nance, we could see Grant traded at that time, just a guess on my part.

[retailguy]

Sounds like Grant took $1M less, but the contract is now fully guaranteed. It almost assuredly means he'll be with the team. If the Packers were thinking about cutting him, I doubt they would have agreed to fully guarantee almost $3M.

This is the way all the contract issues have been handled with Grant. When he was exclusive rights and held out, thompson's reply was, "OK we'll pay you what you want, but it's kinda "pay for performance"" with a lot of strange incentives for being active, healthy and productive. This time he appears to have said, if you're healthy and productive, I'll pay you "X", but if you aren't then I won't.

Grant took the deal, just like he did last time. It seems to work out for both of them, so we'll see... I think if Nance is really "showing" what it appears they may keep 4 rb's and then just keep Kuhn.

Does anyone know if Nance plays ST?

[Smidgeon]

We just have too many of those types here on this forum. :lol:

I'd respond, but I really don't care either way...

[Pugger]

If Grant returns to preinjury form he is easily one of the top 15 backs in the league. He must have had a deadline and just started typing.

By the end of Grant's last full season - 2009 - he was the 7th ranked RB in the league. So unless he has truly lost a step from his ankle injury he ain't going anywhere.

[Fritz]

http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/4/PreviewComp/SuperStock_4-3766.jpg

Is that Ryan Grant???

[pbmax]

Sounds like Grant took $1M less, but the contract is now fully guaranteed. It almost assuredly means he'll be with the team. If the Packers were thinking about cutting him, I doubt they would have agreed to fully guarantee almost $3M.

This buries the lede; Bretsky (in another thread), bobble and others were right, it looks like Grant took a $1 million dollar haircut to make the team. Which means Silverstein saw something that McGinn and other posters did not. And the team agreed. Remember, this is a GM that has said he would not ask other players to take less or restructure just to sign a FA. So this would seem to be performance based.

Under his original deal, his salary is guaranteed by Week 1. So with the new deal, he has gained two weeks of injury protection. But to take that hit (which was salary and not simply trumped up cap space) he clearly had to fear not making the team then having to sign for the vet minimum somewhere else. Its the only scenario that makes sense.

As to the earlier point that no one cuts a 1,000 yard RB unless they have to, has not been paying close attention. Running backs are fungible these days and in a 16 game season, 1,000 yards isn't what it once was in a 12 game season. Mostly its a matter of staying healthy.

[Guiness]

Google tells me there were 17 1000 yard rushers last year. I would guess that means more than half the starters in the league.
From http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_were_the_1000_yard_rushers_for_the_2010_NFL_se ason#ixzz1W5WYcoAE

Arian Foster, Texans (1616 rushing yards), Jamaal Charles, Chiefs (1467), Michael Turner, Falcons (1371), Chris Johnson, Titans (1364), Maurice Jones-Drew, Jaguars (1324), Adrian Peterson, Vikings (1298), Rashard Mendenhall, Steelers (1273), Steven Jackson, Rams (1241), Ahmad Bradshaw, Giants (1235), Ray Rice, Ravens (1220), Peyton Hillis, Browns (1177), Darren McFadden, Raiders (1157), Cedric Benson, Bengals (1111), LeSean McCoy, Eagles (1080), Matt Forte, Bears (1069), BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Patriots (1008), and LeGarrette Blount, Buccaneers (1007).

[King Friday]

Grant has to show me something Friday. To this point in preseason, he's been JAG. He hasn't looked particularly quick or agile, and even his decision making has been mediocre. The fact he redid his deal speaks volumes about how he felt about HIS security. Nance might be average, but he ran HARD in the last preseason game...which is more than can be said for Grant.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Grant took a $1 million dollar haircut to make the team. Which means Silverstein saw something that McGinn and other posters did not.

I think Silverstein gets some major bragging rights from this ordeal. He didn't predict things exactly, but his journalistic nose was obviously sniffing up the right cornhole. Did I just coin a phrase? No, it doesn't make any sense.

At any rate, its time for some groveling from the people who said that Silverstein was nuts, or just looking for attention. Silverstein correctly sensed that Grant was not in a secure position. Come to think of it, I sorta said Silverstein was grandstanding, so I'll offer the first apology.

[pbmax]

I think Silverstein gets some major bragging rights from this ordeal. He didn't predict things exactly, but his journalistic nose was obviously sniffing up the right cornhole. Did I just coin a phrase? No, it doesn't make any sense.

At any rate, its time for some groveling from the people who said that Silverstein was nuts, or just looking for attention. Silverstein correctly sensed that Grant was not in a secure position. Come to think of it, I sorta said Silverstein was grandstanding, so I'll offer the first apology.

I came to this story late and was surprised the story wasn't from a source (Packers or agent) airing some info publicly to drive leverage. Its usually McGinn who sees these things coming, but "Spoon" caught this one and did not have to attribute it to anyone else.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I came to this story late and was surprised the story wasn't from a source (Packers or agent) airing some info publicly to drive leverage.

That was my first thought. But then I thought the team wouldn't be so sleazy as to leak this story to soften-up Grant. I'm not being sarcastic, I think the team is a little more business-like than some agents. They have to protect their reputation for fair dealing.

[Smidgeon]

Grant has to show me something Friday. To this point in preseason, he's been JAG. He hasn't looked particularly quick or agile, and even his decision making has been mediocre. The fact he redid his deal speaks volumes about how he felt about HIS security. Nance might be average, but he ran HARD in the last preseason game...which is more than can be said for Grant.

I think he's still recovering. Someone (i.e. PR poster who attended practice, reporter) noted that Grant lost muscle in his legs due to being on crutches for so long. I just think he needs some time to get back to good. In the meantime, Starks seems to be doing better in practices.

[bobblehead]

I think Silverstein gets some major bragging rights from this ordeal. He didn't predict things exactly, but his journalistic nose was obviously sniffing up the right cornhole. Did I just coin a phrase? No, it doesn't make any sense.

At any rate, its time for some groveling from the people who said that Silverstein was nuts, or just looking for attention. Silverstein correctly sensed that Grant was not in a secure position. Come to think of it, I sorta said Silverstein was grandstanding, so I'll offer the first apology.

Yes, that silversein guy is pretty sharp, and way ahead of things.

[bobblehead]

Yes, I expect that is exactly what is going on here. The Ryan Grant Fan Club will remember, tho.

On an unrelated note, I just remember a great get-rich-quick idea I had. You start, say, 512 stock-picker newsletters. Half of them say "buy", the other half say "sell". You fold the half that are wrong. Well, after 8 rounds of this charade, you are the hot, brilliant financial whiz whose newsletter has been right-on a phenomenal 8 times in a row! This is how bobblehead got his start.

Ooops! Its ok HH, I expect as much.

[vince]

By guaranteeing his full salary, the Packers showed that they did not want to cut Grant, but found themselves needing to gain more space under the cap, so they gave some to get what they wanted. The Packers got the guy they wanted and bought some cap space in exchange for committing to him for the year.

Silverstein comments (wrongly) about Grant's salary at the end of the article, but most of the article is about the respective players' performance on the field. The simple truth is he got it wrong, and was scooped bigtime on the real story. That happens, but Silverstein can hardly be shouting any kind of victory from the rooftops here. Unless Grant ends up being cut, his whole article was wrong and based on the wrong facts.

Had Grant played hardball and refused to renegotiate, I assume the Packers would have cut him, but we'll never know exactly how the deal went. Again, based on them being willing to guarantee his full salary, it's pretty clear they didn't want to at that time.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Really? Personal attacks on the guy who talks more about his predictions that miss than the ones that hit? I would say you are better than this but......

I didn't mention you because of anything in the forum, I just seemed to remember you worked in financial markets. It wasn't an attack, just a joke.

[smuggler]

You are a moron.

Calling someone names in a discussion is an admission of defeat, so thanks for admitting you were wrong about Grant.

:-P

[sharpe1027]

I talk more about whiffing on my prediction of Allen Babre turning into a good guard than I do about my predictions that came true (Like when I said TT and MM would push Favre out after the 2007 season when Favre was pissing on MM).

I was referencing the article by Silverstein. ;)

[MadScientist]

At any rate, its time for some groveling from the people who said that Silverstein was nuts, or just looking for attention. Silverstein correctly sensed that Grant was not in a secure position. Come to think of it, I sorta said Silverstein was grandstanding, so I'll offer the first apology.
I'll take my serving of crow. I thought it was just a space filler piece, but it sure looks now like Silverstein heard some rumblings, and Grant and his agent worked quickly to save his spot on the roster.

[bobblehead]

Calling someone names in a discussion is an admission of defeat, so thanks for admitting you were wrong about Grant.

:-P

Calling you a moron is a comment on your ability to form a respectable arguement, and a direct result of you insulting me first...clearly I was wrong based on the way things played out. How about we look at what happened to decide who was right and who was wrong and not an arbitrary thing like me calling you a name (actually moron is an adjective to describe you, and an accurate one.)

So in conclusion, when you insult me, and I respond by calling you a moron, it is an admission of ME being wrong.

[bobblehead]

I was referencing the article by Silverstein. ;)

My apologies. Your post was right after Yoop responded to my post and I was in defensive mode already. My bad.

[Fritz]

This buries the lede; Bretsky (in another thread), bobble and others were right, it looks like Grant took a $1 million dollar haircut to make the team. Which means Silverstein saw something that McGinn and other posters did not. And the team agreed. Remember, this is a GM that has said he would not ask other players to take less or restructure just to sign a FA. So this would seem to be performance based.

Under his original deal, his salary is guaranteed by Week 1. So with the new deal, he has gained two weeks of injury protection. But to take that hit (which was salary and not simply trumped up cap space) he clearly had to fear not making the team then having to sign for the vet minimum somewhere else. Its the only scenario that makes sense.

As to the earlier point that no one cuts a 1,000 yard RB unless they have to, has not been paying close attention. Running backs are fungible these days and in a 16 game season, 1,000 yards isn't what it once was in a 12 game season. Mostly its a matter of staying healthy.

Now I know you're even older than I am. When I came to that phrase, I though you were going to write "isn't what in once was in a 14 game season." Cuz that's what I grew up with.

[Harlan Huckleby]

14 games - they don't play 12 games anymore!? How the hell do the guys stay away from their jobs that long?

[Harlan Huckleby]

http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/4/PreviewComp/SuperStock_4-3766.jpg

Is that Ryan Grant???

I don't understand this pic, unless that's the worst case of blue balls ever

[Fritz]

I don't understand this pic, unless that's the worst case of blue balls ever

It's Ryan Grant. He's on a bubble.

[mraynrand]

I don't understand this pic, unless that's the worst case of blue balls ever

Why does it not surprise me that you would see blue balls there. Must be some kind of genital-envy.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/Meglicious/huckleberry-hound-1.jpg

[rbaloha1]

It's Ryan Grant. He's on a bubble.

Not anymore. Next season its aloha.