RB Ryan Grant optimistic about new contract

[woodbuck27]

http://blogs.jsonline.com/packers/archive/2008/05/21/grant-optimistic-about-new-contract.aspx

Grant optimistic about new contract

By Greg A. Bedard
Wednesday, May 21 2008, 05:37 PM

SEE LINK for rest of story.

PACKERS FOREVER!

[HarveyWallbangers]

I guess I don't understand the statement in bold.

The Packers have shown a willingness to take care of productive players if they play the part of good soldier, which makes Grant's stance somewhat puzzling.

Read his quotes in the blog. It sounds like he's going about it wonderfully.

[Guiness]

I tend to agree with the writer - the first line HW quoted said it. The Packers have been good to players that have produced, I would really expect they've got enough 'brownie points' that players trust them somewhat?

There's also the other side - as stated a thousand times - he has NO leverage. He has to sign the one year tender, and hope the Pack rewards him, now or after the season. I have no doubt that if he thinks he can play hardball, we'll be watching BJack on opening day.

I have to say I'm disappointed in his posturing. I'd much rather see him out there, happy as shit to be the anointed starter and busting his butt so he can go out there and light it all on fire. Then the contract will come. Has he forgotten already that he was almost a TC cut last year, traded for because we had multiple injuries in our camp, and was roughly a 4th stringer when the season began???

Instead, he's wingeing that he's not being treated well enough, trying to cash in after half a year of success.

[HarveyWallbangers]

What posturing? He's under no obligation to sign the tender at this time.

[texaspackerbacker]

I'm not going to pretend to know what will happen. Thompson is unpredictable, and he has a great record of making it work.

I'm just going to say what I think should happen.

I see Grant as probably the most important single player the Packers have, bar none. I want Thompson to negotiate the best way he knows how, but bottom line, do NOT let the guy get away or sit out.

I was saying similar things when the whole Javon Walker mess--to sign before we absolutely had to or not--came up. In hindsight, I was probably wrong--IF you assume Walker would have gotten injured the same way and basically been a big waste of money. I also was on record as strongly opposing paying enough to keep Ahman Green--I got that one right, but it was a slam dunk. I have said, you NEVER overpay for a high price RB--the logic being that by the time they are in line for the big money, they usually have too much mileage on them to justify the cost.

I think we can sign Grant for a large but moderate amount now--moderate in comparison to LaDainian Tomlinson, etc.--proven superstars. Grant won't command that much, especially now when he can't sign with somebody else. You wait a year, though, as many advocate, the cost will undoubtedly be MUCH higher--assuming he isn't a one year wonder, and plays like he did last season. I'd rather sign him now and take that risk than wait, thinking maybe he will drop off.

[vince]

Well said Tex. I agree that now is the time when Grant has the least amount of leverage he's likely to have in the next three years. Signing him now to a relatively modest 4-5 year deal will give the Packers the greatest value for a vital contributor.

Assuming he continues to produce as he did last year, he may come back to the table wanting more before that deal expires, but it's better to have him locked down in that circumstance than see him on the verge of UFA.

[CaliforniaCheez]

The articles I've read said they are talking regularly. That's good.

They are arguing back and forth over things like:

Productivity

Due to Offensive line. Half year wonder.

You got any other half year wonders?

Fumble at the Metrodome, fumbles that put the team in the hole in the playoffs.

Long term deal

Short term deal

Intermediate deal

Cash up front

Incentive based contract

Better parking spot

We can do that

I want money before the lock out wrecks my career

That's why we are offering what we are offering

Look at those productive stats.......

[Guiness]

I think we can sign Grant for a large but moderate amount now--moderate in comparison to LaDainian Tomlinson, etc.--proven superstars. Grant won't command that much, especially now when he can't sign with somebody else. You wait a year, though, as many advocate, the cost will undoubtedly be MUCH higher--assuming he isn't a one year wonder, and plays like he did last season. I'd rather sign him now and take that risk than wait, thinking maybe he will drop off.

Yes, I also think that should happen, and I think it would happen...if Grant wasn't doing what he is. That's what pisses me off - sign it, show some trust that the Pack will take care of you, and get back to work.

You're right HW, he doesn't have to sign the tender. But I don't know what he has to gain by not signing it! And a lot to lose. He's opening the door for another back to come in and shine. He should be in there taking the first team reps. Where will he be if BJack, Morency or Wynn look lights out, and the Pack decides they can start? I don't care what you think of them, it may not be probable, but it is possible.

Does he really think the Pack would continue to pay him the minimum for as long as they can? Or is he afraid of injury? I just don't understand why he is behaving this way.

[Zool]

If he signs the tender and blows out a knee in practice they wont give him another dime. He's being very smart IMO. There's no reason he cant get a chunk of the $15+mil available this year under the cap with a moderate salary with incentives for the next 3.

Julius Jones got 4/$12. I dont think that would be unreasonable for Grant at all. $3mil signing bonus, $4mil in incentives over the next 4 and a base of $1.25mil avg for each season.

[sharpe1027]

I think we can sign Grant for a large but moderate amount now--moderate in comparison to LaDainian Tomlinson, etc.--proven superstars. Grant won't command that much, especially now when he can't sign with somebody else. You wait a year, though, as many advocate, the cost will undoubtedly be MUCH higher--assuming he isn't a one year wonder, and plays like he did last season. I'd rather sign him now and take that risk than wait, thinking maybe he will drop off.

Yes, I also think that should happen, and I think it would happen...if Grant wasn't doing what he is. That's what pisses me off - sign it, show some trust that the Pack will take care of you, and get back to work.

You're right HW, he doesn't have to sign the tender. But I don't know what he has to gain by not signing it! And a lot to lose. He's opening the door for another back to come in and shine. He should be in there taking the first team reps. Where will he be if BJack, Morency or Wynn look lights out, and the Pack decides they can start? I don't care what you think of them, it may not be probable, but it is possible.

Does he really think the Pack would continue to pay him the minimum for as long as they can? Or is he afraid of injury? I just don't understand why he is behaving this way.

If, as you said, he doesn't think the Packer would continue to pay him the minimum, what the does he gain by signing? Nobody is going to displace him in these workouts. I doubt anybody could displace him by having lights-out preseason games.

IMO, the reason he hasn't signed is that once he does he becomes obligated to meet all the requirements of his contract so if he misses anything he is breaking his contract. More importantly, if he doesn't breach his contract he exposes himself to injury while playing under a minimum contract. Smart move, IMO.

[Guiness]

Nobody is going to displace him in these workouts. I doubt anybody could displace him by having lights-out preseason games.

I doubt it too. I also doubted he would be our feature back when we traded a 6th round pick for him.

I just think he'd want to be protecting his job by being out there taking the reps, rather than sitting back thinking that no one can displace him.

[sharpe1027]

I doubt it too. I also doubted he would be our feature back when we traded a 6th round pick for him.

I just think he'd want to be protecting his job by being out there taking the reps, rather than sitting back thinking that no one can displace him.

I agree. I just think he has to weigh that possibility against getting hurt under a shitty contract. I have to agree with the logic of his decision, eventhough I'd personally (and selfishly) prefer that he listened to you.

[MadScientist]

The trick with this is that any contract will set a precedent. Grant isn't close to free agency, but he's not under contract, so he's not holding out. He deserves a pay raise over the minimum, but how does anyone determine how much. Also, the Packers have to make sure they don't do anything to encourage 1 or half year wonders to start holding out.

Something will get done, but I don't expect it to be soon.

[woodbuck27]

I see both sides of this debate.
I like his position. I do believe also he has some leverage because he's demonsrated solid poduction amonst a weak crop of so far wanna be's.

[Gunakor]

I see both sides of this debate.
I like his position. I do believe also he has some leverage because he's demonsrated solid poduction amonst a weak crop of so far wanna be's.

Grant has no leverage. When it comes time for the season to start, either he signs for whatever Green Bay offers him or he doesn't play. He can't go anywhere else. If say Green Bay tells Grant they will only offer him the low tender they've already offered him and Grant refuses, he won't play at all and his career could be over as quickly as it began. Where does Grant have ANY leverage in the deal? He wants a bigger deal to protect against injury, I can understand that. But holding out could do the same thing to him that an injury would. It could end his career. He should consider that come August if this is still unresolved and he absolutely needs to make a final decision.