What's up with Grant, Part 2: How do we fix this?

[The Gunshooter]

Grant is just now getting his timing down. I was watching him closely the last couple weeks and his initial cuts are perfect. He is not under control when he breaks into the open yet that's why he is going done with some arm tackles but when he does watch out. I expect him to explode a 50+ run against NO.

I doubt it..NFL teams gameplan against his running (I for one like Arod, but this is his beacon for no one plannin for him.....stop Grant and make ARod pass, he's good, but not good enough yet to win games by himself....or so the NFL book goes right now...thus, they stop Grant, opposing team wins). For the record though I voted Start B-Jack and give Grant 15 carries. He's not a back that gets stronger with carries if this season has any merit. He's ok, but start a guy who makes bigger plays THIS year is all...and I hope he does bust a 50 yard run and I'll eat crow, but doubt it. Grant is very subpar for an NFL starting RB (his instincts are very below par with any D ready for him).

I am not crazy about Grant either but the guy is over his hamstring injury now and the o-line has the same guys starting three weeks in a row. They sure made Chicago look weak against the run.

You have to admit that o-line is not playing up to it's potential. I expect them to do a lot better but I do not expect them to get out of the first round of the playoffs.

[packrulz]

I blame M3 for Grant's lack of production, it takes practice to have a good running game, the coach has to be committed to it, and M3 likes to pass, pass, pass, so much you would think Lindy Infante was back. I believe you have to stick to the run because eventually the defense gets worn down and there will be a hole for Grant to run through, there haven't been a lot of holes for him so far, until the Bears game. Running would help in the play action fakes too. I think M3 should use Grant & BJack taking turns so they're fresh and hitting the hole hard. Snake is right, the running game has got to improve. Pound that rock!

[Fritz]

Okay...two questions.

One: you keep saying that Ahman Green "won" games for the Packers. Can you be specific? How did he exactly "win" games for the team?

Two: the inconsistency of this board is a little maddening to me. But he flip-flopping of the newspaper writers just irks me. The gnashing of teeth and moaning over TT's tight hold on the purse strings can become overwhelming - he won't sign free agents! He's cheap! He's too cheap to (over)pay Corey Williams! Yet when Grant started slowly, nearly everybody and his brother - even one of the newspaper columnists, for the JSO, I think - launches in on how TT overpaid Grant, he panicked, he was trying to distract us from Favre, and on and on. As I said, I get a little frustrated when fans do that, but I understand - we're fans. I do it a bit myself. But the newspaper guys? Come on.

As I fan, I can sorta kinda understand my fellow fans flopping back and forth. We're fans - thank god we don't run the team, that's for sure. I am, however, slightly frustrated and certainly mystified by the ability of sports writers in Green Bay to seemingly do a 180 without even cottoning up to what they've done. If you want an example, go back and look at the ongoing game blog in the JSO. The writer doing that work - I don't know who is was - had a snide attitude in his comments throughout the first quarter. But by the time the third quarter ended, suddenly, he pretended all was well. I mean, sure, you can be critical of penalties and some poor plays - it's a blog - but there seems to be no perspective whatsoever on tht writer's part. Based on the comments written in the fist part of the game blog, you'd think the Packers were playing like they did against the Queens. Certainly there are many posters on this board who jump back and forth as the wind blows., and it bugs me a little, but as I said, as fans I think that's more acceptable than a writer who gets paid, I think, in part to give us a little more of a perspective.

Heck, just look at the comments on the threads after the Vikings' loss versus the next week's Bears win. That's a fan thing. One week it's fire Ted, MM's in over his head, and so on. But when you read that same stuff in the JSO, it's irresponsible, to me. It's also hypocritical.

[Gunakor]

He missed pretty much all of training camp and was noticeably affected by the injury the first several weeks of the season. He's been more like the 2007 Ryan Grant the last few weeks.

Dude, I'm not hating on Grant, as I liked him alot last year, but can you seriously say he looks the same as last year? And even so, it took 10 games to do it to get into "game shape"? No way he looks like the unheralded gamebuster of the last 12 games (with playoffs)....I DVR this shit to play back (without Packer pay) mind you....there's no way you can still talk about getting back into "game shape" with Grant.....he is who he is...an OK back that doesn't make big plays consistently. Damn if he gets caught for 1 yard gains almost EVERY down (or a loss) and occasionally busts one for 8. If he brought one back for 40 like he did EVERY game, late last year...we wouldn't have this discussion. Dude is not an elite RB...no excuses. Give the ball to B-Jack. 3.9 don't cut it.

The 3.9 average for the year includes the games in which he was not healthy or productive. Look at the more recent games where he's been healthy and the difference is clear. He's healthy now, and productive.

Also, you have to take the OL into consideration too. Using last year as an example, the OL didn't gel until the second part of the season. That might be the case again. You can't really make a strong arguement for B-Jax starting because last season he struggled mightily behind that line too. Later in the season he looked good, after the line had come together and was playing well. Early this season, Grant struggled behind a line that was not playing well and was dealing with a hamstring injury on top of it. His hammy is now healed, and the line seems to be blocking better for him, thus his production the last few weeks has increased.

B-Jax had 2 or 3 good runs against Chicago, but what else have you seen from him this year that would warrant starting him over Grant? It's not like Grant didn't pop off a few good runs of his own against the Bears. B-Jax is not an elite RB either if using the same barometer you are using for Grant. And Grant's contract is not structured to pay him like an elite RB unless he produces like one, so his contract is irrelevant to this arguement. The guaranteed part of his contract is very fair to both sides given his production this season and what he accomplished last season.

For the record Snake, you should know that Grant is currently 11th in rushing in the NFL. He is less than 20 rushing yards from being top 10. As I said in another thread, nobody expected him to be an Adrian Peterson or a Clinton Portis. And even if he was, he wouldn't get the same production anyway - a RB typically only as good as his offensive line. As poorly as our OL has been playing up until this point in the season, you have to give Grant credit. He started the year injured, has had poor blocking almost all season long, and is still only 20 yards from being a top 10 back. Do you really think B-Jax could do any better?

[The Gunshooter]

The question we should be asking ourselves is can GB win a Super Bowl with Ryan Grant as the starting running back. I say it is not impossible but he is not ideal mainly because he sucks at short yardage and catching out of the backfield. The catching part is a killer in the west coast offense. He can be a great threat to run one 80 yards when he is in form though but a couple more years of playing and he will lose that too because he runs too high and takes a lot of hits.

It is possible Jackson could get a lot better but will he ever be good enough to be your starter? Ugh.

I wanted TT to sign Michael Turner. Now there is a guy who can do it all and he only cost $5 million a year. What would Grant have done then? Who cares. GB could of probably traded him for a nice draft pick if he refused to play for $1-2 million.

[Partial]

What is there to debate? Grant is a very solid back when healthy. He isn't in the top 10 in the league or anything, but he is good enough to win with and create some things with his combination of power and speed.

To this point he has been pretty consistent when healthy. He has shown that he can handle the load as a work horse. His fumbles also seem down this year, but that is without doing any homework.

It's very evident that he was not well for most of the season.

How about BJack? I really think he has made the biggest improvement on the team. His pass blocking has improved to the point of adequate, he hits the hole infinitely harder than last year, and he has shown a knack for a nice stiff arm. I think BJack will challenge Grant next year.

[Gunakor]

He isn't in the top 10 in the league or anything, but he is good enough to win with and create some things with his combination of power and speed.

I'd bet anyone a dollar that Grant is top 10 by years end. He's only short by 20 yards, and only has a couple games left on the schedule against tough rush defenses. Not only that, but he's shown an ablility to gain good yardage against elite rush defenses. Add to that he's healthy now, and if the OL is starting to gel like they did at the end of last season... He's good. I say he IS top 10.

[Zool]

Even with his bad start he's just outside the top 10. Partial you really need to stop with the anti-homerism. The Packers have good players. Every player has bad stretches. Grant is .1 ypc behind one of your beloved NFC East backs (Barber) and only 9 yards behind him overall, and I bet everyone here would say the Dallas O-line is stronger than the Packer O-line.