And you all thought Ryan Grant sucked...

[The Leaper]

I agree with the viewpoint that Grant is "serviceable". He is not good enough to be a workhorse back for a team like he is for us. What really eats me is his inability to provide a threat out of the backfield as a receiver. That was what allowed Dorsey Levens to be such a threat despite his subpar speed.

Pointing out that he is 6th in the NFL in rushing after feasting on the bounty of Detroit and Cleveland doesn't impress me much. I'm guessing there is next to no chance he is a top 12 back in rushing by year end...in spite of the fact that he is a workhorse back, while most other teams employ some kind of platoon at the position.

I'm glad he stepped up against Cleveland...and hopefully he and the OL can take this momentum into the Viking game and slow their pass rush a little. However, this doesn't mean that Grant suddenly has become an elite RB.

[Brandon494]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuCgDXPcOxI&feature=player_embedded

Here is a video from the Brown's game where if Grant cuts to the right he is off to the races....instead he runs right into his tackle.

[pbmax]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuCgD...layer_embedded

He is a video from the Brown's game where if Grant cuts to the right he is off to the races....instead he runs right into his tackle.

I remember that play and I think I made one of my 14 vision jokes about Grant after it. But the replay shows that Lee never cut off the backside pursuit, And the pursuit almost gets him at the LOS. Not Lee's worst block, he had a tough angle on the guy. Lang probably should have struck that end harder or longer. He was on the LB before the LB saw Grant.

Because Grants original hole wasn't (watch the FB go between RG and center) open, he moved one gap over and then had to squeeze past Lee and his dancing partner. At this point, Grant has not looked downfield, so he doesn't see the opening to the right until he is clear of the LOS and the bodies. He has already decided to break off Lang's block to the left but the backer spins Lang and ends up right where Grant has been aiming for. Grant is stumbling a little, which makes me think Lee's guy hit his leg.

Then second pursuit (Bowens on Havner) gets there to knock him down after he hits Lang. But I think the larger point you make with the video is valid. Vision is not his thing. There were several other times he missed opportunities.

[pbmax]

Wells takes Shaun Rodgers right where he wants to go on this play and locks him up pretty good. But it looks like Rodgers doesn't particularly care about this play.

Colledge has no one to block until a LB crosses the LOS behind him. He has to do a turn to block him and just gets enough to make him a non-factor and open the cut back.

If you freeze the video at 2 seconds, you can see the lane to the left Grant saw after he saw the right side get filled. Problem was two pursuers got their hands on him. There would be two fixes for this: one, get a faster back (or block pursuit better) or two, stutter step and go around Lang and the LB. Grant doesn't have the feet to dance away from Lang.

[denverYooper]

67 carries - 337 yards against St. Louis, Detroit & Cleveland

41 carries - 158 yards again Chicago, Cincinatti, & Minnesota.

So what that tells me is Grant is good against poor teams, and average to below average against good teams.

Numbers don't always tell you the real truth...unless you break it down like this.

41 for 158 is a 3.85 yard per carry average. I think its more the number of attempts against these good teams that worries me. That's an average of just under 14 a game.

I have become convinced that McCarthy is not going to change his run calling strategy. He is going to run a certain percentage for each down and distance situation. And if its 3rd and medium or longer, you are getting a pass 100% of the time (except for clock killing purposes).

So since they are completing a high percentage of passes, the only way attempts are going up regularly is keeping down and distance nice and normal. And that means penalties and sacks must stop.

Where are you getting the down and distance data. That would be interesting to peek at.

In direct answer to your question, I don't have data on down and distance. I have never even found a reliable source for short yardage info. The only place where I believe it would be found is the Premium Package at Football Outsiders. You get a copy of their database when you sign up for their pay service.

You could probably also dl the gamebooks from nfl.com and parse out the play-by-play section from the for a cheap version.

Do you know where FO gets their data?

[Rastak]

Denver, I think they do the same as KC Joiner and watch every play 22 times focusing on each player.

[pbmax]

Denver, I think they do the same as KC Joiner and watch every play 22 times focusing on each player.

They do their own tape breakdown (with an army of reader/volunteers) but they also parse the NFL gamebooks for their weekly writeups. That is where the data for the DVOA rankings comes from.

[Partial]

Denver, I think they do the same as KC Joiner and watch every play 22 times focusing on each player.

Wow, I'm can't decide if this would be an amazing job or an awful job.

[denverYooper]

Denver, I think they do the same as KC Joiner and watch every play 22 times focusing on each player.

Yowza.

[Guiness]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuCgD...layer_embedded

He is a video from the Brown's game where if Grant cuts to the right he is off to the races....instead he runs right into his tackle.

I remember that play and I think I made one of my 14 vision jokes about Grant after it. But the replay shows that Lee never cut off the backside pursuit, And the pursuit almost gets him at the LOS. Not Lee's worst block, he had a tough angle on the guy. Lang probably should have struck that end harder or longer. He was on the LB before the LB saw Grant.

Because Grants original hole wasn't (watch the FB go between RG and center) open, he moved one gap over and then had to squeeze past Lee and his dancing partner. At this point, Grant has not looked downfield, so he doesn't see the opening to the right until he is clear of the LOS and the bodies. He has already decided to break off Lang's block to the left but the backer spins Lang and ends up right where Grant has been aiming for. Grant is stumbling a little, which makes me think Lee's guy hit his leg.

Then second pursuit (Bowens on Havner) gets there to knock him down after he hits Lang. But I think the larger point you make with the video is valid. Vision is not his thing. There were several other times he missed opportunities.

You're right PB, he did make an adjustment when he saw the hole open up, instead of following his lead block, the FB. So he turned a 2yd gain into what, 6-7 yards?

I don't think Lee's man got a hand on him, but he was stumbling when he ran into Lang. More likely the cut into a different hole, then dancing away from Lee's man made him lose his feet. Looks like he's got his head down when he hits Lang, probably stumbling trying to get his feet under him.

Of course, if he had proper pad level, he could've regained his balance :P

[bobblehead]

I agree with this 100%. I think my bigger problem is McCarthy's running game is so damn predictable, espcially against certain teams. When we play Minnesota, it's like McCarthy is so bent to show we can run righ tat them, that when we can't, he just throws it.

My problem with you saying this is that in the first quarter of that game we DID.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/gamecenter/playbyplay/NFL_20091005_GB@MIN

if you look at the play by play in that game you will see we mixed it up early and ran successfully.

[bobblehead]

67 carries - 337 yards against St. Louis, Detroit & Cleveland

41 carries - 158 yards again Chicago, Cincinatti, & Minnesota.

So what that tells me is Grant is good against poor teams, and average to below average against good teams.

Numbers don't always tell you the real truth...unless you break it down like this.

41 for 158 is a 3.85 yard per carry average. I think its more the number of attempts against these good teams that worries me. That's an average of just under 14 a game.

I have become convinced that McCarthy is not going to change his run calling strategy. He is going to run a certain percentage for each down and distance situation. And if its 3rd and medium or longer, you are getting a pass 100% of the time (except for clock killing purposes).

So since they are completing a high percentage of passes, the only way attempts are going up regularly is keeping down and distance nice and normal. And that means penalties and sacks must stop.

I agree with this 100%. I think my bigger problem is McCarthy's running game is so damn predictable, espcially against certain teams. When we play Minnesota, it's like McCarthy is so bent to show we can run righ tat them, that when we can't, he just throws it.

PLUS...watch closely sometime. When we run a zone play, Grant is at 7 yards, any pass play, or any other running play, he is at 5 yards....YES, I decided to actually break down packer tape when I was working on some football stuff. When we run a play action pass, Grant is ALWAYS at 4 yards. And, when we run a zone, we will always run away from the TE, every time. If we are in a double tight set, we will motion one of the TE's away, and run again, away from the TE's...EVERY time.

Wow. I am impressed and worried. I am going to watch the game with this post on the computer. Its seems to be inviting a beatdown by opposing scouting. He must have counters to each of these plays, or is that the role of the cutback run?

I also touched on this after the Minnesota game. I sat with my best friend and called something like 12 of 14 plays correctly (based mostly on formation) including the FB dive for the touchdown. I even pointed out that JAllen had completely stopped thinking about the run by the middle of the second quarter and we needed to run right at him....but never did.

[Fritz]

Here's what I don't quite get: if Wells is #63, and the play was supposed to go between center and right guard (where the FB goes), why did Wells appear to block his man toward the right? Or did Rodgers just take him there, thus closing the original hole but allowing the middle to open thanks to the blocking on the left side?

[bobblehead]

If this thread isn't a flashing billboard screaming "stats aren't the entire answer/picture", I don't know what is.

If Grant is a top 10 back, then I'm Brad Pitt.

There is nothing about this offense that is "top 10 anything" right now. Back to back games against Detroit and Cleveland will help you pad those stats.

I'll take the wins, that's for sure, but it doesn't ease my worries about this team at all.

Let's see what the stats from Sunday's game look like on Monday, ok? If those stats look good, and we get another W, then I'll start believing.

TJ Lang against Jared Allen, is a lot different than TJ Lang against Wimbley/Coleman....

I agree RG, stats don't mean shit Truthfully though, just like I said in the other thread they do matter. Maybe not the entire story, but they matter. For 2 weeks MM has committed to the run a bit more, Grant and the OL has been able to catch a rythm and suddenly things look a lot brighter.

Is RG a top 10 back....probably not, but he is obviously capable of getting the job done when the blocks are there. He also has hands of stone. And like someone said, we don't split carries at all.

All of the information is telling, but stats do matter and those of us (myself to an extent) who said RGrant SUCKS have to backpeddle a bit. Is he a stud...no, but he obviously can still get 'er done when the carries are there and the line is adequate.

Like you said, this week will tell us a lot. I actually expect to win a tough one, maybe lose a tough one, but we will be in this game the whole way without any doubt on my part. And I stand by what I said earlier, we are a top 10 team, but not a top 5 team.

I didn't say "stats suck" in either thread. I said they don't tell the whole picture. Ryan Grant is not the 6th best back in the NFL. Stats say he is performing that way in a couple of categories.

You don't get into the NFL without talent. NFL worthy talent. Grant has that. Grant isn't, nor will ever be, top 10 NFL talent. Adrian Peterson, Barry Sanders, and Walter Payton, did not need quality offensive lines to be successful. Ryan Grant, along with 9/10ths of the backs to ever play the game, DO need a good line.

We don't have that right now. True to form this line will probably improve as the season goes along. That doesn't make it a good line. It won't be until we play consistently. We aren't. For 3 years in a row, we haven't.

We must be careful in using stats to say "there! It is working!"

It is NOT working yet. This line has a long, long way to go. Ryan Grant will be COMPETENT when that happens. He'll never be GREAT. I'll be happy with COMPETENT. Right now, Grant isn't the problem. After we have a line, then we'll see if he's the problem. He does miss a lot of cuts though, and sometimes is slow as hell. So, a good line might expose him. But, first things first.

I agree, I was making a joke with my first statement cuz I had just argued you weren't giving the D enough credit based on stats in the other thread, but I was coming right back here agreeing with you that stats don't tell the whole story. I was poking fun at myself.

You and I agree mostly, I just happen to think this team is better than you do. I think the D is better than average, and the O is much better than average. Grant needs enough carries, but the OL has sucked and put us in situations that don't help. I do think grant is slightly below average for an NFL starter, but he certainly does have NFL talent....just not enough for him to have held out last year.

[bobblehead]

Here's what I don't quite get: if Wells is #63, and the play was supposed to go between center and right guard (where the FB goes), why did Wells appear to block his man toward the right? Or did Rodgers just take him there, thus closing the original hole but allowing the middle to open thanks to the blocking on the left side?

The second is my take. Wells has great balance and when Rogers adjusted his force Wells took him there as hard as he could. Sometimes you can't force a guy that size where you want him, but if he is off balance you can drive him harder than he wanted in the direction he wanted. In this case it opened the cutback.

Grant on the play showed what he is. Solid, not all world. He did what MM preaches all the time. He made the first cut into the hole and ran downhill. Bummer the guy he ran into wasn't 2 yards left or right as Grant would have been gone, but Grant did his job...one cut and run downhill. I only bag on him when he misses the FIRST cut, you can't ask him to make another one, he would start running too tenatively and never bust a big one.

Big runs come when a guy makes his one cut and has a lane as he opens up full speed....unless its Barry Sanders who can make another 4 cuts before he is done.

edit: If Cliffy were the LT on that play Grant is dropped at the line. With Lang the cutback lane appeared though as he held his ground.