Brandon Jackson's fearless projections...

[Scott Campbell]

Re: Brandon Jackson's fearless projections...

I love how supportive we are of our guys.

It's not that I'm not supportive. I like him as a 3rd down back. I just haven't seen anything yet that makes me think that he's a lock to remain our every down back.

I wouldn't mind being wrong at all.

[Patler]

Re: Brandon Jackson's fearless projections...

Since I think Ryan Grant is a bit over rated and Jackson is under rated... My fearless prediction is...

250 carries... 1050 yards... 4.2 avg 7 tds

Pour me some koooooool aidddddddddddddddddd...yum

I don't think Jackson is the starter at year end.

I'm thinking along those lines, too. Or, if he is starting, he will be splitting snaps much more evenly with others than Grant has the last few years. I think eventually that someone, maybe even Starks, will be getting a lot of the 1st and 2nd down snaps. That's what Starks was expected to compete for. The Packers have not seriously considered Jackson in that role the last couple of seasons. If they did, he would have relieved Grant a lot more than he has.

I love how supportive we are of our guys. Jackson might not be the most ellusive back, and he might not hit a hole as hard as Grant does, but Jackson is a better zone reader than Grant is, and he is a better cutter than Grant it. Don't be surprised if our Zones start looking a little better with Jackson.

It's got nothing to do with being supportive or nonsupportive. I support Daryn Colledge, I just don't think he is a particularly good or consistent lineman.

I think Jackson has significant value on 3rd downs, and I don't think his durability allows him to carry Grant's workload together with his own previous workload. For that reason, I think MM will use someone else on more of the 1st and 2nd down situations, to "save" Jackson for the 3rd down role.

Besides, as I implied, if the Packers really did like Jackson's 1st and 2nd down capabilities, why have they used him so little for anything other than 3rd downs?

[mraynrand]

I have to agree that MM probably won't want Jackson to be the season-long starting tailback. I think you actually want Jackson to remain fresh for third downs where he excels at catching screens and in pass pro. Still, I'm not terribly worried about first and second down, even if 'Buckets' Kuhn is in there. Just fire up the Road Grader and get 'er done!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: Brandon Jackson's fearless projections...

Jackson is a better zone reader than Grant is, and he is a better cutter than Grant it. Don't be surprised if our Zones start looking a little better with Jackson.

I don't agree with this, and I don't think it's close. There are things to like about Jackson (e.g. power, balance, pass pro, catching), but reading a zone and being a one cut runner. I actually think he's misplaced in this scheme.

Speed - Grant
Power - Jackson
Balance - Jackson
One Cut Ability - Grant
Blocker - Jackson
Receiver - Jackson
Awareness - Grant

[3irty1]

Re: Brandon Jackson's fearless projections...

I love how supportive we are of our guys. Jackson might not be the most ellusive back, and he might not hit a hole as hard as Grant does, but Jackson is a better zone reader than Grant is, and he is a better cutter than Grant it. Don't be surprised if our Zones start looking a little better with Jackson.

Disagree big time. Grant is the starter for a reason and that reason is that he's a great fit for the scheme.

[Lurker64]

Screw the nimber of yards baloney. We need a RB in place that will take the heat off of Aaron Rodgers and compliment MM's approach to managing games. Since when was it Packer football to go 'all in with the pass'? That won't be MM's way.

Screen passes, shovel passes, and the like frequently function as "extended handoffs" in order to maximize a running back's skills like "good hands" and "niftiness in the open field" while minimizing a back's troubles in the traffic closest to the line. This seems like the sort of thing that would be perfect for Jackson.

[vince]

Has anyone else noticed Brandon Jackson's resemblance to Wanda from In Living Color when he's running?

[mmmdk]

I don't think we will pass more...I think we will see Kuhn more. McCarthy has a hard on for the running game...and does dumb things sometimes trying to establish/prolong one.

He's from Pittsburg, of course he's a run-first addict. It's in his genes.

Run first ? No! But McCarthy does dumb things trying to establish running game. Yes! Mike III is clueless...well maybe not clueless but he ain't the sharpest knife in the drawer with the running game.
McCarthy = Pittsburgh wannabe

[mmmdk]

...I gotta show that I can do other than throw knives at McCarthy.

Hmm he's lost weight and he's a great coach from february till start of august. Not good enough!? Well, he's had mucho to do with the makings of AR into a star. There!

[hoosier]

Living in southern Indiana my access to televised Packer games is fairly minimal. From what I have seen in the last couple of years, it seems to me that a significant number of Rodgers's big plays through the air have come off of play fakes. The game winner to Jennings against Chicago last year is one obvious example. But maybe my impression is based on a small sampling that isn't representative of McCarthy's "body of work."

[HarveyWallbangers]

Living in southern Indiana my access to televised Packer games is fairly minimal. From what I have seen in the last couple of years, it seems to me that a significant number of Rodgers's big plays through the air have come off of play fakes. The game winner to Jennings against Chicago last year is one obvious example. But maybe my impression is based on a small sampling that isn't representative of McCarthy's "body of work."

I don't think so. Not compared to most teams. Play action works best when you are good at running the ball. Teams aren't geared to stop our passing attack.


Rodgers gets his big plays out of all sets. Pocket, shotgun, play action, rollouts, etc.

[Brandon494]

hahaha Ryan Grant is overrated? Thats a good one! Brandon Jackson will not rush for 1,000 this season nor will he even last 16 games.

[RashanGary]

The thing about Grant that you loved, he was always out there for the last two and a half years.

That said, I have quite a bit of confidence in Brandon Jackson. This year, in particular, he's looked really good.

If he can stay healthy and gets the bulk of carries, I think he'll get 1,000 yards. He's a much better threat out of the backfield, so it opens up another little avenue on our 1st and 2nd down offense as well.


I like Grant, but assuming Jackson stays healthy, I don't think this is a major blow. Now if we lost a guy like Tramon Williams or BJ Raji (neither great players but solid players like Grant) we'd be in more trouble because the guys taking over are really bad.

Jackson is fine. Grant was good. We'll be OK if Jackson can find a way to stay healthy.

[NewsBruin]

The knock on Jackson, since his draft evaluations, was that he was not an exceptionally quick or fast prospect who isn't going to shed tackles in the interior. Reading that, I thought, "Here's a guy who's not going to consistently get first downs by himself. That's not a guy we can feature an NFL running game around." I believe everyone's positive evaluation of his pass-catching and pass-blocking skills, but I don't see that as being the same as a good runner.

I still don't know how he's going to get any quicker or faster with more years of NFL experience. It's nice that he's relatively fresh for the number of seasons under his belt, but I just don't think he's going to get us enough ground yards to be a reliable starting back.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm not sure Jackson's quickness or speed is that bad. I think he ran 4.5 40 or better (maybe even high 4.4s)--which is plenty fast enough at RB. My problems with him are his vision and tendency to dance instead of pounding a hole.