Will the Packers re-sign Ryan Grant?

[Tony Oday]

I think he is letting him test the market and then match what he gets so Grant doesnt feel insulted by the offer he will likely accept.

[woodbuck27]

I think he is letting him test the market and then match what he gets so Grant doesnt feel insulted by the offer he will likely accept.

I'm not optimistic about Alex Green and Brandon Saine and I believe that the option of using Ryan Grant and James Starks in alternating situations will work as long as both remain healthy. That's an issue considering Ryan Grant.

I hope that Undrafted RB Marc Tyler has his game face on and looked good over the weekend. His numbers at Southern California are impressive.

Mike McCarthy had nothing to say about Ryan Grant on Friday when asked at a press conference on Friday 11 May, 2012.

I'll post up that LINK as there's other stuff in there that may interest Packerrats from an observers standpoint:

http://blogs.greenbaypressgazette.com/blogs/gpg/insider/2012/05/11/mccarthy-nothing-to-report-on-ryan-grant/

GO PACKERS !

[Gunakor]

Part of the report as to why Grant didn't go visit the Lions is that he's still looking for an opportunity to start. If that's the case, why would he sign for the veteran minimum to back up Starks again?

Because Starks is injury prone, because both backs are used fairly evenly when healthy, and because the Packers have the most potent overall offense in the NFL.

[woodbuck27]

Because Starks is injury prone, because both backs are used fairly evenly when healthy, and because the Packers have the most potent overall offense in the NFL.

and... Because Ryan Grant wants to play in the NFL and he enjoys being a Green Bay Packer. It's simply a good fit as our RB situation is so up in the air.

GO PACKERS !

[Fritz]

I don't know if I've ever seen such a change in the value of a position as I have the running back position in the past four or five years.

The fullback role has been vastly diminished, too, but the value of a guy who can really run and make people miss, plus maybe catch the ball, is far, far less valued than it used to be. It's kinda weird. I grew up with McArthur Lane and John Brockington in the backfield, with
Billy Sims in Detroit, watching Walter Payton.

[pbmax]

I don't know if I've ever seen such a change in the value of a position as I have the running back position in the past four or five years.

The fullback role has been vastly diminished, too, but the value of a guy who can really run and make people miss, plus maybe catch the ball, is far, far less valued than it used to be. It's kinda weird. I grew up with McArthur Lane and John Brockington in the backfield, with
Billy Sims in Detroit, watching Walter Payton.

The 70s were a very strange time indeed. Their run to pass ratio made the Lombardi Packers seem like a Sam Wyche offense.

[Fritz]

You're right, PB. There was a great thread - maybe it was even back on the old JSO site - about how the game has changed. I did some research, and found that there was a lot more passing in the 50's and 60's than most people would have thought. It was the seventies where things got conservative, probably because DB's could mug receivers, and could cover themselves in stickum. Plus there were tearaway jerseys, which aided running backs.

So I grew up with what I thought was "normal" football, and that explains why it freaks me out a little that MM likes to pass so much. It's the culture I grew up in.

This also explains my alcoholism and my kinky sexual preferences.

[woodbuck27]

I don't know if I've ever seen such a change in the value of a position as I have the running back position in the past four or five years.

The fullback role has been vastly diminished, too, but the value of a guy who can really run and make people miss, plus maybe catch the ball, is far, far less valued than it used to be. It's kinda weird. I grew up with McArthur Lane and John Brockington in the backfield, with
Billy Sims in Detroit, watching Walter Payton.

In my observation it's not been that long since it was vital for an NFL team to have a strong running game. In the case of any team incorporating the WCO. That RB needed to block well and catch screen pass's (where's that gone?) catch the ball period as an added weapon in the passing attack.

In my observation when did it change in Green Bay?

I believe it was when Ahman Green declined. When Packer GM Ted Thompson began to draft to emphasize pass protection and weapons to use with Aaron Rodgers skills. When have we seen so many TE's on our roster? Why? Does TT have 'a prototypical all needs' TE on his roster?

TT has to protect and utilize now and the immediate future to showcase his QB, Aaron Rodgers.

When would the production minus opportunity,attitude, skills, loyalty (13 seasons) and popularity of 'a Donald Driver', if there is another one in the NFL. Be trumped by immediate needs for younger player development? Again evidence that great deal of Ted Thompson's plan is focused on taking the most advantage of his starting QB.

Ryan Grant can still be secured. He's playing a waiting game as I see it. Sometime an NFL teams #1 RB will fall and there's Ryan Grant as an option. If TT doesn't know it. Ryan Grant does know his own value. If TT and MM let him go. Who would be our most efficient runner? That won't happen. He's the anti-Tebow.

I believe it would be Aaron Rodgers again using that skill (running) to recover from a blown pass play.

If I was TT and MM I would look for that RB that can grab 4-5 yards on 1st down. The RB that consistently can bull ahead for 4 - 4.5 yards. That RB has to be durable as well as consistent in terms of his gains. He should have either solid blocking ability or good hands. 2 out of 3 is real good.

Ryan Grant isn't that guy. James Starks isn't that guy. Alex Green or Brandon Saine? They havn't started any games. They've played in a combined 12 games in 2011 with 22 plays for a total 80 yards (3.6 yard Avg.).

TT and MM have NOT found that RB yet. MM promised us a stronger running game or more emphasis place in that part of the WCO.Will we see that evolve in 2012?

I'm not seeing enough so far to be an optimistic fan in terms of the Packers running game.

My concern is Aaron Rodgers being more exposed then need be.

In Aaron Rodgers 'getting burned'... in 'Aaron Rodgers burnout' !

GO PACKERS !

[Fritz]

"My concern is Aaron Rodgers being more exposed then need be."

I know, Woody, that's always my fear, too - that opposing defensive linemen will be able to just pin their ears back and charge. It kinda freaks me out. But I have to admit that, watching the games, the Packers (as well as other passing teams) have gotten better over the years in devising protection schemes and running quick routes with three-step drops, so even a hard-charging defensive lineman or a blitzer can't get there in time.

I'd feel even better about it all, though, if the Packers did at least one of two things:

1. Developed a better screen game (Alex Green?)
2. Had a running back who was a real threat and could gain some yards and thus have his number called more often.

[woodbuck27]

"My concern is Aaron Rodgers being more exposed then need be."

I know, Woody, that's always my fear, too - that opposing defensive linemen will be able to just pin their ears back and charge. It kinda freaks me out. But I have to admit that, watching the games, the Packers (as well as other passing teams) have gotten better over the years in devising protection schemes and running quick routes with three-step drops, so even a hard-charging defensive lineman or a blitzer can't get there in time.

I'd feel even better about it all, though, if the Packers did at least one of two things:

1. Developed a better screen game (Alex Green?)
2. Had a running back who was a real threat and could gain some yards and thus have his number called more often.

Bang on !

[woodbuck27]

and... Because Ryan Grant wants to play in the NFL and he enjoys being a Green Bay Packer. It's simply a good fit as our RB situation is so up in the air.

GO PACKERS !

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/tag/_/name/2012-pressure-point

See Pressure point: Packers.

"Today is May 16. That leaves about 2 1/2 months before training camp and almost four months before the start of the regular season for reinforcements to arrive. But for the time being, there is only one player on the Packers' roster who seems suited to be a No. 1 back in the NFL." Fr. LINK

and Cont'd ... see LINK above.

GO PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/priorities-do-not-include-running-game-3a5fj85-153333925.html

By: Tyler Dunne

Packers' priorities do not include running game

If Ted Thompson is going to lowball a position, it should be the position that's most disposable. A position that requires smart, healthy players. Not stars. In Green Bay, that's the running back.

Please click on LINK for the story.

GO PACKERS !