Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Trent Richardson Interviews Fellow Brown Brandon Weeden

Packers: Ryan Grant May Be Lost in Transition Sometime This Offseason

For a player who hails from Suffern, NY., Green Bay's Ryan Grant isn't accustom to the outspoken and pushy ways of his fellow Big Apple friends.  Like the thousands of billboards in Time's Square, Grant simply blends into the crowd.

Maybe that's why he is considered one of the most underrated backs in the NFL.

When it comes to locker room meetings, Grant isn't the first guy to stand up and declare Lambeau Field as Sparta, followed by a triumphant march from beneath the stadium.  Instead, Grant knows his place on the team, one that is two steps forward of a rookie status and one step behind maintaining leadership on the Packers depth chart.

After one missed season, though, all of that could be erased in the blink of an eye.

Star-divide

It's hard to say what Grant's hobbies are exactly.  Something along the lines of origami seems too far-fetched for a man of Grant's background.  Yet studying the music of Mozart's piano concerto's is much too high brow for a player often regarded as Ahman Green the second.

I guess we'll throw Grant into the mix of video game lovers and car enthusiasts until we find out.  Fire up your Sega Chad Ochocinco.

But if there's one thing we can hold Grant too, it is his hobby of hard work.  Grant was interviewed by NFL Network three years ago.  In front of his loving family.  Straight after sustaining his third 100 yard performance following a Thanksgiving game against Detroit.

Grant casually plomped down onto an extended arm rest of his parents couch.  Where he wasn't too much of a macho man to fill us in on who the real No.25 is.

"Pretty basic, I'm just a hard worker.  A downhill type of runner who does whatever it takes to contribute" said Grant with a toothy smile on his face and a stern but serious silence from his adoring folks.

That response gave us all a pretty firm answer.  Grant means business.

Now, that same outlook has flip-flopped over the past six months.  Grant resembles a man whose job rests on the ever predictable Ted Thompson, after going down in Week 1 with an ankle injury against the Philadelphia Eagles

Mind you, replacement James Starks hasn't been much help.  Especially in the postseason.

If Green Bay hadn't won the Super Bowl on Sunday, we may not even be having this discussion.  Should the Steelers have won, most people would have blamed a Green Bay loss on injury depletion.  Simply by writing it off as "I guess everything finally caught up to them".

Unfortunately, that wasn't the case.  The Packers won their fourth ring.  And they did it in style, not just in the air, but on the ground as well.  Starks ran for 52 yards against a threatening Dick LeBeau 3-4 scheme.  The Steelers linebackers were basically silent on the day.  So was Troy Polamalu.

However, all of this tells only half the story. 

The constant criticism that Grant receives time and time again isn't directed toward his attitude, his performance or even his demeanor.  No, the negative aspect of Grant's game is consistency.  As it lacks big time, although it is quietly starting to take shape.

Grant rushed for 1,253 yards and 11 touchdowns in 2009 -- earning him the third spot in rush yards in the NFC.  Inside that season, though, Grant had seven games without a score.  Leaving Aaron Rodgers to make the most of a crater filled offensive line.  He also got by with a little help from friend Greg Jennings.

If Grant doesn't wish to go the way of Brandon Jacobs in his former team, the New York Giants, he best work hard this offseason.

The chances of Grant wandering off to another team?

They aren't as slim as you think.  Money has become a big issue in this picture, even though the Packers Pro Shop is rolling in green right now.  Grant's $30 million (plus) contract could be sliced sometime in the near future.  Or worse, totally passed on due to the emergence of Starks.

Sweaty times await Grant's palms in the coming months.

If Grant really wanted to, he could take partial ownership of Green Bay (without buying shares in the team either).  Lambeau Field is officially Rodgers' playground for years to come.  But with the Packers history showing more depth at quarterback than running back, Grant could go down with Green, Paul Hornung and Jim Taylor if he played his cards right.

Holding your breath isn't a wise decision just yet.

For a runner that is considered one of the top of in the tier, a lot is expected in 2011.  A stronger team presence is needed.  Along with a much more balanced performance that doesn't force the Packers to rely on Rodgers' arm.  Despite the fact that it just won a fourth ring for Titletown.

Grant is expected to receive serious contract bonuses during the offseason.  These are all seven digit figures.  Whether or not they are worthy is up for serious debate.

I won't forget how Grant seriously helped Favre to lead the Packers to the NFC Championship Game in 2007, heck, it was a brilliant year for all involved.  But a lot has changed since then, and with a year off, Grant is beginning to full behind the Pack.  Literally.

Packer fans still love him.  From a financial standpoint?  Not so much.

Mike McCarthy isn't focused on this issue right now, but it wouldn't hurt to consider the prospect of a two-headed run attack in the future.  The New Orleans Saints left teams reeling behind this combination two years ago, and now that the Packers are defending champs, say hello to a serious offensive threat.

It isn't tah-tah for Grant.  In all reality he should remain in green and gold.  Still, the Packers aren't the New York Jets.  They don't have excessive amounts of money to blow, and they don't necessarily need two or three great running backs on the roster.

Sooner or later, don't be surprised to see someone make way.

Grant told reporters last week, "I could play on Sunday".  His ankle is close to 100%.  So I ask you, why didn't he?  It could have potentially saved this sticky situation.

 

Follow Ryan Cook on   Twitter.

Ryan Cook is an Australian writer for Acme Packing Company. He is also a guest writer for PackerChatters.  Like/Hate his work?  Just want to shoot the breeze?  Send him an email: ryan.cook392@gmail.com.

Comment 108 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

In the context of the article, unfortunately works…but in the context of life, WHAT?!?!? :-)

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Feb 12, 2011 7:49 AM CST up reply actions  

"Grant told reporters last week, "I could play on Sunday". His ankle is close to 100%. So I ask you, why didn't he?"

Wouldn’t him being placed on IR prevent him from playing in any more games this season?

Selgy

by mittens on Feb 11, 2011 11:21 PM CST reply actions  

You are correct

He was on IR so he couldn’t have played.

by Zundar on Feb 11, 2011 11:36 PM CST up reply actions  

Technically you are right

But if this is the case, there is really no need for his comment anyway.

by Ryan Cook on Feb 11, 2011 11:40 PM CST up reply actions  

Hard to tell the "need for his comment" without the context in which it was given

The most likely scenario is a reporter asking him how his rehab is progressing, and Grant wanted to show that his rehab was nearly complete.

"What would Jesus Do? You're damn right he'd do a wheelie" ~ Daniel Tosh

by stempke on Feb 12, 2011 11:07 AM CST up reply actions  

Ted should really try to keep Grant,

I’m not sure of Grants contract status FYI. Feature backs are going out of style and teams have now mostly 2 or 3 main backs. Based on tape I think Starks is a better back to help us win because he does so well picking up those 1st downs that Grant just doesn’t make. Grant may be a better Home-run guy but lacks consistency. Grants injury this year is more evidence that we need him back, what would happen if Starks get’s injured? Two good runners makes it that much easier to make it through the season. Jackson is also hugely important as well and he may want to leave with the arrival of Starks though, why ever hand Jackson the ball if only as a token gesture to defenses? Fortunately no one else wants Jackson’s running ability so he’ll hopefully stay here.

by ericforeman04 on Feb 11, 2011 11:37 PM CST reply actions  

He Really Should

Not only has Grant done a great job when the weather gets bad in the North, but he will be necessary eventually. I’m still afraid that Starks will get hurt sooner or later until he learns to run lower. He took a shot that is still played on NFL Network’s highlight reel by a DB that weighed less than him and laid him out. I would love to see them split time and play situationally. Starks does seem to be a decent reciever out of the backfield.

by PhoenicianPakFan on Feb 12, 2011 12:23 AM CST up reply actions  

that should be “took a shot in the Atlanta playoff game”. Sorry.

by PhoenicianPakFan on Feb 12, 2011 12:24 AM CST up reply actions  

This is a buzz kill. )-;

"Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect."

Vince Lombardi

by CaliSeth on Feb 12, 2011 12:00 AM CST reply actions  

No thanks

Don’t really see a problem with my grammar, and don’t appreciate the Australian reference, either. If a kangaroo pun is the only thing you can come up with, I question your editing skills altogether. Thanks for your time champ.

by Ryan Cook on Feb 12, 2011 12:12 AM CST up reply actions   2 recs

It's called a column

The sentences are supposed to be short and concise, and the paragraphs aren’t meant to be long. Proof reading? I always read over my work at least once. Look at Bill Simmons or Rick Reilly, I’m not comparing myself to those two, but they keep it short to get the point across.

Seems to me you are looking for an argument or just trying to be picky.

by Ryan Cook on Feb 12, 2011 12:32 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Boys, boys.

This is a discussion most appropriate in the form of e-mail. I suggest you use it instead of an open forum.

"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."

by Mitchell Maurer on Feb 12, 2011 1:18 AM CST up reply actions  

For the record, Ryan,

Bill Simmons has never EVER kept it short.

"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."

by Mitchell Maurer on Feb 12, 2011 10:49 AM CST up reply actions  

Lay Off Clutch

I’m sorry you don’t agree with his use of words and sentence structure, but his articles are always in depth and informative. Ryan is a solid contributor to APC, just as you are. So try and focus more on the message he is giving us as opposed to his “sentence structure.”

Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!

13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!

Nuff said....

by Jabooty on Feb 12, 2011 1:22 AM CST up reply actions  

Although it could have been more politely put

I’m with Clutch16 on this one. It hurts to read Ryan’s articles, which are chock-full of misused words, errors in grammar and punctuation, and occasional factual errors (like the one mentioned above about how, since Grant was on IR, he wasn’t allowed to play even if he physically could have). This is all fine for BR, but I expect better here.

Eagle Totem - Comprehensive EMU coverage.

by cmadler on Feb 12, 2011 6:14 AM CST up reply actions   4 recs

Can you highlight some examples?

I’m not trying to be defensive or anything, just would like to know what particular area’s you are talking about so I can keep that in mind for the future. Thanks.

by Ryan Cook on Feb 12, 2011 5:10 PM CST up reply actions  

For one: there are no apostrophes in plural nouns.

"Career highlights? I had two. I got an intentional walk from Sandy Koufax and I got out of a rundown against the Mets." - Bob Uecker

by texwestern on Feb 13, 2011 9:14 AM CST up reply actions   3 recs

Yinz aint nebberly

I challenege any of you to go to Western PA, or SE Ohio and speak to some of my cousins for one week. You will come away thinking Ryan’s grammar and sentence structure is shakespearean.

"Steel lightens your work, brightens your leisure, and widens your world."

"I've gotta a feelin!
Pittsburgh Steelers to the Super Bowl!"

by dmdjr1 on Feb 13, 2011 12:38 PM CST up reply actions   2 recs

For another:

From the FreeDictionary.com

sus·tain (s-stn)
tr.v. sus·tained, sus·tain·ing, sus·tains
1. To keep in existence; maintain.
2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for.
3. To support from below; keep from falling or sinking; prop.
4. To support the spirits, vitality, or resolution of; encourage.
5. To bear up under; withstand: can’t sustain the blistering heat.
6. To experience or suffer: sustained a fatal injury.
7. To affirm the validity of: The judge has sustained the prosecutor’s objection.
8. To prove or corroborate; confirm.
9. To keep up (a joke or assumed role, for example) competently.
Not one definition there that supports this usage.
Straight after sustaining his third 100 yard performance…

That glass is flowing over!

"It's a great day to be great!"

THE BEARS STILL SUCK!

by NorthStarr on Feb 14, 2011 9:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Here are the first few I noticed, with errors in bold. I could go on much longer if you'd like.

“…Green Bay’s Ryan Grant isn’t accustom to the outspoken and pushy ways of his fellow Big Apple friends.”

“Like the thousands of billboards in Time’s Square…”

“But if there’s one thing we can hold Grant too…”

“Grant casually plomped down onto an extended arm rest of his parents couch."

“…a stern but serious silence…”

Eagle Totem - Comprehensive EMU coverage.

by cmadler on Feb 16, 2011 11:33 AM CST up reply actions  

Seriously?

I think Ryan does a fantastic job. I think I saw ONE misspelling in the entire article which is great considering its a long, well-written piece. I find more errors in professional SI articles. Really, this was inappropriate.

by PhoenicianPakFan on Feb 12, 2011 12:21 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Really I can’t say enough for you devoted people who take the time to do the research and write these fantastic articles that we all enjoy everyday. You don’t know how excited some of us are to log in after a long day at work and see a new article that we can think about and comment on, without having had to do all the legwork. Thank you again for your dedicated and passionate support for our team. That goes for all those here who write articles for us to enjoy.

by PhoenicianPakFan on Feb 12, 2011 1:09 AM CST up reply actions  

Even if you are right, there is a way to go about things and THIS isn’t it man. If you made a similar comment (kangaroo thing) about someone from like Asia or something people would be all over you for it!!

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Feb 12, 2011 8:46 AM CST up reply actions  

HOW DARE YOU SPEAK ILL OF MICHAEL HUNT?!

"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."

by Mitchell Maurer on Feb 12, 2011 10:48 AM CST up reply actions  

Thanks

For saying what I wanted to say, better than I could have said it.

by Packer Logician on Feb 12, 2011 12:56 PM CST up reply actions  

I understand what you are saying Ted

I admit I do try extremely hard to be creative, so perhaps that is my downfall. I’ll try and keep it shorter/simpler the next time. Thanks for the constructive feedback.

by Ryan Cook on Feb 12, 2011 5:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Actually Ryan,

I like the way you write. I feel like you aren’t trying to forcefeed me bullshit. All the writers on here are different, I embrace that. Suggestion for Clutch… if grammar mistakes on a football blog bother you that much, do something costructive. My suggestion would be to go teach an english class, or volunteer to teach at a prison. I’m still don’t understand why the fuck you would call someone out in the way the you did. You are an asshole.

"Flopped out my old fella."
-- New Zealand lawn bowler David File, on exposing himself to teammates because they were playing poorly

by Prince Fielder is Skinny on Feb 13, 2011 12:50 PM CST up reply actions  

+2

Like others said, if someone has anything they want to criticize the writers on, please do it via email.

Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!

13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!

Nuff said....

by Jabooty on Feb 13, 2011 3:16 PM CST up reply actions  

+1

The Artist Formerly known as Speedingtime/Speedy

Herb Kohl needs to fire himself.

by Jacob Grinyer on Feb 13, 2011 9:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Well said!

Rec’d.

That glass is flowing over!

"It's a great day to be great!"

THE BEARS STILL SUCK!

by NorthStarr on Feb 14, 2011 1:32 AM CST up reply actions  

You know what? You're right

I apologize for that crack and the general tone. Occasionally, the peever (don’t ask) in me still rears its ugly head. I could have put it better and perhaps in a different forum.

"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root

by Clutch16 on Feb 12, 2011 9:20 AM CST up reply actions  

All is forgiven Clutch,

Go about in a less assholish (invented word) way next time.

"Flopped out my old fella."
-- New Zealand lawn bowler David File, on exposing himself to teammates because they were playing poorly

by Prince Fielder is Skinny on Feb 14, 2011 2:46 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

All is forgiven Clutch,

Go about it in a less assholish (invented word) way next time.

"Flopped out my old fella."
-- New Zealand lawn bowler David File, on exposing himself to teammates because they were playing poorly

by Prince Fielder is Skinny on Feb 14, 2011 2:46 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Nice work, Ryan.

I hope RG25 is able to contribute next season, I really do. I was NOT happy when they put him on IR after the first game; at the time I thought it was a knee-jerk reaction to an injury that could heal.

Ultimately, the Packers won a Super Bowl, which is the best possible outcome in any season.

Great writeup.

Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Feb 12, 2011 12:45 AM CST reply actions  

I do too. I can see why people would want Starks to start and get rid of Grant, but I just think its too soon to give up on a guy that rushed for 1200+ yards twice in the last couple years and usually carries your team in the late season games. Its not as though he had a down year and was benched or something of that nauture, he simply had a season ending injury and needed a rookie with a spark to fill in for him.

by PhoenicianPakFan on Feb 12, 2011 12:54 AM CST up reply actions  

I think it's premature to ditch RG25 now.

Grant plays harder as the year goes along, which is huge considering how the Green Bay weather shifts at the end of a season.

I can’t tell you how many “OMG RYAN GRANT’S MAKING TOO MUCH MONEY LET’S CUT HIM ASAP BECAUSE HE’S NOT AN ELITE BACK” comments I’ve seen. It sickens me. It’s ridiculous. And it needs to stop. Running backs, as common as they might seem to be, have a short shelf-life and durability. Grant has shown durability with the exception of this year.

Don’t make this a “what has Ryan Grant done for me” deal. Make this a “what CAN Ryan Grant do for the Packers” deal.

Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Feb 12, 2011 1:29 AM CST up reply actions  

Agreed.

We need Ryan Grant more than ever this year. With the possibility that James Jones and/or Donald Driver could be leaving the Pack could be forced to run the ball more than usual. Also, I’m not convinced that Starks is the long term answer. He played well against Philly, but did nothing against the Bears, and regardless of how good a defense is, 52 yards is not a good performance. He’s shown flashes, but that might be partially due to the fact that no one game planned for him. Ryan Grant should be the feature back, with Starks coming in to relieve him. I think GB should let Jackson go, and find a new 3rd down back in the draft that isn’t just a WR in a RB body.

"They’re good players. They’re basically all the same guy, except for Jordy Nelson is Caucasian."

--Ryan Clark, Pittsburgh S, on the Green Bay receivers

by Kuhl on Feb 12, 2011 12:59 PM CST up reply actions  

"Mind you, replacement James Starks hasn't been much help. Especially in the postseason"

Bullshit!!! Fine he didnt have a huge impact on the super bowl, but he was a key component throughtout the rest of the postseason. THAT point is hard to argue

I'd do anything for Da Packers, Gosh I love da Packers.

by tutts3131 on Feb 12, 2011 1:17 AM CST reply actions  

I think he meant….Starks wasn’t much help towards the argument that we NEED Grant. I had to read that a couple times as well to get what he meant, but I don’t think it was a knock on Starks. He was saying Starks played well in the post-season making the argument to keep Grant harder than it should be.

by PhoenicianPakFan on Feb 12, 2011 1:52 AM CST up reply actions  

You misunderstood me Tutts

I meant he hasn’t been much help to Grant due to how great he has been in the postseason.

by Ryan Cook on Feb 12, 2011 2:09 AM CST up reply actions  

i see...

the writing was confusing on that one Ryan.

by Jeigh AK on Feb 12, 2011 7:11 PM CST up reply actions  

Starks!

I am not sure of the total yards Starks finished the game with but he
came through quite well against the AFC’s #1 running defense. His YPC
average was good but he didn’t get the ball very often. He also got the
first downs when we needed them which was a huge problem earlier
in the season. Fact is, we can probably point to a couple of close losses
where he may have made the diffrence.

All in all, I think Grant needs to stay in Green and Gold regardless of the emergence
of Starks. With Starks making an impact, I don’t see RG 25 getting anything but better.
Late in the game and late in the season, those two could totally destroy a defense with
play action and/or runs coupled with AR’s arm and a sorely missed tight end coming
back.

BJK

by Crotext on Feb 12, 2011 11:18 AM CST up reply actions  

I agree.

The combination of the two of them and the packers passing game could be lethal next season. Grant and Starks sharing the load will help keep them fresh during the season and help them close games out.

Starks really did have a good game running the ball in the super bowl when he was call upon. I think the stat line was 52 yards on 11 carries which is about 4.7 ypc.

by JDub37 on Feb 12, 2011 6:21 PM CST up reply actions  

You can never have too many running backs

Grant + Starks > Grant or Starks

the chances of one or both of them going down for at least a week next year are probably over 75%. and even if they don’t, it’ll be better to for grant to share the load a bit and he’ll be fresher and better when he plays. Average game might be like 18 carries Grant, 10 Starks, 2 Jackson. I’d feel really good about that.

by mladwig0 on Feb 12, 2011 1:24 AM CST reply actions  

This

but I want Bjax around for blitz pickup too.

"Hawk Harrelson: Annoying even the hearing impaired": Teahenny Penny paraphrasing Chisoxfan1473

by NorthSidePaulie on Feb 12, 2011 4:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Agreed.

Nance is the odd man out.

That glass is flowing over!

"It's a great day to be great!"

THE BEARS STILL SUCK!

by NorthStarr on Feb 14, 2011 1:36 AM CST up reply actions  

I think we'd be wise to keep both

Starks hasn’t had enough carries to make an adequate appraisal on him, plus he has a history of injuries. Meanwhile, RG is coming off a season ending injury and no one knows how he’s gonna perform next yr. But, his salary could play a part in that decision.

by bigbill992001 on Feb 12, 2011 7:04 AM CST reply actions  

I like Grant

I think they should keep him.

But I also think they should let Jackson walk if that’s the case.

Grant is a very good receiver out of the backfield, and a good blocker… He can fill the third down role. Kuhn can even be the third down back sometimes.

He and Starks can share the ‘feature’ back role, so neither of them has to deal with a heavy workload (kinda like how the chiefs did things with Jones and Charles last year? the Jets with Tomlinson and Greene? Giants with Bradshaw and Jacobs…)

Not only would that give defenses two different type of backs to worry about (Grant the more explosive, home run type, also a receiving threat… Starks the downhill, bruising type)… It would also mean that neither would be excessively worn down by the time they reach the postseason, and if one needs a game off due to a nagging injury, or is struggling on a given day, the other can handle the full workload that game.

Considering that the Pack had almost zero running game all last season and still managed to have a top ten offense, adding in a versatile, two-headed rushing attack could make the offense near unstoppable.

by Sheegan on Feb 12, 2011 7:48 AM CST reply actions  

wait!

you said Grant=home run type? Really? Can you define ‘home run’?

by bigbill992001 on Feb 12, 2011 4:39 PM CST up reply actions  

It's a big building with patients...but that's not important right now.

"Career highlights? I had two. I got an intentional walk from Sandy Koufax and I got out of a rundown against the Mets." - Bob Uecker

by texwestern on Feb 13, 2011 9:12 AM CST up reply actions  

Johnny, what can you make out off this?

"Who ever heard of the Cubs losing a game they had to have?" -Frank Chance
"If [Ruth] had [called his shot], I would have knocked him down with the next pitch." -Charlie Root

by Clutch16 on Feb 13, 2011 10:15 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Oh, I can make a hat…or a broach…or a pterodactyl!

"Career highlights? I had two. I got an intentional walk from Sandy Koufax and I got out of a rundown against the Mets." - Bob Uecker

by texwestern on Feb 13, 2011 1:03 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm new to seeing Grant referred to as a 'home run hitter'

But, I’m fairly new to this site, maybe since last summer. However, I’ve been a Packer fan since 1965, if that’s what you’re asking. Define a big run. It’s 6 yds? 8? 12? 15? More?

by bigbill992001 on Feb 13, 2011 5:06 PM CST up reply actions  

ryan grant

Dont get me wrong Starks really helped the Pack during the playoffs and a little in the superbowl BUT hes no Ryan grant ,how soon we forget !How many times did you see Starks burst out for 80 yard runs?Grants done that a few times to my recollection. I was sure Starks was why TT didnt go out after a free agent or a trade but dont throw Grant under the bus just because starks had a few good games!

by BIRDMAN62 on Feb 12, 2011 8:34 AM CST reply actions  

defense

Look at the teams starks just went against. Some of the best run defenses. Trust me, he is faster than RG. A lot faster. Has better vision as well.

Over a whole season against average or poor run defense he will shred them.

by Acme on Feb 12, 2011 11:34 AM CST via mobile up reply actions  

RG

FYI, I am not saying we should get rid of RG. He is very important to the team.

Will be great to have both next year

by Acme on Feb 12, 2011 11:36 AM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Different Players

Ryan Grant is great at finding holes in the defense and exploding through them. This play making ability means he gets stuffed every once in a while. On the other hand, Starks never goes down on the first hit. I watched the Super Bowl with a bunch of Bears fans, and that was the first thing they noticed about him. He’s a more dependable rusher but doesn’t have the home run threat.

"They’re good players. They’re basically all the same guy, except for Jordy Nelson is Caucasian."

--Ryan Clark, Pittsburgh S, on the Green Bay receivers

by Kuhl on Feb 12, 2011 1:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Grant isn’t a home run threat either though.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 12, 2011 1:11 PM CST up reply actions  

He can make the occasional big plays.

He’s not AP, but he definitely shows more big play ability then Starks does.

"They’re good players. They’re basically all the same guy, except for Jordy Nelson is Caucasian."

--Ryan Clark, Pittsburgh S, on the Green Bay receivers

by Kuhl on Feb 12, 2011 2:33 PM CST up reply actions  

I guess I disagree on that. The only big play I ever remember Grant making was his run against the Boys’ in 2007 and the one against the Bears in 2009. That’s two in his three years with us. Though, I’ll fully admit he could have some more big runs that I just can’t remember.

Starks has basically only gotten legitimate carries in 4 games. His big run will come as he gets more playing time.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 12, 2011 2:44 PM CST up reply actions  

Grant's last 3 years .

Rushing longs of 66, 62, 57. I wasn’t able to find much info about rushes of over 20 yards, but he does break a big one eventually. Maybe it’s just because of Starks limited opportunities, but I don’t think he’s had one like that.

"They’re good players. They’re basically all the same guy, except for Jordy Nelson is Caucasian."

--Ryan Clark, Pittsburgh S, on the Green Bay receivers

by Kuhl on Feb 12, 2011 7:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Disagree

Big time too. You can’t say RG is a big play guy because he had:
A- more games
B- Starks played against far better run defenses in the Postseason.

Starks is faster, stronger, can block, and catch. Grant has the experience factor though, and is good at finding the holes. That’s about it. Is Grant useless? Absolutely not. I don’t think anybody said that either. From what I mostly read here, and said myself, is trading Grant is something worth exploring. Key word being exploring. In the end, the odds are Grant will return. Unfortunately, I don’t think McCarthy is going to implement a dual threat running game and Starks is not going to get many opportunities. That is my fear, wasting talent. I would much rather have the more talented RB in there to gain experience. Especially one that opponents are forced to respect.

Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!

13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!

Nuff said....

by Jabooty on Feb 12, 2011 8:11 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm just saying

I think it’s too early to hand over the starting job to starks. Grant needs to be on the team next year, at least as a backup plan in case starks doesn’t pan out. Give them a competition in training camp, and let the best man win. As I’ve said in other comments, I also don’t think either is the long term answer. I think Green Bay needs to draft a playmaking RB to eventually replace Grant.

"They’re good players. They’re basically all the same guy, except for Jordy Nelson is Caucasian."

--Ryan Clark, Pittsburgh S, on the Green Bay receivers

by Kuhl on Feb 13, 2011 12:06 AM CST up reply actions  

I still think they should draft a RB.

Both Starks and Grant are servicable players, but it would be nice to have a true playmaker lining up behind Rodgers. From what I’ve heard, Reggie Bush might not be back with New Orleans next year. If he wasn’t too expensive, he would be an awfully nice receiving back

"They’re good players. They’re basically all the same guy, except for Jordy Nelson is Caucasian."

--Ryan Clark, Pittsburgh S, on the Green Bay receivers

by Kuhl on Feb 12, 2011 2:34 PM CST up reply actions  

I think Starks is the guy. I wouldn’t discredit what he was able to do behind our porous OL. As well as playing well against some good, good run defenses.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 12, 2011 2:45 PM CST up reply actions  

I agree

Starks did a good job behind a fairly bad run blocking unit. Props to him. I can only imagine what he will do once our OL improves at run blocking!

Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!

13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!

Nuff said....

by Jabooty on Feb 12, 2011 8:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, once Lang gets plugged in somewhere that should help things out. Though, the OL probably won’t ever be great at run blocking as long as Clifton is starting but that’s a consequence we just have to live with.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 12, 2011 10:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Improved run blocking? What does THAT look like?

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Feb 13, 2011 10:45 AM CST up reply actions  

It looks something like.....

A. Consistent blocking by everyone
B. Pulling the OG once in a while from the other side
C. Not allowing the RB to be touched before hitting the line of scrimmage
D. It doesn’t force John Kuhn to act like Barry Sanders

Did I get everything?

That actually does kind of generate a new question. Should we see more run blocking plays where we pull an OG from the opposite side? I notice how some of the best run blocking teams do this, but don’t recall the Packers doing this even once. Is this against what the Zone Blocking Scheme is all about? Even if that is the case, we will mix up our run blocking schemes, so once in a while it’s not a ZBS run.

Superbowl Champs Baby!!!!!

13 World Championships, soon to be 14 after next season...GUARANTEED!!!!!

Nuff said....

by Jabooty on Feb 13, 2011 3:13 PM CST up reply actions  

Jackson?

What happened to all the Jackson fans?

by uglyfatpimplynerd on Feb 12, 2011 11:16 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm still here.

Go Suns, Packers, Jays, and Huskers!

Green Bay Packers: Super Bowl XLV Champions!!!!

by Omaha Sun on Feb 14, 2011 9:12 PM CST up reply actions  

I talked to Grant on twitter.

I was telling him how I am close to where he was from and I asked him if he ever played my high school. My friends brother is actually friends with Grant and he helps local kids out. Ray Rice is also from around my area.

Suffern and New Rochelle are like 15-20 minutes away.

Follow me on twitter

I'M GOING H.A.M.

by Jeterian 2 on Feb 12, 2011 8:46 AM CST reply actions  

eh

I don’t think he’s going anywhere. Starks is still unproven and we have NOTHING behind him really so we aren’t prepared to move on from Grant IMO. if they had brough in Lynch or something and he looked good then Grant should be sweating but I think the fact that they didn’t bring anyone in shows that TT still believes in him.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Feb 12, 2011 8:47 AM CST reply actions  

gotta keep Grant

we don’t know how good Starks can be over the course of the season, and if it goes to 18 games, you need to have 2 good backs to sustain a running game.

by ThroughBeingCool on Feb 12, 2011 8:54 AM CST reply actions  

We should probably keep Grant but I’d like to see Starks get more carries then him. We know what we have in Grant, and that’s an average runner, and a guy who offers nothing from a receiving/blocking standpoint.

I get that he’s put up 1,200 yards in back to back to seasons but I’m sticking with the thought that he’s essentially a product of a system. I know I’ll get the, “Well Brandon Jackson couldn’t get those yards argument”, and while that’s true, Brandon Jackson may very well be one of the worst runner’s in the NFL. I honestly don’t think I’ve seen another Rb in the NFL that’s as indecisive as he is.

Obviously this is complete speculation on my part but had Starks gotten the majority of the carries the whole season, I think he gets that 1,200 yards and probably more. He looked good in pretty much every game he played in this season aside from the game against Atlanta, and even that had more to do with our OL not being able to block for him whatsoever. He’s got better speed/acceleration then Grant does, he has better vision then Grant does, and he runs harder then Grant does.

BTW- This was his first time playing in over two seasons too. Pretty impressive.

Fire Slocum

by packallday555 on Feb 12, 2011 11:46 AM CST reply actions  

pad555, we've been over this before...

Jackson is a great 3rd down back and a bad every-down back.

Editor at BT Powerhouse, a Big Ten Basketball blog.

by OBrienSchofieldismyHero on Feb 12, 2011 12:28 PM CST up reply actions  

The logic ain't there

I’m not following the logic of this article. We will let Grant go because Starks is so good and we can’t afford the signing bonus? Because Ted is so good he’ll find another Starks in the ’11 draft?

First of all, we need depth. Grant’s injury showed that you need at least two solid first down backs and that Jackson ain’t one of them. Even if Ted finds another Starks in the draft he’ll be a rookie and one dimensional. Would Ted really spend a draft pick on another back when all he has to do is honor his mantra and stick with the proven guy?

This not to say it won’t happen. Ted vales quality above need. If the right RB falls to him he will take him and let the chips fall during training camp. But I believe Grant will be in training camp next year. And, barring some strange twist of fate, starting game 1.

by 50 years and Counting on Feb 12, 2011 4:25 PM CST reply actions  

I say keep all 3 running backs....

Ryan Grant doesn’t have the “home run” type strides all the time, but is good at finding the holes and receiving. Starks shows that he’s able to bounce off tacklers and come forward for extra yardage. Put B-Jax in at 3rd down and RB flat plays and ya got one hell of a hydra of running backs. Plus having Kuhn at FB for some power don’t hurt either.

When life gives ya lemons, shut up and eat your damn lemons.

by P-Townfan on Feb 12, 2011 9:31 PM CST reply actions  

What I've been saying

Keep Grant, Starks and Jackson.
Let Nance go.

Simple.

That glass is flowing over!

"It's a great day to be great!"

THE BEARS STILL SUCK!

by NorthStarr on Feb 14, 2011 2:19 AM CST up reply actions  

not complaining or anything but how did Ryan become an author right away?

its like he was promoted before he posted his first comment on here

I hope Kotsay gets hit by a dump truck and slips into a coma where he is stuck forever in Baseball purgatory having to bat against a three-headed, six-armed Lefty Hydra consisting of Billy Wagner, Damaso Marte, and Randy Johnson. - Shoeless In SC

by blackoutsox on Feb 14, 2011 12:45 AM CST reply actions  

He wrote for BR I guess and had some of his stuff picked up by other sites.

I don’t know if Brandon talked to him or of he talked to Brandon, but I guess what he did for BR was enough.

Go Suns, Packers, Jays, and Huskers!

Green Bay Packers: Super Bowl XLV Champions!!!!

by Omaha Sun on Feb 14, 2011 9:16 PM CST up reply actions  

Sure hope that that isn't enough

to get Chad Lundberg writing for this site.
Yikes!

That glass is flowing over!

"It's a great day to be great!"

THE BEARS STILL SUCK!

by NorthStarr on Feb 14, 2011 10:05 PM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed



Manager

Img00243_small Kevin McCauley

Editors

Texbucky_small texwestern

Author

Rubberducky_small Mitchell Maurer

Ayrton_senna_1988_canada_small Vermont Cubs Fan

Fallout-3-1010_small PackApologist

Gassertaylor_small OBrienSchofieldismyHero

Linkedin_picture_small Zack Ward

Carson-palmer-hot-dog_small MatthewJStein