Is Ryan Grant a Hypnotist?

[LZ13]

I don't get it with Ryan Grant. 7 carries for 7 yards last night. Granted, most of his runs were in a situation where run was expected, but that makes my point. He can NOT run the ball when run is expected (except against the Titans in garbage time I guess). Furthermore, I am certain that we would not have won the Super Bowl in 2010 had he not been out for the season (see James Starks game-closing runs in the NFC Champ game). Yet still, McCarthy loves him, Collinsworth and every other announcer loves him and hails him as this great back. He NEVER was a great running back. Nothing against him personally - he seems to be a great team player, and he seems to fill other roles such as a receiving back, non-running downs, or blocking well, but when we need someone to get tough yards, he can't do it, he never could do it. This goes back, way back to the Favre days even - the 2007 NFC championship game was an example of how our run game was non-existent when we really needed it bad. So all I can conclude is that Ryan Grant is a hypnotist - but he can't get through to me.

Harris, on the other hand . . .

 

[JBlood]

He was a 1000 yard rusher for 3 years (few yards short in 2007), and does ok even now. He's the only running back averaging over 4 ypc besides Harris. I'm glad he's a backup, even if he's not an elite runner.

 

[LZ13]

He was a 1000 yard rusher for 3 years (few yards short in 2007), and does ok even now. He's the only running back averaging over 4 ypc besides Harris. I'm glad he's a backup, even if he's not an elite runner.

Yes, I know that. And I think this is why he is hailed as being so great. But if you take a close look at his stats over the years, you will see numbers like 2yds, -1yds, 0yds, 15yds. He averaged 4+yds but he did not consistently get 4yds. Do you really think we win it all in 2010 with him instead of Starks?

Are they even running the zone blocking scheme any more that Grant got some of his big runs with?

 

[TJV]

I don't get it with Ryan Grant. 7 carries for 7 yards last night. Granted, most of his runs were in a situation where run was expected, but that makes my point. He can NOT run the ball when run is expected (except against the Titans in garbage time I guess).

What’s not to get? Have you noticed the Packers have two RBs on IR they preferred to Grant? Have you noticed there are three other RBs that were on the roster before they signed Grant? That makes Grant their 6th choice at RB. They’re lucky he was available.

Furthermore, I am certain that we would not have won the Super Bowl in 2010 had he not been out for the season (see James Starks game-closing runs in the NFC Champ game).

This, at best, is revisionist history. There is no way anyone can be certain of that. And beyond that, consider the facts: During his Packers career up to and including the first game of the 2010 season, Grant averaged about 4.4 yards per carry. Starks in the 2010 season averaged 3.5 yards per carry. Even today as Grant’s career is winding down, his career per carry average is higher than the younger Starks’.

 

[longtimefan]

This goes back, way back to the Favre days even - the 2007 NFC championship game was an example of how our run game was non-existent when we really needed it bad. .

But the week before vs Seattle he gained what? 200 yards and 7.4 yards per carry and 3 tds after fumbling twice?

 

[FrankRizzo]

Am I the only one here to figure out that our OL sucks when it comes to run blocking.
When I say "sucks", I don't mean they fail every time.
But all in all, compared to the other 31 teams, they for sure are bottom half and I would say bottom 10 definitely.

Why, I am not sure of.... I think the OL coach has plenty to do with it though.
Also, protecting Rodgers is the most important thing period, so they are better pass blockers, and perhaps more passive as a result?

I get a kick out of this article.... he called it "A ROLL" what the running game did last night. WTF? http://packersinsider.com/?p=5137

 

[longtimefan]

Am I the only one here to figure out that our OL sucks when it comes to run blocking.
When I say "sucks", I don't mean they fail every time.
But all in all, compared to the other 31 teams, they for sure are bottom half and I would say bottom 10 definitely.

Why, I am not sure of.... I think the OL coach has plenty to do with it though.
Also, protecting Rodgers is the most important thing period, so they are better pass blockers, and perhaps more passive as a result?

I get a kick out of this article.... he called it "A ROLL" what the running game did last night. WTF? http://packersinsider.com/?p=5137

No...he said Packers got on a roll..He started it by mentioning the short passes to Kuhn and Harris..

 

[FrankRizzo]

No...he said Packers got on a roll..He started it by mentioning the short passes to Kuhn and Harris..

Yeah, I think he's exaggerating a bit calling that a roll.
I think 76 total yards rushing in any game, on 30+ carries, is awful.
2. a carry..... that won't beat any other teams in the playoffs besides last night's Joe Webb Queens.

I love Harris, but they gotta give this guy a chance to get into the open field....

By the way, where the hell is Alex Green?
He's been active for at least the past 2 games I am pretty sure.

 

[longtimefan]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...-in-backfield-rotation-o487ug2-185499171.html

But running backs coach Alex Van Pelt said that Green's surgically repaired knee was a big factor. Green missed the week of practice after the Chicago game because of a concussion, and Van Pelt said when he isn't practicing scar tissue builds up in the knee.
It was obvious in the week of practice leading up to the Vikings game that he wasn't himself.
"You could see it," Van Pelt said. "With his situation with the time off, it kind of hurts him, like the bye week. He had the concussion and didn't practice for a week, that's when the scar tissue builds up in the knee that was repaired and it kind of takes him three or four days to break that scar tissue back up.

 

[TJV]

But all in all, compared to the other 31 teams, they for sure are bottom half and I would say bottom 10 definitely.

Not "definitely". According to nfl.com, the Packers finished this regular season 22nd in the league in yards per rush at 3.9. As a point of reference, Atlanta the top seed in the NFC finished 28th at 3.7.

The Packers finished this regular season 20th in the league in rushing yards per game at 106.4. Atlanta finished 29th at 87.3.

The Packers finished this regular season 16th in the league in rushing attempts per game with 27.1. Atlanta finished 26th at 23.6.

The Packers aren't in the bottom 10 in any of those categories. And BTW, they finished the regular season 5th in scoring offense at 27.1 points per game. Atlanta finished 7th at 26.2.

 

[Aaron rodgers is god]

His skill has clearly diminished but don't be stupid in downgrading what he has done for us. He gave us a constistent running game for 3 years. Since his absent we have yet to find a true runner.

 

[FrankRizzo]

According to nfl.com, the Packers finished this regular season 22nd in the league in yards per rush at 3.9.

The Packers finished this regular season 20th in the league in rushing yards per game at 106.4.

OK, thanks for the research... so bottom 10-12 in both categories. But as smart as you are, let me ask you to think about this for a minute.
Let's say you are a defensive coordinator and you are facing the Packers and their great QB and receivers.
And now let's say you are facing a great running team like the Redskins, with the legs of Alfred Morris and RG3.

Will you defend each of those offenses differently?
Surely you will right?

Teams don't gameplan to make it a paramount to stop our RBs. They put their most focus on stopping the MVP and all his great WRs and Finley. That's no secret to any of us fans here.

So with that base, it should be easier for us to run than it should be for a team like the Vikings, or Browns, or Redskins.

Despite that, our average per carry was only 3.9, and I bet that's skewed by Rodgers scrambles too.
We're thrilled at what we did to Adrian Peterson last night. He still averaged 5 per carry with us totally focusing on him.

We can't even get 4 a carry against defenses who are 1A and 1B committed to stopping our passing game. That's bad... bad blocking? Bad OL coaching? Bad RBs, or just bad luck? I don't think it's luck.

 

[GreenBlood]

At this point, Grant is a JAG.

 

[LZ13]

Keep in mind we were in a single-back setup in the years Grant had over 1000 where as most teams were multiple-back. Thankfully we are now in multiple-back, which makes a lot more sense.

I am not impressed with him, and never really was, with exceptions like the 2007 Seahawks game (as was pointed out) and a few other games through the years. Too many dead-end runs for my liking, where as our other RB's find a way to get yardage in those situations. But as I can tell here, I am definitely in the (small) minority. Sorry to get a lot of you riled up. Perhaps call this thread a day. It is a moot point anyway as it appears that MM will be primarily be using Harris. Hoping, however, that Starks can be the #2 guy for the remaining games.

 

[Shawnsta3]

I like Grant but at this point in his career, with these other backs on the roster I think he's only the 3rd best behind Dajuan Harris and Alex Green. The thing about Grant though is, he's earned McCarthy's trust. In the last 5 year's McCarthy has grown to trust him not fumbling the ball. To pick up blitzes. To know the playcall. (like where Harris messed up last week and ran on the wrong side of Rodgers) And to catch passes out of the backfield (like the one early in the game that Harris dropped)

Grant is very much so not the best RB on the roster. But he's trusted and he's got some fresh legs. What more could you ask of a dependable 5 carries a game guy?

 

[JBlood]

Grant's average is 4.3 ypc for his career. Great runners, like Barry Sanders average 1-2 ypc more. Which means Grant is not a breakaway threat, like Sanders (5.0), Jim Brown(5.2), Bo Jackson(5.4). So, he's averaged 4 ypc with few breakaway runs, which means he, on average, will get you a first down if given the ball 3 times. Not bad, but not HOF level that's for sure. BTW, he's averaged 5.3 ypc in the playoffs on 63 attempts. If he had done that for his career, he'd be looking at the HOF. We've had a lot worse runners, that's for sure.

 

[burt packerack]

he's a good pass blocker at least. But yes he has lost a step.

 

[ivo610]

This is another thread where they don't appreciate a player for what he is. He isn't elite. He is old. He is at the end of his career and just came off the street. Yet, once you realize all this, for the situation he is great. Fresh legs, runs hard, not a difficult player in the locker room, hasn't made mistakes ect.

He wasnt brought in bc he's a long term solution, he was brought in bc we had no other options