Brandon Jackson receiving high praise (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

So if you haven't heard of people, they don't exist? Their opinions don't matter?I could have quoted more... I just didn't have the time

Not at all...nor did I claim as much or even insinuate that...but when you make a claim about "when everyone on these boards couldn't love him enough." and the best you could come up with is a few Packer fans who don't post enough to even be recognized right away as the regulars in Packer threads...your point is a bit hollow.

 

[sho nuff]

I am avoiding the Pack running game for this reason. Jackson started to come on at the end of the season and iirc he was a first or second round pick, so there is probably some pressure from the FO to use him.

You need to put down that crack pipe man. Have you seen them both play?Rashan Salaam was a high pick too and Priest was never drafted. Who was better?He came on? In frigid Chicago he had 3 carries for 25 yards and 113 yards vs DETROIT in a meaningless game. He had one good game. He'll have to improve greatly to even be the backup. He doesn't block well or catch the ball well. I hope everyone avoids the GB running game.

Ummm...actually he had problems blocking earlier in the year but was praised at least by his starting QB now for how he is doing.Does not catch the ball well? Umm...yes, he actually does.

 

[bcr8f]

So if you haven't heard of people, they don't exist? Their opinions don't matter?I could have quoted more... I just didn't have the time

Not at all...nor did I claim as much or even insinuate that...but when you make a claim about "when everyone on these boards couldn't love him enough." and the best you could come up with is a few Packer fans who don't post enough to even be recognized right away as the regulars in Packer threads...your point is a bit hollow.

Those of us who watched training camp and posted what we saw sure weren't gushing over anyone. I said it's a passing team and hopefully the running game with develop in time, but who knew who it would even be?

 

[bcr8f]

I am avoiding the Pack running game for this reason. Jackson started to come on at the end of the season and iirc he was a first or second round pick, so there is probably some pressure from the FO to use him.

You need to put down that crack pipe man. Have you seen them both play?Rashan Salaam was a high pick too and Priest was never drafted. Who was better?He came on? In frigid Chicago he had 3 carries for 25 yards and 113 yards vs DETROIT in a meaningless game. He had one good game. He'll have to improve greatly to even be the backup. He doesn't block well or catch the ball well. I hope everyone avoids the GB running game.

Ummm...actually he had problems blocking earlier in the year but was praised at least by his starting QB now for how he is doing.Does not catch the ball well? Umm...yes, he actually does.

You're posting opinions as facts. Look up targets. The last 3 games he had 5 and caught 3. His starting QB naturally will say he's doing well. What do you expect?He isn't in pads yet or battling defenders. Geez.

 

[Kleck]

The only Pakers fan I knew that didn't like the pick was 'packerfan'...

Flawed was against the pick more than any Packer fan that I can remember. And IIRC, Flawed also lives in Nebraska. I was in the camp that thought Jackson was raw and would need polishing and time to mature.

 

[switz]

I honestly don't remember any of those quotes. I seem to remember that wdcrob and I were almost on an island in praising him, but maybe I just have a martyr complex or something, LOL.Anyway, I was mostly joking with you. When Felix Jones hits it big, I'll bump your threads. :(

M'eh... I was having a bit of a bad day. Huge project needed to be done, I was waiting on some stuff to finish it when I popped in here. Just finished work and it's 11:25 on a Friday night. Yuck.

 

[Tecmo]

The Ryan Grant contract situation is very interesting. Their low tender could be interpreted as take this deal and 'show me again' as Grant would still be an exclusive rights free agent in 09. OR it could be interpreted as a lowball tender as motivation to work out a long term deal. But how hard is it to work out a deal when the #s aren't big at all? The $370k is right around veteran minimum for a tender. The Pack seem to be squabbling over peanuts if that is the case. It's not like Ryan Grant has much leverage, he would probably jump at a contract that payed him $500k this year with a small signing bonus. I just don't get the business side of the NFL sometimes, Grant does deserve a little something you would think

I'm not sure about this but I am assuming a team offers a low tender to keep exclusive rights to that player so they are not an UFA? I don't know but my guess is this post might be reading a lot more into this. I take it as simply you offer the minimum tender offer to keep your exclusive rights while you negotiate a deal.

you're right, i am reading too much into the $370k. teams just offer the minimum tender to keep the player from becoming a free agent. Grant has to work out a new contract or sign that tender if he wants to play

 

[mcintyre1]

I am avoiding the Pack running game for this reason. Jackson started to come on at the end of the season and iirc he was a first or second round pick, so there is probably some pressure from the FO to use him.

You need to put down that crack pipe man. Have you seen them both play?Rashan Salaam was a high pick too and Priest was never drafted. Who was better?He came on? In frigid Chicago he had 3 carries for 25 yards and 113 yards vs DETROIT in a meaningless game. He had one good game. He'll have to improve greatly to even be the backup. He doesn't block well or catch the ball well. I hope everyone avoids the GB running game.

Ummm...actually he had problems blocking earlier in the year but was praised at least by his starting QB now for how he is doing.Does not catch the ball well? Umm...yes, he actually does.

You're posting opinions as facts. Look up targets. The last 3 games he had 5 and caught 3. His starting QB naturally will say he's doing well. What do you expect?He isn't in pads yet or battling defenders. Geez.

You're using a sample size of 5 targets to determine that he's not good at catching the ball? Ok.

 

[sho nuff]

I am avoiding the Pack running game for this reason. Jackson started to come on at the end of the season and iirc he was a first or second round pick, so there is probably some pressure from the FO to use him.

You need to put down that crack pipe man. Have you seen them both play?Rashan Salaam was a high pick too and Priest was never drafted. Who was better?He came on? In frigid Chicago he had 3 carries for 25 yards and 113 yards vs DETROIT in a meaningless game. He had one good game. He'll have to improve greatly to even be the backup. He doesn't block well or catch the ball well. I hope everyone avoids the GB running game.

Ummm...actually he had problems blocking earlier in the year but was praised at least by his starting QB now for how he is doing.Does not catch the ball well? Umm...yes, he actually does.

You're posting opinions as facts. Look up targets. The last 3 games he had 5 and caught 3. His starting QB naturally will say he's doing well. What do you expect?He isn't in pads yet or battling defenders. Geez.

Im posting the opinions of his QB over your opinion about his blocking.Look up targets? That is not a sign of his ability...its a sign of how many times it was thrown to him.In the last 3 games...he was not the starting tailback and only got a majority of the playing time once.

 

[sho nuff]

I am avoiding the Pack running game for this reason. Jackson started to come on at the end of the season and iirc he was a first or second round pick, so there is probably some pressure from the FO to use him.

You need to put down that crack pipe man. Have you seen them both play?Rashan Salaam was a high pick too and Priest was never drafted. Who was better?He came on? In frigid Chicago he had 3 carries for 25 yards and 113 yards vs DETROIT in a meaningless game. He had one good game. He'll have to improve greatly to even be the backup. He doesn't block well or catch the ball well. I hope everyone avoids the GB running game.

Ummm...actually he had problems blocking earlier in the year but was praised at least by his starting QB now for how he is doing.Does not catch the ball well? Umm...yes, he actually does.

You're posting opinions as facts. Look up targets. The last 3 games he had 5 and caught 3. His starting QB naturally will say he's doing well. What do you expect?He isn't in pads yet or battling defenders. Geez.

You're using a sample size of 5 targets to determine that he's not good at catching the ball? Ok.

Over a 3 game period where he was the feature back for only part of the Lions game.

 

[Spike]

Some good stuff in this thread. I agree, just because a rookie guy who came out early and 'struggled' doesn't mean he won't 'get it' down the road. I'm sure that's a lot of pressure when everyone expects you to be the guy.

He was an underclassman that only started one year. I think most people expected a learning curve, but those who didn't were certainly disappointed.

IIRC, a common thread I saw about Jackson (right around last year's draft) was that it might take him a year or so to "get it".For someone who, as was stated above, "...was an underclassman that only started one year.", he's really about where he should be in his development cycle.

 

[Donnybrook]

Brandon Jackson's 1st three games played last year: 38 rushes, 97 yards (2.5/rush); 11 receptions, 81 yards (7.4/rec)

Brandon Jackson's last three games played in 2007: 31 carries, 172 yards (5.6/rush); 4 receptions, 48 yards (12.0/rec)

I own him in all five dynasties, so obviously am vested - but I own him because if ever there was a 2nd round+ guy that fit the model of a successful NFL RB it's Brandon Jackson. Ryan Grant has obviously put up a roadblock as far as opportunity goes, but Jackson is almost certainly talented enough to become a quality starter in the NFL.

Based on what? 113 yard against Detroit doesn’t impress me much. I think any RB that got 20 carries against Detroit could have produced the same type of numbers. Who recalls when Artose Pinner ran for 125 yards and 3 TDs against Detroit the year before?

 

[bcr8f]

Some good stuff in this thread. I agree, just because a rookie guy who came out early and 'struggled' doesn't mean he won't 'get it' down the road. I'm sure that's a lot of pressure when everyone expects you to be the guy.

He was an underclassman that only started one year. I think most people expected a learning curve, but those who didn't were certainly disappointed.

IIRC, a common thread I saw about Jackson (right around last year's draft) was that it might take him a year or so to "get it".For someone who, as was stated above, "...was an underclassman that only started one year.", he's really about where he should be in his development cycle.

Too bad he "got it" after Ryan Grant locked down the starter job.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Based on what? 113 yard against Detroit doesn’t impress me much. I think any RB that got 20 carries against Detroit could have produced the same type of numbers. Who recalls when Artose Pinner ran for 125 yards and 3 TDs against Detroit the year before?

You're wrong about Detroit. Opponents in 2007, rushes, average Y/CGB 46 6.22PHI 28 6.00SD 49 5.45MIN 59 5.22TB 23 4.96DAL 15 4.80OAK 20 4.45WAS 32 3.69KC 18 3.50CHI 35 3.49ARI 24 3.12NYG 22 3.05DEN 15 2.87They were a below average run D last year, but closer to the average than the worst. Jackson also managed a similar Y/C late in the season on limited carries vs the Bears and Seahawks.But my prediction has nothing to do with this. It's based on a model. It could be wrong, but it seems awfully good at slotting RBs into the right tiers and I've got more faith in it than I do subjective opinion (mine or anyone else's).

 

[bcr8f]

Michael Turner did great too but LT never really got hurt.

Jackson isn't going to take the job from Grant unless he gets hurt. Period. You can post all the numbers you like but all it does is move him up the depth chart or maybe turn him into a 3rd down back.

Grant isn't going to give up his job over a contract either. He is the perfect player for this offense. He wouldn't be nearly as good on any other team.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Michael Turner did great too but LT never really got hurt. Jackson isn't going to take the job from Grant unless he gets hurt. Period. You can post all the numbers you like but all it does is move him up the depth chart or maybe turn him into a 3rd down back.Grant isn't going to give up his job over a contract either. He is the perfect player for this offense. He wouldn't be nearly as good on any other team.

Why do people keep arguing about things I didn't say? My only comment is that Jackson is talented enough to start and do well in the NFL.I do think that good backs virtually always find a way though. Sometimes it takes longer than others, but if you can play you'll always get a shot. Turner's a great example.btw... just saw this, very good news for him if true:

It doesn't take a peek at the scale to notice running back Brandon Jackson is bigger and buffer than he was when he arrived in Green Bay as a rookie last May.Jackson said Wednesday he's added 10 to 15 pounds of "the right kind of weight" during the offseason, and his wide 5-foot-10 frame is carrying 220 pounds, 8 more than his listed weight in 2007.

The coaches have also said he's more explosive based on whatever stats they keep during weight training.

 

[sho nuff]

Michael Turner did great too but LT never really got hurt.

Jackson isn't going to take the job from Grant unless he gets hurt. Period. You can post all the numbers you like but all it does is move him up the depth chart or maybe turn him into a 3rd down back.

Grant isn't going to give up his job over a contract either. He is the perfect player for this offense. He wouldn't be nearly as good on any other team.

That is where I think he is barring injury.

 

[Donnybrook]

Based on what? 113 yard against Detroit doesn’t impress me much. I think any RB that got 20 carries against Detroit could have produced the same type of numbers. Who recalls when Artose Pinner ran for 125 yards and 3 TDs against Detroit the year before?

You're wrong about Detroit. Opponents in 2007, rushes, average Y/CGB 46 6.22

PHI 28 6.00

SD 49 5.45

MIN 59 5.22

TB 23 4.96

DAL 15 4.80

OAK 20 4.45

WAS 32 3.69

KC 18 3.50

CHI 35 3.49

ARI 24 3.12

NYG 22 3.05

DEN 15 2.87

They were a below average run D last year, but closer to the average than the worst. Jackson also managed a similar Y/C late in the season on limited carries vs the Bears and Seahawks.

But my prediction has nothing to do with this. It's based on a model. It could be wrong, but it seems awfully good at slotting RBs into the right tiers and I've got more faith in it than I do subjective opinion (mine or anyone else's).

Thanks for showing me the error of my ways. In the same game, R. Grant gets 6 carries for 57 yards and a TD. That works out to be an impressive 9.5 yard per carry.

In the previous game vs Detroit, Ryan Grant gets 15 carries for 101 yards and a TD. 6.7 yards per carry. Jackson didn't get a carry probably because Green Bay had a desire to win that game.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

In the same game, R. Grant gets 6 carries for 57 yards and a TD. That works out to be an impressive 9.5 yard per carry. In the previous game vs Detroit, Ryan Grant gets 15 carries for 101 yards and a TD. 6.7 yards per carry.

Sorry, I misunderstood this:

I think any RB that got 20 carries against Detroit could have produced the same type of numbers.

Didn't realize we were talking about Ryan Grant.And for like the 10th time... I'm not saying Jackson's a better back than Ryan Grant. Or will take his job. Just that I wouldn't be against Jackson at this point. YMMV

 

[Bruce Leroy]

I'm ok with a RBBC plan of Grant/Jackson. (If that's what happens) Sure it sucks for fantasy but it's great if you're a Packer fan.

 

[sholditch]

LOL, fantasy footballers really are the most hard-headed, stubborn group of people that are totally unwilling to learn from the past, aren't they? That's not a knock on anyone, it's just the nature of this game.How many times have we seen this? A first year starter (whether it be a rookie or via some other means) fails and in the next offseason the reports come out that he looks so good in practice that a cancer patient watching him is instantly cured, while everyone on the boards writes off year 1 to "adjusting to the NFL game" or "learning the game" after which he soon falls off the face of the planet.Get over it people, it doesn't take 3 years for a RB to learn how to run the football. The "he really hasn't played RB that long excuse" has nothing backing it up either. Willie Parker barely had a carry after high school and had no problem jumping right in. Hell, we don't even have to leave the team as Ryan Grant didn't have all that much more experience than Jackson in college and hit his stride in game 1 with the Packers.I'll see you guys next year when Matt Forte or Kevin Smith have fallen flat on their face and we all hear about how they look like the next incarnation of Walter Payton in practice just before they fall off the face of the fantasy football planet.

The same Wiilie Parker that had all of 32 carries his 1st year in the league?