What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Ryan Grant injures hand? any details? (1 Viewer)

Black

Footballguy
Grant went out in the 2nd Quarter with an injured hand. They seemed to expect him to return. Br. Jackson has been getting the carries since then...anyone have any details?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok... smart guy... which RB would you want?Career rushing yards/carry - 4.5 and getting betterCareer receiving yards/catch - 7.2orCareer rushing yards/carry - 4.4 and getting worseCareer receiving yards/catch - 4.7And that first set of numbers includes those first three games last season when a completely undeveloped Jackson was thrown to the wolves.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok... smart guy... which RB would you want?Career rushing yards/carry - 4.5 and getting betterCareer receiving yards/catch - 7.2orCareer rushing yards/carry - 4.4 and getting worseCareer receiving yards/catch - 4.7And that first set of numbers includes those first three games last season when a completely undeveloped Jackson was thrown to the wolves.
Not sure it's quite as cut and dry as that. If it is, then Grant will never start another game for GB unless Jackson gets hurt. Grants been very good the last few weeks, and the first few weeks of the season was hampered by a hamstring injury. He's been playing well. Jackson looked very good today and could certainly force more playing time, but I don't think it's a sure thing he just replaced Grant as the primary ball carrier.
 
They reported during the game he was fine and they were going with Jackson because he was the "hot hand".
I think there is more to the injury, you do not sit your #1 RB and give him ZERO looks just to ride the hot hand in a close game.
 
Not sure it's quite as cut and dry as that.
I don't think it's that cut and dry either. But I do think it's more likely than not that Jackson is the starter by opening day 2009. He does more things.Grant did have three good games in a row, but then didn't do anything against the Saints or in the first half today. And Jackson looked very good.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
with GB playing HOU at home next week, I hope we get a clear-cut starter, and yes i hope it's Brandon Jackson !!! :popcorn:

 
wdcrob said:
MCguidance said:
Ok... smart guy... which RB would you want?Career rushing yards/carry - 4.5 and getting betterCareer receiving yards/catch - 7.2orCareer rushing yards/carry - 4.4 and getting worseCareer receiving yards/catch - 4.7And that first set of numbers includes those first three games last season when a completely undeveloped Jackson was thrown to the wolves.
How about this guy:Career rushing yards/carry - 4.4 and getting worseCareer receiving yards/catch - 7.5
 
duece2626 said:
wdcrob said:
finito said:
Not sure it's quite as cut and dry as that.
I don't think it's that cut and dry either. But I do think it's more likely than not that Jackson is the starter by opening day 2009. He does more things.
:tinfoilhat:
It's not as far-fetched as you must think it is based upon you're well thought out reply. Jackson was a 2nd round draft pick last year. Grant was acquired for a 6th round draft pick. Jackson is getting paid 2nd rounder money...not breaking the bank but compensated decently nonetheless. Grant signed a big extension. However I believe the Packers can cut him at any time following this season without taking much of a cap hit. It's filled with performance incentives and non-guaranteed money.Do I think Grant gets cut? Nope. Do I think he loses a lot of time to a guy the Packers liked enough to use a 2nd rounder on? Yep. Remember Ted Thompson looks at 2nd rounders like gold. You get a talented player at a fraction of the cost of a first rounder. Any player picked in the second round by Green Bay is a player they expect more out of than to make a career as a backup.
 
For a RB who suffered a hamstring injury in the preseason, didn't play in any preseason games or in training camp, it is going to take awhile to get things together. Lets look at a few of the top defenses he played against this year (YES, I left out the bad outings):

WEEK 01 - MIN - 12 / 92 = 7.67 yds/att

WEEK 09 - TEN - 20 / 86 = 4.30 yds/att

WEEK 10 - MIN - 16 / 75 = 4.69 yds/att

WEEK 11 - CHI - 25 / 145 = 5.80 yds/att (Same Chicago team that shut down one of the best rushing tandems in the league the week earlier - held TENN to 0.69 yds/att).

**I agree he did not look good today, but to say he is done and B.Jackson is the man is hilarious after seeing how well he has done the previous 3 weeks against top rush defenses. There is a reason Jackson is NOT the starter this year and was NOT last year.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
B.Jackson is nothing but a COP RB at this level, IMHO. I don't understand why the Packers sat Grant in a huge game with only a bruise, but who am I as a Viking fan to question the wisdom of the Packer's coaching staff. You reap what you sow, as the Packers found out when they could have really used a TD late in the 4th from the 1 yard line and could not get it in.

2-1-CAR1 (3:01) B.Jackson right tackle to CAR 1 for no gain (J.Beason, C.Johnson).

3-1-CAR1 (2:19) J.Kuhn up the middle to CAR 1 for no gain (D.Lewis, J.Peppers).

 
This is what Sportsline has

News: In the Packers' 35-31 loss vs. the Panthers in Week 13, RB Ryan Grant left in the first half with a thumb injury, according to head coach Mike McCarthy. He did not return and Brandon Jackson took his reps. Grant had 12 carries for 39 yards in the game. "He had a thumb injury. I just felt that he was having trouble with the ball carriage. That's why we did not go with him in the second half," McCarthy said.
 
springroll said:
dmac37 said:
Stinger Ray said:
They reported during the game he was fine and they were going with Jackson because he was the "hot hand".
I think there is more to the injury, you do not sit your #1 RB and give him ZERO looks just to ride the hot hand in a close game.
you do if he is not very good.I am not saying 100% thats the case, just saying that if your RB is not good, you might not stick with him.
So why bring up "you do if he is not very good".Why even make that statement unless you just don't think he is very good?
 
wdcrob said:
finito said:
Not sure it's quite as cut and dry as that.
I don't think it's that cut and dry either. But I do think it's more likely than not that Jackson is the starter by opening day 2009. He does more things.Grant did have three good games in a row, but then didn't do anything against the Saints or in the first half today. And Jackson looked very good.
He ran pretty well against the Saints in the first half...then turned around and the team was down 17 pretty quick in the 2nd half and did not really get to do much in the 2nd half.Hard to just say he did not look good that day.People talked about RBBC all the early season and it never happened.They talked about Jackson taking over this year and it has yet to happen.Ill believe it when I see it.Could they? Sure, if Jackson keeps playing this well and TT sees another RB he would rather have rather than giving Grant his bonus this offseason...it sure could just out of a #s game.Either way, if it means Jackson is finally living up to his draft spot..>Im pretty happy about that as a Packer fan.
 
He ran pretty well against the Saints in the first half...then turned around and the team was down 17 pretty quick in the 2nd half and did not really get to do much in the 2nd half.Hard to just say he did not look good that day.
Good stuff...please post any news on the actual injury and how it might affect the lineup next week.I have noticed that in general, Br.Jax is used on passing downs, so if they were behind, it's plausible that every down was a passing down in the 2nd half, so that's why RGrant sat.
 
64 on 16 carries vs the Saints is not good. It's bad. The Saints give up 4.2 per rush. And Carolina gives up 4.1.

Which is probably why the Packers were unhappy about Grant putting up 28 for 103 (3.7 ypc) in those two games. Especially if they think the O-line is blocking better than average.

And I'm not saying Grant sucks - I'm just saying that I think Jackson's going to be better. I've thought that he was a legit #1 NFL RB since he was drafted (once he developed). Based on his bulking up to 220 and his 5.5 yards per carry this year I'm feeling more confident about that prediction.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And I'm not saying Grant sucks - I'm just saying that I think Jackson's going to be better. I've thought that he was a legit #1 NFL RB since he was drafted (once he developed). Based on his bulking up to 220 and his 5.5 yards per carry this year I'm feeling more confident about that prediction.
I've watched as much of Jackson as anyone (from Nebraska). He's not a feature back. He wasn't even one on the college level.
 
Seems everytime Grant doesnt wow, he gets replaced by the guy who shows flashes.

Perhaps the most overrated discussion of the year.

Grant looks to have the floor of a TD side of any RBBC with Jackson.

Floor.

 
And I'm not saying Grant sucks - I'm just saying that I think Jackson's going to be better. I've thought that he was a legit #1 NFL RB since he was drafted (once he developed). Based on his bulking up to 220 and his 5.5 yards per carry this year I'm feeling more confident about that prediction.
I've watched as much of Jackson as anyone (from Nebraska). He's not a feature back. He wasn't even one on the college level.
And I disagree. Time will tell.But here are the backs taken in the 2nd+ round since 1998 that shared some characteristics with Jackson that suggests they'll develop a great deal AFTER they reach the NFL. The number after the name can be thought of as a measure of their improvement in their pro career compared to their college career (that's not exactly right, but it's close enough for this topic):Brandon Jackson 13 Clinton Portis 12 Maurice Jones-Drew 10 Frank Gore 9 Ray Rice 9 Domanick Williams 7 Ahman Green 6 That's a damn good list to be on IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grant had a great year last year. And Jackson wasn't NFL-ready in 2007.

Look, I could be wrong. The point is that I'm not just jumping on the bandwagon.

 
And I'm not saying Grant sucks - I'm just saying that I think Jackson's going to be better. I've thought that he was a legit #1 NFL RB since he was drafted (once he developed). Based on his bulking up to 220 and his 5.5 yards per carry this year I'm feeling more confident about that prediction.
I've watched as much of Jackson as anyone (from Nebraska). He's not a feature back. He wasn't even one on the college level.
And I disagree. Time will tell.But here are the backs taken in the 2nd+ round since 1998 that shared some characteristics with Jackson that suggests they'll develop a great deal AFTER they reach the NFL. The number after the name can be thought of as a measure of their improvement in their pro career compared to their college career (that's not exactly right, but it's close enough for this topic):

Brandon Jackson 13

Clinton Portis 12

Maurice Jones-Drew 10

Frank Gore 9

Ray Rice 9

Domanick Williams 7

Ahman Green 6

That's a damn good list to be on IMO.
Can you be more specific? I'd prefer to think of the numer as whatever it actually is. If you're comparing Jackson to Portis or MJD, I'd like to know what links them.
 
Can you be more specific? I'd prefer to think of the numer as whatever it actually is. If you're comparing Jackson to Portis or MJD, I'd like to know what links them.
I'm not going to say anything else about the details until I know if the model has predictive power instead of just describing what's already happened.But if I'm right Brandon Jackson is can't miss barring injury. There are a few other guys who could tell me if I'm on the right track or not, but Jackson's the gold standard. Which is why I've followed him so closely and gotten a little ahead of myself today.
 
Can you be more specific? I'd prefer to think of the numer as whatever it actually is. If you're comparing Jackson to Portis or MJD, I'd like to know what links them.
I'm not going to say anything else about the details until I know if the model has predictive power instead of just describing what's already happened.But if I'm right Brandon Jackson is can't miss barring injury. There are a few other guys who could tell me if I'm on the right track or not, but Jackson's the gold standard. Which is why I've followed him so closely and gotten a little ahead of myself today.
You cannot be serious here. LOL @ Jackson being "can't miss" and the "gold standard".
 
Grant had a great year last year. And Jackson wasn't NFL-ready in 2007.Look, I could be wrong. The point is that I'm not just jumping on the bandwagon.
I'm not jumping on the bandwagon just yet either, but Jackson did look very solid today. That part is not up for debate.
 
springroll said:
dmac37 said:
Stinger Ray said:
They reported during the game he was fine and they were going with Jackson because he was the "hot hand".
I think there is more to the injury, you do not sit your #1 RB and give him ZERO looks just to ride the hot hand in a close game.
you do if he is not very good.I am not saying 100% thats the case, just saying that if your RB is not good, you might not stick with him.
So why bring up "you do if he is not very good".Why even make that statement unless you just don't think he is very good?
this isnt about what I think. It is about what the people who bench him think. If they have lost confidence in him, well then they would bench him. I replied to a post that claimed you would not sit your #1. Obviously the scenario I described would be a reason.
 
Considering how Ray Rice had an extremely successful college career (he would've had a shot at Dayne's career rushing record if he came back this year), I have no clue what your "model" is supposed to be saying.

 
And I'm not saying Grant sucks - I'm just saying that I think Jackson's going to be better. I've thought that he was a legit #1 NFL RB since he was drafted (once he developed). Based on his bulking up to 220 and his 5.5 yards per carry this year I'm feeling more confident about that prediction.
I've watched as much of Jackson as anyone (from Nebraska). He's not a feature back. He wasn't even one on the college level.
And I disagree. Time will tell.But here are the backs taken in the 2nd+ round since 1998 that shared some characteristics with Jackson that suggests they'll develop a great deal AFTER they reach the NFL. The number after the name can be thought of as a measure of their improvement in their pro career compared to their college career (that's not exactly right, but it's close enough for this topic):Brandon Jackson 13 Clinton Portis 12 Maurice Jones-Drew 10 Frank Gore 9 Ray Rice 9 Domanick Williams 7 Ahman Green 6 That's a damn good list to be on IMO.
what characteristics are you talking about? If you compare the college careers of everybody outside of Domanick Davis, it's not even freakin' close. Jackson barely broke 1000 yards in college and may not have if I remember correctly. Jackson was overrated because he was a part of a very weak RB class. Grant has proven he can get it done, and it's not like he's washed up all of a sudden.I have no idea what you base your manlove for Jackson on, he's far from the answer. I said from the beginning that he will be a solid NFL contributor ala Kevin Faulk, but never a feature guy. Comparing him to guys on that list is ridiculous especially if you conjuring some BMI or whatever. It's not combine numbers cause Jackson really didn't have that great of #'s outside of 1 drill I think it was the shuttle or something
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CURRENT THREAD: Ryan Grant injures hand? any details?
There's nothing wrong with him. He could have played, but was effectively benched for the second half.
Wrong. He has a sprained thumb.
Ok.There's nothing wrong with him that would have kept him out of the game if the coaches had wanted him to play.

Feel better?
Please link this to a Packer's coaching source, TIA. If you can't link, you're flat out lying about your unfounded opinion being news.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top