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 owners--Let's talk (1 Viewer)

sholditch

Footballguy
I'll give him the 20 on 15 against Minny when his hammy was more hurt, but what really kills me is McCarthy's playcalling. His use of his backs adverstises his play calling. He takes Grant out every single time he passes, therefore opposing defenses know that every time Grant is in the game GB is running the ball. This mickey-mouse playcalling would hamper any back's production. Is it likely to change, and if not, should owners hope for a better performance next week or try and trade him now befor he piles on another stinker?

BTW: HE only got 13 carries last game as the Packers were way too quick to abandon the run. Anyone think they learned from their loss to the Boys?

 
I'll give him the 20 on 15 against Minny when his hammy was more hurt, but what really kills me is McCarthy's playcalling. His use of his backs adverstises his play calling. He takes Grant out every single time he passes, therefore opposing defenses know that every time Grant is in the game GB is running the ball. This mickey-mouse playcalling would hamper any back's production. Is it likely to change, and if not, should owners hope for a better performance next week or try and trade him now befor he piles on another stinker?BTW: HE only got 13 carries last game as the Packers were way too quick to abandon the run. Anyone think they learned from their loss to the Boys?
With Dallas constantly in the back field, im watching and wondering, wheres the screen pass, draw, direct snap, trick play, something to slow down the rush. I guess im agreeing, but I'll hold as I can afford to use him situationally because I think he'll have some big weeks.
 
I'm optimistic for now because I thought Grant looked good when they did give him the ball last week. I think McCarthy just got a little pass happy with Rodgers starting off hot. Hopefully he tries to establish the running game more going forward.

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches.

Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
Grant owner here, I thought Jackson looked alot better also, but as mentioned before he has been running on alot of passing situations so it always 'looks' like there's more room to run on those plays. I would love to see Grant in there in the same situations and see what happens.The play calling has left Grant with alot of front lines that KNOW he's running the ball on that play....hopefully this changes but I'm not counting on it. To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
 
Yeah Ryan Grant is a great buy low right now. There is no reason why he should not have the same kinda second half that he did last year. Hopefully he starts that kinda run sooner then the second half this year.

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Uh...ok
 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Uh...ok
LOL @ Georgio Armani :unsure: ....I'm guess your a sad BJax owner, your team must suck if your rostering him!!!
 
The biggest question is not Grant's ability...it's McCarthy's obvious playcalling that telegraphs every run to the opposing DCs. The only way around this is to keep Grant in on passing downs so that it's not so completely obvious. I mean, he'll still come out on obvious passing downs but he needs to stay in on second downs unless it's 10+ yards, cause otherwise, opposing DCs know exactly what's coming every play. Grant in = run, BJax in = pass. Is McCarthy smart enough to figure this out?

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Did you even read what I wrote?
 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Uh...ok
LOL @ Georgio Armani :hophead: ....I'm guess your a sad BJax owner, your team must suck if your rostering him!!!
NEWSFLASH.... Half a season of good production does not make you a stud. Go back and look at Kevin Jones second half of the season in his rookie year.. Is he considered a stud????Continue to start Grant and his 12 carries and continue to lose. :football:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good LORD!!!! Seriously, both of you leave this thread and please do not come back. This is a thread for discussion, not bickering at each other like two women who wore the same dress. This thread is for people who want to put their heads together and make a reasonable guess as to whether the playcalling in GB will change, allowing Grant greater opportunity to run. Or if Grant still has the stuff, whatever, but the pointless nyah-nyah bickering has got to stop. Take it elsewhere.

/ :headbang:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Did you even read what I wrote?
Yeah.... you said Jackson should get more touches, umm, that is insane!!! He lost the job to Grant cuz he sucks, REMEMBER!!!
 
Good LORD!!!! Seriously, both of you leave this thread and please do not come back. This is a thread for discussion, not bickering at each other like two women who wore the same dress. This thread is for people who want to put their heads together and make a reasonable guess as to whether the playcalling in GB will change, allowing Grant greater opportunity to run. Or if Grant still has the stuff, whatever, but the pointless nyah-nyah bickering has got to stop. Take it elsewhere./ :goodposting:
Actually it says... and I quote..."Ryan Grant owners--Let's talk"THXHave a good day!!!
 
I'm still in Grant's corner. From what I've seen the past two weeks the OL is not opening any holes to speak of. Anything Jackson is getting is around the edges which is not the bread and butter of a successful running game. If they do ever find a way to open holes, Grant will do exactly what he did to Minnesota; gallop for 57 yards over and around defenders.

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Uh...ok
LOL @ Georgio Armani :rant: ....I'm guess your a sad BJax owner, your team must suck if your rostering him!!!
My reply was to all the !!!!! and then you telling everyone to relax. It was not referring to your insightful outlook into the Green Bay RB situation. Thanks for your assessment of my team. As far as the topic goes, to be honest I haven't noticed the play calling to the extent some of you are saying. I would like to think that an NFL coordinator could be less transparent if that is true.
 
The biggest question is not Grant's ability...
Actually it is.....he is nothing more than avg at best. He was just in a very good situation last year with the potent GB passing attack where Favre had everyone playing 7 in a box. ARodgers is no Favre....he looked average against a good defense in Minny and a not so good D in Dallas (see how much the Eagles and Mcnabb scored on the D as point of reference). The only good game ARodgers has had is against a bad bad bad Det team. I avoided Grant like the plague in every league.
 
I'm just speculating here, but I'm still convinced Grant will put up very good numbers the rest of the way. Once the hamstring is healthy, not only will he get more carries, but he'll also be on the field for more passing downs. That means some catches and less predictable play calling when he's on the field.

 
I'm just speculating here, but I'm still convinced Grant will put up very good numbers the rest of the way. Once the hamstring is healthy, not only will he get more carries, but he'll also be on the field for more passing downs. That means some catches and less predictable play calling when he's on the field.
Not to mention when he gets healthy, HE IS the goal line back!!!
 
Jackson's touches while the game was competitive... hardly passing situations...

2-5-GB 17 (11:53) 32-B.Jackson right guard to GB 26 for 9 yards (56-B.James; 25-P.Watkins)

1-10-GB 26 (11:13) 32-B.Jackson left end pushed ob at GB 34 for 8 yards (56-B.James; 26-K.Hamlin)

2-2-GB 34 (10:40) 32-B.Jackson right end to GB 37 for 3 yards (98-G.Ellis)

 
Jackson's touches while the game was competitive... hardly passing situations... 2-5-GB 17 (11:53) 32-B.Jackson right guard to GB 26 for 9 yards (56-B.James; 25-P.Watkins) 1-10-GB 26 (11:13) 32-B.Jackson left end pushed ob at GB 34 for 8 yards (56-B.James; 26-K.Hamlin) 2-2-GB 34 (10:40) 32-B.Jackson right end to GB 37 for 3 yards (98-G.Ellis)
Are you gonna list all his carries? Oh, wait....
 
The biggest question is not Grant's ability...it's McCarthy's obvious playcalling that telegraphs every run to the opposing DCs. The only way around this is to keep Grant in on passing downs so that it's not so completely obvious. I mean, he'll still come out on obvious passing downs but he needs to stay in on second downs unless it's 10+ yards, cause otherwise, opposing DCs know exactly what's coming every play. Grant in = run, BJax in = pass. Is McCarthy smart enough to figure this out?
Ryan Grant comes out on passing downs because he is a liability as a passblocker. The solution is not to keep him in on passing downs and possibly get your qb killed. Grant needs to improve on blitz pickup and pass blocking, period.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah.... you said Jackson should get more touches, umm, that is insane!!! He lost the job to Grant cuz he sucks, REMEMBER!!!
HMMMMM...I remember that Jackson was billed as a player that would need a year or two before he'd be ready to start, but that had all of the raw skills to become a qality NFL starter. I remember that he was then rushed into a position where they tried to start him right away, and as predicted, he struggled. I also remember that BJ's second half stats were a dramatic improvement over his first half. (There's good reason to attribute this to improvements in the O-Line, but we digress....)

Jackson was not drafted to start last year. He was drafted to start THIS year!!! Couple that with the fact that he's actually looked halfway decent, sprinkle in the fact that Grant has struggled, and rememerb that as good as Grant looked last year, his resume is actually pretty small....and your statement above becomes either

A: "insane"

or

B: un-informed.

I'll assume B for now.

Grant might be a better player then BJ, but that margin mght be a LOT smaller then you're recognizing, and until Grant is 100%, I'd say a very strong case could be made for giving BJ a heck of a lot more touches to see what he can really do!

 
I've got a lot invested in Jackson, so I follow him pretty much obsessively. And here are his stats for the last seven games (including playoffs):

48-265-5.5 and 10-85-8.5 with 58 FF Pts in 57 touches

But! Wait... he played the Lions twice! Those game shouldn't count!

Ok.

21-91-4.3 and 7-61-8.7 with 28 points in 28 touches, while playing:

CHI

SEA

NYG

MIN

DAL

Those are pretty good numbers for a still-raw player going against five quality defenses. If he develops much from here (and I believe he will), he's going to be a good starter in the NFL.

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Did you even read what I wrote?
Yeah.... you said Jackson should get more touches, umm, that is insane!!! He lost the job to Grant cuz he sucks, REMEMBER!!!
Dude. papa georgio said that, not me. Reading comprehension. Catch it!
 
Grant will likely go down as the dreaded one hit wonder.

He was very smart to lock up some guaranteed money, without that his future would be in serious jeopardy.

 
Hamstring recovery and Rodgers showing he's not afraid to pass.

I expect big things out of Grant still. Frankly Im glad Rodgers is chucking it, which in time will back the defense out of the box.

Jackson looks OK but Grant's going to get healthy and I expect when that happens he will look more like GB RB1.

 
I just traded for Grant (Graham for McNabb/Grant). I think he is unstartable until he has a 20 carry 100 yard game. Then he will be back. He is my RB3 now and will be a solid RB2 down the stretch.

IMO... They gave him a fat contract to be the starter. Brandon Jackson is the backup.

 
dont forget it gets pretty cold in GB later in the year, harder to catch the ball, easier to run it. grant owner here who's very glad he has CJ (Titans) on the team too.

 
Yeah.... you said Jackson should get more touches, umm, that is insane!!! He lost the job to Grant cuz he sucks, REMEMBER!!!
HMMMMM...I remember that Jackson was billed as a player that would need a year or two before he'd be ready to start, but that had all of the raw skills to become a qality NFL starter. I remember that he was then rushed into a position where they tried to start him right away, and as predicted, he struggled. I also remember that BJ's second half stats were a dramatic improvement over his first half. (There's good reason to attribute this to improvements in the O-Line, but we digress....)

Jackson was not drafted to start last year. He was drafted to start THIS year!!! Couple that with the fact that he's actually looked halfway decent, sprinkle in the fact that Grant has struggled, and rememerb that as good as Grant looked last year, his resume is actually pretty small....and your statement above becomes either

A: "insane"

or

B: un-informed.

I'll assume B for now.

Grant might be a better player then BJ, but that margin mght be a LOT smaller then you're recognizing, and until Grant is 100%, I'd say a very strong case could be made for giving BJ a heck of a lot more touches to see what he can really do!
Ya know, we've all heard this a million times and it's never worked out. A rookie comes into the league, does poorly, and we hear all the "he just needs a year under his belt to learn, he's a project, etc".In the end, those guys never come in, fail, have excuses made for them, and then end up being good players. Never.

 
I know he played last week, but hamstring injuries can linger for a while. He might be a good buy low but with some risk.

 
I guess I'm jaded but Jackson looked so much better than him I wondered why they would stick with Grant. I thought they needed to give Jackson more touches. Regardless of who it was they did need to give the RB more and in a variety of ways...such as the screen pass.
To me Grant just looks slower than Jackson hitting the hole right now.
Agreed. Which is a direct result of a hamstring that isn't 100% and him missing all training camp. I will say though, that I started to see flashes of the old Grant last week. Just didn't see it consistently. I think he'll be just fine in the long run, but it might take another few weeks for him to get back to 'normal.'
I tell you what, drop Grant and pick up Jackson if he looks so much better....and I'll be there to pick up Grant, i mean come on dude its week 3 and he's a stud!!! not to mention his hammy is not 100%, just relax!!!
Uh...ok
LOL @ Georgio Armani :lmao: ....I'm guess your a sad BJax owner, your team must suck if your rostering him!!!
NEWSFLASH.... Half a season of good production does not make you a stud. Go back and look at Kevin Jones second half of the season in his rookie year.. Is he considered a stud????Continue to start Grant and his 12 carries and continue to lose. :thumbdown:
Go back and look what defenses Jones played against vs. who Grant played against.Once his is back even a bit healthier...Id start Grant with confidence.
 
The biggest question is not Grant's ability...
Actually it is.....he is nothing more than avg at best. He was just in a very good situation last year with the potent GB passing attack where Favre had everyone playing 7 in a box. ARodgers is no Favre....he looked average against a good defense in Minny and a not so good D in Dallas (see how much the Eagles and Mcnabb scored on the D as point of reference). The only good game ARodgers has had is against a bad bad bad Det team. I avoided Grant like the plague in every league.
Thats right...Rodgers is more careful with the ball.He looked very good against Minny.And don't just look at Dallas' game against Philly to call that defense no good.Though, nobody expects a complete Bear homer with no objectivity to really have an opinion worth listening to on Grant or any Packer player.
 
The biggest question is not Grant's ability...it's McCarthy's obvious playcalling that telegraphs every run to the opposing DCs. The only way around this is to keep Grant in on passing downs so that it's not so completely obvious. I mean, he'll still come out on obvious passing downs but he needs to stay in on second downs unless it's 10+ yards, cause otherwise, opposing DCs know exactly what's coming every play. Grant in = run, BJax in = pass. Is McCarthy smart enough to figure this out?
Ryan Grant comes out on passing downs because he is a liability as a passblocker. The solution is not to keep him in on passing downs and possibly get your qb killed. Grant needs to improve on blitz pickup and pass blocking, period.
This might be the dumbest thing in this thread.Jackson's biggest knock is his pass protection.Grant comes out, because Jackson simply has better hands out of the backfield.Not because he cannot block.Don't speak opinions that are not true...you have it backwards on who is not good at blocking.
 
Grant will likely go down as the dreaded one hit wonder.He was very smart to lock up some guaranteed money, without that his future would be in serious jeopardy.
Another misguided soul who should not be listened to or is incapable of being objective about Ryan Grant.
 
Ya know, we've all heard this a million times and it's never worked out. A rookie comes into the league, does poorly, and we hear all the "he just needs a year under his belt to learn, he's a project, etc".In the end, those guys never come in, fail, have excuses made for them, and then end up being good players. Never.
:popcorn: The experts were sayng he'd need a year BEFORE the season started last year. You'd be right if this "excuse" were being offered after he had failed, but not in this case!He only had a couple of starts, early last year, before the line gelled, well before he supposed to be ready. Later in the season, he looked MUCH better. This year, he looks better still. EXACTLY as predicted before he ever took a single snap!Funny thing is.....he's the third down back now, already a better blocker then Grant!I'm not about to ty to argue that Grant won't win/keep the starting job. What I'm arguing is that Jackson is being prematurely written off and is likely to continue to see significant carries even when Grant is 100%.
 
Grant will likely go down as the dreaded one hit wonder.He was very smart to lock up some guaranteed money, without that his future would be in serious jeopardy.
Another misguided soul who should not be listened to or is incapable of being objective about Ryan Grant.
I completely disagree with this statement.I am objective about Ryan Grant, that is why i trust my opinion that he is a one hit wonder.Ryan Grant is to fantasy football as The Five Stairsteps, "O-o-h Child" is to music. ONE HIT WONDER.
 
Good LORD!!!! Seriously, both of you leave this thread and please do not come back. This is a thread for discussion, not bickering at each other like two women who wore the same dress. This thread is for people who want to put their heads together and make a reasonable guess as to whether the playcalling in GB will change, allowing Grant greater opportunity to run. Or if Grant still has the stuff, whatever, but the pointless nyah-nyah bickering has got to stop. Take it elsewhere.

/ :lmao:
Actually it says... and I quote..."Ryan Grant owners--Let's talk"THX

Have a good day!!!
Talk, not bicker. Just keep it on topic please and respect others opinionsThere have been some good points raised in this thread and some not so good ones:

Grant does not seem to be a liability as a blocker. However, he does seem to come out on all passing downs, but we should all remember that it's Jackson whose pass-blocking has been called into question.

Rodgers, I think, has had 1 great game (against Detroit) one good game (against Dallas) and one average game (against Minnesota). Personally, I blame the transparency of the playcalling against Dallas for him not having more success. I think anyone who has watched him play has seen a guy with a good, accurate arm who takes care of the football and seems capable of making all the throws. Originally I was down on Grant cause I thought it would take Rodgers all year to acclimate to game action. From what I have seen, he seems more than capable of creating the passing threat that Brett did. So 8 in the box shouldn't be Grant's problem.

Jackson could be a threat all year and keep Grant out on passing downs, which will severely limit his upside. But as I said before, having one back that is always in on running plays and one that is always in on passing plays broadcasts your playbook and surely someone must have figured that out.

Here is an excerpt from the post-game presser that is relevant to this discussion:

You seemed at times to try and run the ball. Was that part of the game plan and why couldn't you run the ball more effectively?)

The most important thing about running the football once again is attempts, in my view. You have to get the attempts up. We really didn't do a very good job of sustaining drives. You can say whatever you want, the run game, the passing game. But the times we were able to commit to the runs throughout the series that was longer than three plays, I think it was productive. We need to do a better job of that. I was not very pleased with the production we had on first down offensively. The injury to James Jones kind of set us aside there for a few series there in the second quarter and I probably didn't do a very good job of adjusting quick enough to that.

He seems to be saying what we want to hear, that they will run more in the future. Forte had a fairly easy time running against TB so maybe there is hope for Grant this weekend.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
renesauz said:
FreeBaGeL said:
Ya know, we've all heard this a million times and it's never worked out. A rookie comes into the league, does poorly, and we hear all the "he just needs a year under his belt to learn, he's a project, etc".In the end, those guys never come in, fail, have excuses made for them, and then end up being good players. Never.
:lmao: The experts were sayng he'd need a year BEFORE the season started last year. You'd be right if this "excuse" were being offered after he had failed, but not in this case!He only had a couple of starts, early last year, before the line gelled, well before he supposed to be ready. Later in the season, he looked MUCH better. This year, he looks better still. EXACTLY as predicted before he ever took a single snap!Funny thing is.....he's the third down back now, already a better blocker then Grant!I'm not about to ty to argue that Grant won't win/keep the starting job. What I'm arguing is that Jackson is being prematurely written off and is likely to continue to see significant carries even when Grant is 100%.
Where are you getting that Jackson is already a better blocker than Grant?
 
People will see a whole new Grant this week. The combination of his hammy being better and Scott Wells back at center (and more importantly, Tony Moll out at guard) will improve his output.

 
FreeBaGeL said:
Ya know, we've all heard this a million times and it's never worked out. A rookie comes into the league, does poorly, and we hear all the "he just needs a year under his belt to learn, he's a project, etc".In the end, those guys never come in, fail, have excuses made for them, and then end up being good players. Never.
Thomas Jones down?
 
renesauz said:
FreeBaGeL said:
Ya know, we've all heard this a million times and it's never worked out. A rookie comes into the league, does poorly, and we hear all the "he just needs a year under his belt to learn, he's a project, etc".In the end, those guys never come in, fail, have excuses made for them, and then end up being good players. Never.
:football: The experts were sayng he'd need a year BEFORE the season started last year. You'd be right if this "excuse" were being offered after he had failed, but not in this case!He only had a couple of starts, early last year, before the line gelled, well before he supposed to be ready. Later in the season, he looked MUCH better. This year, he looks better still. EXACTLY as predicted before he ever took a single snap!Funny thing is.....he's the third down back now, already a better blocker then Grant!I'm not about to ty to argue that Grant won't win/keep the starting job. What I'm arguing is that Jackson is being prematurely written off and is likely to continue to see significant carries even when Grant is 100%.
Where are you getting that Jackson is already a better blocker than Grant?
My mistake... a better way to put it would be to say that obviously he isn't a huge liability, or he would NOT be in on passing downs, let alone be the primary back on pasing downs!Right now, GB smells like a full-fledged RBBC. That's assuming the pro-Grant posters are correct (that he is a stud in the making). I'm neither sold on, nor truly sold against Grant...I think he is and will be a solid NFL RB...but I do think Jackson will be good too, and too many pro-Grant posters are ignoring that fact.BOTH OF THESE GUYS ARE YOUNG.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top