Zero2Cool
13 years ago
http://sportsradiointerviews.com/2011/07/11/nfl-lockout-green-bay-packers-ryan-grant/ 

After missing most of last year with an injury, are you still considered the starter?:

“I would think so. I don’t know. From what I’ve heard, that’s the conversation that was told to me. … I was told that by [former running backs coach Edgar Bennett], initially. Jerry [Fontenot, the new position coach] didn’t tell me that anything changed. Jerry told me that as of right now I’m still the leader of the backfield and the expectations won’t change. … I do believe there will be competition, which is fine. I’m all for that.”



I think it goes without saying there will be a competition, since that's what Mike McCarthy and Ted Thompson preach. I also think Ryan Grant has the upper hand on starting because of his age and contract, the Packers would be more wise to wear him out this year, while giving James Starks some reps to see if he's worth starting next season.


I think we've discussed this topic a few times, but felt the article contained some interesting quotes from Ryan Grant himself.
UserPostedImage
beast
13 years ago
After Ahman Green Mike McCarthy tried RB by committee which it seems a lot in the league have turned to. But Mike McCarthy didn't like it, and changed it back to the feature back role with Grant being that guy once he stepped up.

I'm expecting if everyone is healthy for to start out as a feature back in the preseason, and if Starks practices well, plays well and etc (or if Grant doesn't) that Mike McCarthy will slowly give the RB by committee another shot, with the committee being Grant and Stark... i expect Grant to get more carries

Also Green might be able to compete for the 3rd down role, Grant nor Starks are the best blockers and Green showed some skill for it at the college level, as well as pass catching. I don't think Green has the power that Starks has, but they'll probably have Kuhn in the 3rd down plays as well.

UserPostedImage
Tezzy
13 years ago
I don't know if leader necessarily equates to the starter. But I still think if healthy as can be and he hasn't lost what he already had, I thnk Grant remains the starter. To the point about being the backfield leader, I think he showed a lot of that last season. I saw him actively engaged with the running backs group on the sideline and one of their loudest cheerleaders. If he loses out to fair competition I think he will be gracious in whatever capacity is asked of him.

The contract/lifespan idea I think holds a lot of water as well and I am sure will be part of the equation.
On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."
Rockmolder
13 years ago

After Ahman Green Mike McCarthy tried RB by committee which it seems a lot in the league have turned to. But Mike McCarthy didn't like it, and changed it back to the feature back role with Grant being that guy once he stepped up.

I'm expecting if everyone is healthy for to start out as a feature back in the preseason, and if Starks practices well, plays well and etc (or if Grant doesn't) that Mike McCarthy will slowly give the RB by committee another shot, with the committee being Grant and Stark... i expect Grant to get more carries

Also Green might be able to compete for the 3rd down role, Grant nor Starks are the best blockers and Green showed some skill for it at the college level, as well as pass catching. I don't think Green has the power that Starks has, but they'll probably have Kuhn in the 3rd down plays as well.

Originally Posted by: beast 



There's another reason for this, though... At first, Mike McCarthy was pretty much forced into a RB by committee style. I mean, we had Morency, Wynn, Herron (arguably), Jackson and Grant... And at that time, Grant was way down the depth chart, not seeing any playing time.

The reason he got in was because of both injuries and because of that committee build, which, I believe, was purely to actually find someone who could run the ball decently. Just throw them out there, hoping to find someone who can run it decently.

When we found Grant, that obviously stopped.

And the reason it didn't really come back was the lack of talent behind him, I think.

So really, it's a gamble right now. You have to use Starks in some way, you have to get Grant out there carrying the load and you would like to see something out of Green. With the talent we have now, I do see more of a committee-like build. Something like we had under Sherman, maybe, in, let's say, 2003.

Share about 150 carries between Starks (majority) and Green (Like Davenport and Fisher, respectively) and give the rest to Grant (Green). Maybe get Kuhn some carries, but really, apart from being a fan favorite, he wasn't overly productive last year.
Cheesey
13 years ago
That's true Rock. There was no real talent behind Grant. Now it seems at least, that there is, with Starks and the new guy, Green. Of course Green is a complete unknown at this time.
Grant is the starter right now, but i don't think it would take much to unseat him, and Starks showed that he CAN play well.
UserPostedImage
Yerko
13 years ago
He is going to be hungry for that starting spot. I think he has some very strong competition in James Starks, which is going to be great to see. It is tough to tell at the moment, but if I had to decide I would think Grant gets his starting position.

Either way, the running game is going to be that much better with Grant coming back and Starks going on his second year.
UserPostedImage
DakotaT
13 years ago
Obviously Starks is our RB of the future, but with that said, it doesn't make any sense not to use Grant while he is under contract for a reasonable amount. So yes, Grant should be the starter. Plus he and Finley will be playing with enormous chips on their shoulders.
UserPostedImage
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Martha Careful (15h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
    Martha Careful (15h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
    Mucky Tundra (18h) : Rude!
    beast (19h) : Martha? 😋
    Zero2Cool (23h) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
    dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
    beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
    beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
    beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
    wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
    wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
    wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
    Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
    Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
    beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
    beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
    beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
    Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
    beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
    beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
    wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
    wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
    wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
    Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
    Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
    beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
    beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
    beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled
    Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond
    Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    Recent Topics
    5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    15h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.