What amazes me if that some on this forum are just waiting and hoping for DD or RG to drop a pass, miss a block, or make some other mistake just so they can say "See I told you so", I myself am rooting for every player wearing The Green and Gold to succeed, but I also realized a long time ago that nobody is perfect, mistakes will be made.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 

What amazes me is you have this perception at all. I can't think of any one fan who has said they hope for that or even implied anything of the such. Rather, I've read that some feel Donald Driver is past his prime and they fear if we depend on him, he may be injured. Although, most seem to think Driver should be on the roster in '11, but not in '12. I struggle to see how that's saying they hope Driver falters.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

1: What makes me think Nance has superior vision is the fact that he's not constantly cutting away from wide open field so as to run up the back of his own blocker.

2: Why doesn't Grant put himself into the conversation as a third down guy? Is he unwilling to pass block? Maybe. Maybe it's just that they don't trust his receiving ability. They want someone who can not only CATCH the ball, but also make the first guy miss. Another thing about screens is that you have to have the ability to play off your blockers. Remember that play by Alex Green in the last game? You can't be running up the backs of your own guys.

3: I'm glad you admit Nance cuts better than Grant. So he's better at receiving, has better vision, and can pass pro on third down. Sounds like we can agree to that. He can also run screens. How does that not make him a threat to Grant's roster spot? What good is it to be a slightly better "runner" if you're just gonna run up Sittons back anyway?

4: If Starks and Green are "unknowns," because of their lack of carries, than how can we know that Nance is so much worse than Grant? Does the inexperience thing only work in one direction? We can't know anyone is as good as Grant, but we CAN know that somebody ISN'T as good as Grant. Is that what you're saying?

5: Ted renegotiated the contract so that it is is less money. Why do you think he did that? Because Grant is better than everyone? No. Why would Grant and Grant's agent AGREE to such a deal, if they were confident they were better than everyone? Because they know that Grant is neither as good as Starks nor as good as Green. And they also know that Grant can't be the designated "third down" guy. Btw, if Grant is cut, he's almost certain to be picked up by another team, at which point the Packers would only be responsible for the difference between that salary and the 2.5, which is likely to be negligible, if anything.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Well in fairness, I am a F'n asshole.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

1: It is neither Nance's 2.7 yards per carry from last year (when he was trying to learn the playbook on short notice) NOR is it the 7 yards per carry he got last week against scrubs that make him a threat to Grant's roster spot. It is his third down blocking. Well that, and his superior vision, receiving ability, not having to stop to change direction, special teams contributions, etc.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Allow me to summarize:

"In spite of all objective evidence to the contrary, I still believe Nance is better than Grant in every facet of the game and will continue to state this as an undisputed, universally accepted fact."

After this paragraph I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of your post. By the way, I find it hilarious that you tried to defend Nance's yards per carry by stating he had trouble learning the playbook. If a running back has a hard time picking up the playbook--after 12 weeks with the team no less--that's a major red flag. Running back is one of the easiest positions to slot into an offense and hit the ground running.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

Allow me to summarize:

"In spite of all objective evidence to the contrary, I still believe Nance is better than Grant in every facet of the game and will continue to state this as an undisputed, universally accepted fact."

After this paragraph I couldn't bring myself to read the rest of your post. By the way, I find it hilarious that you tried to defend Nance's yards per carry by stating he had trouble learning the playbook. If a running back has a hard time picking up the playbook--after 12 weeks with the team no less--that's a major red flag. Running back is one of the easiest positions to slot into an offense and hit the ground running.

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 

nerd gets off by making wildly absurd statements with no basis whatsoever and then call them "facts" when they are really fauxts.

If you enjoy carrying on the banter with him go right ahead but you will never get him to admit his error as he already knows it. He will continue his along the same line as he enjoys it immensely.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

Nance was a mid-season pickup.
But no, all I'm saying is that it's the "third down pass pro" gig that the key to Nance making the team. It's not the 2.7 from last year, when he was a mid season pickup, nor was it the 7 yards per carry against the scrubs from last week. I have to keep clarifying, because you keep trying to change the subject. But thanks.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 

Nance was active for 12 games with the Packers according to NFL.com. According to wikipedia, he was picked up by the Packers on September 14th. Assuming that's correct you have a very broad definition for "mid-season." You also stated he was better for his "superior vision, receiving ability, not having to stop to change direction, special teams contributions, etc." That's more than just "third down pass pro," mate.


http://www.nfl.com/player/dimitrinance/2507821/careerstats 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimitri_Nance 

Originally Posted by: mi_keys