Ryan Grant vs. Adrian Peterson· Page 3

4PackGirl
Registered

14 years ago

#21

i like chester taylor. we need a chester taylor.

Gravedigga
Registered

14 years ago

#22

I'd take grant in a heart beat over peterson. Wont get as many broken tackles or "spectacular plays" but he's consistent, runs hard and doesnt fumble. Thats more important than 6 or 7 amazing highlights per year and 30 fumbles.

--------------------------------------------

A wise man once said
---------------------------------------------
You are weak, pathetic and immature..............I would have d

wpr
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#23

revised stats


Rk Player 	Att 	Att/G 	Yds 	Avg 	Yds/G 	TD  Lng  1st 	1st% 	20+ 	40+ 	FUM
3 Peterson 	305 	20.3 	1,329 	4.4 	88.6 	17  64T  71 	23.3 	11 	3 	6
8 Grant 	271 	18.1 	1,202 	4.4 	80.1 	10  62T  57 	21.0 	8 	2 	0

wpr
Preferred Member

14 years ago

#24

Receiving stats


Rk Player       Rec 	Yds 	Avg 	Yds/G 	Lng 	TD 	20+ 	40+ 	1st 	1st% 	FUM
 83 Peterson  42  	435 	 10.4 	 29.0 	 63 	 0 	 5 	 2 	 16 	 38.1 	 1
148 Grant     25  	197 	 7.9 	 13.1 	 27 	 0 	 2 	 0 	 9 	 36.0 	 1

Pack93z
Select Member

14 years ago

#25

Wait I thought Grant sucked and tackled himself every play? ;)

Simply put.. he isn't a overly elusive back.. but consistent and keeps the football off the ground for the most part... I think since 07 is 4th in rushing yards in the NFC..

Isn't it ironic that once the oline settled in with Tauscher and a semi healthy Clifton (for him anyway), and we started the same guys from more than a week the running game started to click... maybe Grant ate his wheaties..

It hasn't changed.. football is won and lost in the trenches.. hasn't and will not change.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

earthquake
Member

14 years ago

#26

Peterson's yearly fumble average of 6.6 is greater than Grant's career stat of 6 fumbles. Funny stuff.

blank

Dulak
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#27

Peterson's yearly fumble average of 6.6 is greater than Grant's career stat of 6 fumbles. Funny stuff.

"earthquake" wrote:

One of the reasons the pack has done so well this year is because the lack of turnovers on our part and the amount of turnovers we have caused.

I think we have like the 2nd highest differential. Behind the saints.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

14 years ago

#28

Receiving stats


Rk Player       Rec 	Yds 	Avg 	Yds/G 	Lng 	TD 	20+ 	40+ 	1st 	1st% 	FUM
 83 Peterson  42  	435 	 10.4 	 29.0 	 63 	 0 	 5 	 2 	 16 	 38.1 	 1
148 Grant     25  	197 	 7.9 	 13.1 	 27 	 0 	 2 	 0 	 9 	 36.0 	 1

"wpr" wrote:

I think that this has as much to do with the QB as the RBs. Grant and Peterson both really aren't such good receivers, but Peterson is getting a lot more dump-offs and makes a lot more happen. He's an open field monster. Grant is not.

Makes me wonder how many screens we've attempted with Grant, though. I'm a huge fan of the screen pass, but we seem to run it very little when anyone but Jackson is on the field. Makes it a little one-dimensional.

Dulak
Veteran Member

14 years ago

#29

Receiving stats


Rk Player       Rec 	Yds 	Avg 	Yds/G 	Lng 	TD 	20+ 	40+ 	1st 	1st% 	FUM
 83 Peterson  42  	435 	 10.4 	 29.0 	 63 	 0 	 5 	 2 	 16 	 38.1 	 1
148 Grant     25  	197 	 7.9 	 13.1 	 27 	 0 	 2 	 0 	 9 	 36.0 	 1

"Rockmolder" wrote:

"wpr" wrote:

Im pretty dissappointed we didnt use jackson more this year - he looks like a much better runner then grant. I dont remember if he was injured earlier this year or what ... I liked his cutback in the seattle game that got him the TD. (noone was there to take him).

DakotaT
Select Member

14 years ago

#30

Factor in some negative yardage for all the fumbles, and consinder the garbage time stats Peterson racks up, and I am no longer jealous of the Vikings running back situation. Also, I don't think Peterson is an overly intelligent ball player. Last night he should have just run out of bounds after getting the first down. I think Percy Harvin's football intelligence is very high.

GB's running backs are performing at a high level for their role in this reciever dominated offense.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (49m) : Merry Christmas!

beast (9h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (17h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (22h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (23h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS