Hey, just cause you have man love for the guy doesn't mean we are all joining you. The guy wears a Viking jersey for Christ sakes. I've always said he has awesome skills, I've just been pointing out the negative, where most people are blinded.

---

yeah...i kinda have to agree with this. while Peterson is certainly a fancier back, i think "holding onto the ball" should factor into the discussion of "talent". while he is likely a better back by most standards, their stats aren't that different and i'm never really scared when Grant has the ball (mostly head-slap frustration when he runs into his own linemen like it's a party and he feels left out).

---

I think you meant Ahman Green in his prime > Peterson now; which I totally concur. Favre and Green should have placed more hardware in the trophy box.

---

Peterson is obviously a more gifted runner, but this just goes to show Grant can get the job done. Pretty it ain't, but I'll take it.

---

If the Packers coupled a scat back with some elusiveness along with Jackson and Grant.. the Packers would have as dynamic tandem of backs as any team in the NFL.. what we lack is a Spiller type of back.. someone that is explosive in space.

But before we start thinking AP isn't a hell of a back.. he lacks one important factor that is limiting him from becoming one of the best ever.. football intelligence upon the field. Until he learns sometimes ball security is more important than one more yard.. he will be limited. There are times that you fight like hell for every inch you can get.. and there are situations where it doesn't matter as much.

And I think his immaturity right now is preventing him from taking that next step and picking his spots to lower his shoulder.

---

Still need a D to win the big one. We didn't have a top 10 D except for 2001. Green's best years were 2000-2004. Here's our D rankings:

Now here are the rankings of the SB winners those same years:

So realistically, you really need a top 10 D to win the SB. Favre and Green were gold, no argument there. We just needed a top 10 D.

Now in 2009, it's Aaron and Grant. Our D is #9. Maybe this is our year? :downtown:

---

Another fun stat that compares more the overall running game, but obvioulsy since Grant and AP get majority of the carries, I'll draw it as a comparison between the two backs. One stat I'm more interested in always is negative plays. I could care less if the average is 4.4, or 5.1, or 3.9. I don't want us losing ground when we run, ever.

So looking at the NFC playoff teams I ran the percentage of run plays that result in negative yards. Here's how we stack up against our potential playoff foes.

Queens - 46 of 435 attempts - 10.6%
Cowgirls - 38 of 404 attempts - 9.4%
Cards - 30 of 351 attempts - 8.5%
Pack - 32 of 404 attempts - 7.9%
Eagles - 29 of 374 attempts - 7.8%
Saints - 34 of 436 attempts - 7.8%

I know everyone likes to put a microscope on each run of Grants and thumbs up or down if he should have made a Madden move to try and get somewhere, but if he did try those things I guess that the negative plays count would be a lot higher. For me a negative yardage rush is just as bad as a sack. Interesting stat I thought, debate.

---

Very nice.

I don't think that this is the year, but if this is what we can do in the first year of the 3-4, just imagine what we can do a year from now. The only guys who the window is closing on in defense are our cornerbacks. A strength, yes, but defenses are build from the front 7. Our is really young and really good. One OLB, my friend, one OLB....

As to Grant, I'm glad that he got some sort of recognition in the league this year by being voted in as an alternate. One has to wonder how often he's going to get snubbed as he appears to get better when the season gets along. Same goes for the game. He's just a hard worker. The man has some great conditioning.