Article on Ryan Grant

[CorporateBucks]

Sorry if this has been posted, I just wanted to gauge others thoughts on this article. I gave grant the benefit of the doubt that the coupling of his hamstring problem and an O-line trying to gel for the reasoning of his lackluster year as of yet. This article does bring up some good points though.


http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/33255299.html

Green Bay - It's looking more and more as if Brett Favre got the last laugh on the Green Bay Packers in at least one regard.

The furor created by Favre's return to football in early August was a contributing factor why the club would go against its own successful business principles and cave in during negotiations with Ryan Grant.

With each passing week, Grant is demonstrating that he's not a difference-maker at running back and shouldn't even be a featured ball carrier. And every time that Grant goes nowhere, the Packers are kicking themselves for misevaluating one of their own players and compounding the error by negotiating his contract extension under pressure.

Bubba Franks in 2005. Robert Ferguson in 2004. Cletidus Hunt in 2003. Bernardo Harris in 2001. Antonio Freeman and George Koonce in 1999.

They represent the precious few mistakes made by the Packers over the last decade in terms of deciding which of their own players deserved lucrative extensions. The Packers owe much of their sustained run of winning to their success in this area.

Then Favre and the media circus came to town three months ago, and it's almost as if the front office went brain-dead in its dealings with Grant.

Grant should understand that much of his four-year, $18 million extension, which could swell to about $30 million based on an extraordinary incentive package, is the result of Favre. Last year, Favre minimized the attention defenses could bring to Grant which, in turn, artificially inflated his rushing statistics. This year, the Packers gave in at the bargaining table when Grant's agent delivered a diatribe in the media and eventually reached the conclusion that a two-front conflict was too much to withstand.

Presently, Grant ranks 17th among running backs in average salary per year at $4.5 million.

Last week, two executives in personnel for NFC teams took ample time to compare Grant one-on-one against other running backs. According to one scout, Grant ranks 45th. According to the other, Grant ranks 50th.

"He's not in a special class," said Will Lewis, the Seattle Seahawks' director of pro personnel who was not one of the aforementioned two scouts. "He does what he does, which is run hard and give everything he's got. Sometimes that's enough, sometimes it's not against pretty good defenses. I don't think he's a dominant runner."

Through seven games, the Packers obviously aren't getting anywhere close to the production they expected from Grant.

Certainly, the situation could improve, especially late in the season when the Packers annually run the ball better. Grant won't be 26 until December, he missed the exhibition season with a hamstring injury and his starting experience is just the equivalent of one full season.

But Grant also appears limited in several critical areas, including run skill, quickness, balance and elusiveness. Those are the factors separating top backs from ordinary ones.

"Running backs, you know about them right away," one of the two NFC scouts said. "It's vision and instincts. Look how they got him. He was the No. 5 guy in New York. That's the reason why."

Despite the fact Grant was three years removed from unrestricted free agency, the Packers decided that asking him to play for the $370,000 exclusive-rights tender this year wasn't right.

In his position as vice president in charge of player finance, Russ Ball researched the situation and reported back to general manager Ted Thompson. They offered Grant a long-term deal with about $4.5 million in the first two years and an incentive package starting at 1,250 yards.

Training camp opened July 27, but Grant stayed home. At the same time, the showdown between Favre and the Packers intensified.

As the week played out, Favre eventually flew into Green Bay on Sunday night, Aug. 3. The Packers had gotten serious with Grant the day before, and agreement was reached late on Aug. 2 after six hours of talks between agent Alan Herman and Ball.

Not only did Grant get almost double what the Packers had been offering in the first two years, the trigger point for his incentive package dropped to a more attainable 1,000 yards.

Ball must be held at least partially responsible for the deal, his first major negotiation in Green Bay, because he did the talking with Herman. But the decision to up the ante so significantly rests primarily on Thompson.

"Any time running backs come in and they seem like they got you over a barrel, teams tend to cave in," one of the two NFC personnel men said. "I just didn't understand why they did it so early. They outperformed their contract, and you want to make them happy. But why not get to the halfway point of the year and then we'll talk? Let's just make sure."

But with the heat from Favre scorching Thompson & Co., the organization felt trapped and decided it was impossible to deal with overwhelming negativity on two fronts. Often labeled as "cheap" for their salary-cap surplus, the Packers deluded themselves into thinking they knew for sure how good Grant was, lost their poise and decided just to pay somebody.

Grant and Herman made off with millions more than the Packers' evaluation had led them to offer back when Favre was retired and their thinking was clear.

Fortunately for the Packers, they have a safety valve. If they don't like Grant anymore than they do now, he can easily be released.

If Grant plays 16 games this season, he'll be paid $4.25 million. Last year, the Packers got him for the bargain-basement sum of $310,000.

Grant is due a $2.5 million roster bonus in mid-March. His base salary in 2009 is just $750,000, but it would swell by $500,000 if he gains 1,000 yards this year, by $1.5 million if he gains 1,250 yards and by $2.5 million if he gains 1,500 yards.

Because of their advantageous cap situation, the Packers didn't have to give Grant a signing bonus. If they were to cut him before mid-March, it is believed that their cap responsibility for Grant would end immediately.

In other words, no harm, no foul. They would have paid Grant a total of $4.56 million to have him in their backfield for two years, there would be no cap penalties and they'd have to draft, trade for or sign another back.

Plus, Kregg Lumpkin, Brandon Jackson and DeShawn Wynn would still be around. Grant, who was behind Julius Jones and Darius Walker in his final two seasons at Notre Dame, has no better background than theirs. Who's to say they might not be as good as Grant given his opportunity?

One-year wonders abound at the position, particularly in the Denver zone scheme that produced Olandis Gary (1,159 yards in 1999, 839 in his last five seasons) and Tatum Bell (1,025 in '06, now out of football).

Some other backs who flashed for one season were Charles White and Cleveland Gary with the Rams during the John Robinson era, Rashaan Salaam as a rookie with Chicago in 1995 and Michael Bennett with Minnesota in 2002.

Even when Grant was ripping off 100-yard games down the stretch last season, some personnel people never warmed to his ability level. One scout kept saying that defenses totally were geared to stop Favre, and that the threat of the play-action pass kept safeties out of the box. Plus, defensive coordinators hadn't had time to really study him.

Certainly, Grant did have some wide, wide lanes through which to run. And run he did, breaking free for 15 carries of 20 yards or more.

Grant clocked 40 yards in 4.43 seconds at the combine in 2005. For a big man, speed probably is his best attribute.

[ReasonablySober]

Mountain. Molehill.

I hated the extension but Scoop himself negated damn near the entire first half of the article:

Fortunately for the Packers, they have a safety valve. If they don't like Grant anymore than they do now, he can easily be released.

Because of their advantageous cap situation, the Packers didn't have to give Grant a signing bonus. If they were to cut him before mid-March, it is believed that their cap responsibility for Grant would end immediately.

In other words, no harm, no foul. They would have paid Grant a total of $4.56 million to have him in their backfield for two years, there would be no cap penalties and they'd have to draft, trade for or sign another back.

As for the teams gearing on Favre and the playaction pass, Rodgers currently has a rating hovering around 98. He's got one of the best deep threats in the NFL in Jennings. Rodgers' ability will soon open up running lanes, if it hasn't already.

[El Duderino]

McGinn is a great writer and maybe the team did get schooled a bit by Grant's agent given the circumstances of Grant only having a year of service time, but i think Bob overstated things. Given that not much of the contract is guaranteed, Ryan can be cut loose at pretty much any time without hurting the Packers cap going forward.

It's giving out those 20 million dollar signing bonuses and then the player being mediocre that kills a team.

[Jollay]

I do think defenses keyed on Favre which helped, but they do so with Rodgers also--and heck that's obviously MM's focus--passing--any defense now is going to pay attention to that aspect of playing the Packers first with any halfway decent QB under center.

I think its been discussed here--I don't like the formations the Packers have been using. I'd like to see more Grant runs out of spread sets with Rodgers under center. Our run sets have been pretty predictable, and its not like we do U-71 with effectiveness anymore. I'd also like to see Grant utilized in the passing game more.

Interesting about the possible release option, but it takes a helluva GM to in essence admit he made a mistake, especially with the Packers so far under the cap. I certainly wouldn't put it past TT to go with Jackson and bring in a 3rd round pick or something next year though...

I think Grant'll do fine, though--articles and proclaimations of Grant as average to below average are premature IMO. As I said, people don't realize how hard it is to overcome a hamstring and essentially miss camp.

[crkone]

Grant was out of training camp and then got injured. It also took (is taking) a while for the o-line to gel on the running game. This is way too quick to judge him. Write the article at the end of the year.

[Balls2TheWalls]

I think that our offensive line is the reason that he hasn't looked spectacular. Tauscher and Clifton have taken noticeable declines in the last 2 years, and Darren Colledge shouldn't be playing on an NFL offensive line. If we got any push in run blocking situations, Grant would be considered one of the best in the league.

[xTitan]

I believe it is a combination of things, the offensive line primarily, they did not play together at all during the pre-season and it appears the tackles may be slipping. I heard an interesting thought, the tackles are built for power football while the center and guards are built for zone blocking. The most interesting thing i had heard was that Clifton absolutely refuses to cut block and he was able to get away with it because he was a great pass blocker, this makes some sense because the staff had no problems throwing Cliffy under the bus when it appears his play is slipping. I have also noticed Cliffy HAS started to cut block more the past 2 games, so who knows.

I also blame Grant, he has had some cut back lanes he has obviously missed, he seems to put his head down real quick and run into the back of his blockers. The other thing Grant excelled at last year was abusing the second line of defnders and breaking off long runs, that has only happened once in the first game against the Vikings andd he has had opportunities this year to turn an 8-12 yard run into a huge play and he has failed miserably.