Draft Countdown Forums

Draft Countdown Forums (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/index.php)
-   Pro Football (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=44)
-   -   Ryan Grant a fluke? (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=25679)

D-Unit 09-30-2008 04:11 PM

Ryan Grant a fluke?
 
I compare him to Julius Jones, another ND RB who had a hot start then fizzled as fast as he rose. But I can't really compare him to Julius now that Julius is in a better situation and doing well than compared to what he was in Dallas.

So I say... who are the believers and who are the doubters? and who is right out of the 2?

Bruce Banner 09-30-2008 04:13 PM

Once you venture outside of AD, LT, MBIII, etc, it becomes stale.

A RB is a RB is a RB.

Grant is no different.

drowe 09-30-2008 04:14 PM

Ryan Grant was absolutely a fluke. he has nothing going for him now.
no burst, no vision, as he pretty much looks for people to tackle him. he goes down easy...but, at least he fumbles a lot.

i'm calling RB as the Packers' #1 need this off season.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf) 09-30-2008 04:15 PM

Only because he's on my fantasy team.

djp 09-30-2008 04:15 PM

I think everyone outside of Green Bay knew that he was a definite fluke...

I still think he can be a decent RB, he will never be as successful as he was last year, imo.

Dr. Gonzo 09-30-2008 04:18 PM

I got flamed by Packer fans for saying it before but I have no doubt he is a fluke. I don't think he is as terrible as he is playing now but he is a below average starting RB and for that matter he would probably only be an average backup RB.

ShutDwn 09-30-2008 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Banner (Post 1237087)
Once you venture outside of AD, LT, MBIII, etc, it becomes stale.

A RB is a RB is a RB.

Grant is no different.

There are a lot more runningbacks that aren't "stale"

Hawk 09-30-2008 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CutlerChris (Post 1237091)
Only because he's on my fantasy team.

quoted for truth

PackerLegend 09-30-2008 04:22 PM

Wow a little over the top there.... Grant has been plagued by a hammy and well we all know those heal overnight :rolleyes: they can continue to nag throughout an entire season... Grant is suppose to be close to 100% but he says he isnt their yet. So hes fumbled twice, we have seen that not taking many hits early in the year can cause this. Our O-line has been in a constant shuffle and they havent had anytime together. Now that they do things should improve and if they dont I will then be worried. At this moment I am concerned but Im also not going to overeact. Part of the blame has to be put on Grant because yes we have seen him miss some holes, but I would also blame the o-line as well. I think they have been a bit overated and at times arent opening anything up.

Do I think he is an AD or LT .... No way but I do think he can be a good back

Bruce Banner 09-30-2008 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShutDwn (Post 1237101)
There are a lot more runningbacks that aren't "stale"

A RB is a RB is a RB.

Dime a dozen. Not stale but nothing to write home about.

Im_a_Romosexual 09-30-2008 04:31 PM

I never bought into him, although I don't think I ever said so on this sight. It always seemed he would have one long run that made his numbers look a lot better than what they would have.

wicket 09-30-2008 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Banner (Post 1237087)
Once you venture outside of AD, LT, MBIII, etc, it becomes stale.

A RB is a RB is a RB.

Grant is no different.

Are you seriously naming barber the third running back in the league? r u kidding me

Bruce Banner 09-30-2008 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wicket (Post 1237120)
Are you seriously naming barber the third running back in the league? r u kidding me

Yep, I'm doing that. :rolleyes:

I just listed a few backs that I consider elite.

For future reference. Using the word "seriously" in the same post as "r u", isn't a winning formula.

Twiddler 09-30-2008 04:49 PM

I think its very possible but I'd like to see a little more than just four games. I might get flamed for saying that (who am I kidding, I will) but I think more than one game with a complete starting offensive line will show us how good he is, no matter what the results are. Really though, no one knows for sure how he's going to turn out this year, its only four games so far (not to mention that he was way behind because of holding out and his hamstring) just like it was only 10 games last year that he played in significantly. So as of now, Grant is a mystery, but my gut is still telling me to be prepared to be underwhelmed.

PACKmanN 09-30-2008 04:57 PM

I don't think anyone thought he was anything special...I for sure didn't, since I wanted Felix. But, he has been bother by injuries from the start of TC.

umphrey 09-30-2008 05:01 PM

He hasn't had much running room. I expected a lot more out of him. It looks like he's running without inspiration this year. He's fast but this year that just helps him run into a defender quicker.

Bruce Banner 09-30-2008 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by umphrey (Post 1237150)
It looks like he's running without inspiration this year.

He was running for a contract last year. Not so much anymore.

Xiomera 09-30-2008 05:04 PM

I think he is suffering from PFS (Post-Favre Syndrome).

Twiddler 09-30-2008 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xiomera (Post 1237154)
I think he is suffering from PFS (Post-Favre Syndrome).

Eh, that may be part of it, but I don't think that would account for all of it. I think a lot of this is on Grant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Banner (Post 1237151)
He was running for a contract last year. Not so much anymore.

I don't think that that is the case as much as most would believe. Yeah, I doubt he is running with the same passion because he did in fact get paid pretty well, but a great majority of the contract is incentive based. If he's fine with the $4.25 million that he is guaranteed then he probably is slacking, but he still could stand to earn a lot more.

comahan 09-30-2008 05:14 PM

I thought it said 'flake'

I was going to agree.

P-L 09-30-2008 05:21 PM

I'm not sure that he's as bad as he's been playing, but I never thought he'd continue to be as successful as he was last year.

bearsfan_51 09-30-2008 05:25 PM

I've been doubting him since last year and predicted a serious decline.


That didn't stop me from signing him in one of our fantasy auctions though. At least I've got the handicap.

Mr.Regular 09-30-2008 06:00 PM

Yeah, he pretty much sucks. No vision, misses holes, doesnt make anyone miss, no speed burst, and he cant hold on to the ball. Of course he has been hampered by an injury and our o-line has been brutal this year, but when hes had his chances he does nothing.

scottyboy 09-30-2008 06:02 PM

I've seen the kid play since high school(he'd trounce my hometown school annually) and watched him quite a bit at ND and then on the Giants. I knew he was a pretty good runner, deserving of a #2 spot on a team, getting anywhere between 5-10 carries a game, but he's not #1 starting back material. He did well in what? 8? 10? games. even in the playoffs he started to decline(mainly the Giants game). He's a nice option to have, but shouldn't be a starting back

ShutDwn 09-30-2008 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bruce Banner (Post 1237106)
A RB is a RB is a RB.

Dime a dozen. Not stale but nothing to write home about.

Are you saying that other than the three you listed, LT, Peterson and Barber, the rest are dime a dozen?

Because there are quite a few that I don't consider dime a dozen.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:14 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.