I mean look at this guy. Do you want to tackle him? |
Earlier
I praised Ted Thompson for resigning Donald Driver for the right reasons. I
praised his flexibility in drafting for need since the nucleus of a
championship team was already intact. I even praised him for cutting one of my
favorite players because of serious health concerns. But his obstinate refusal
to bring back Ryan Grant has me confused and frankly annoyed.
Ryan
Grant was originally signed by the New York Giants as undrafted rookie free
agent out of Notre Dame in 2005. He spent a year on the practice squad in New
York before he caught the eye of Ted Thompson, who uncharacteristically traded
a sixth round draft pick for him before the 2007 season. Grant was originally
brought in to back up the perpetually disappointing Brandon Jackson and DeShawn
Wynn. When Grant was forced into action due to injury mid-season, he responded
explosively, and was named the starter in an ongoing search for a feature back
midseason.
Over
the next 39 games, Grant would start and rush for over 3300 yards, averaging over
4.3 yards a clip. Add in 24 total touchdowns and 73 receptions, and even a
casual fan could see that Grant was rounding into quite a nice starting
tailback. Then came the seemingly inevitable major injury. Grant tore a
ligament in his ankle in week one of the 2010 season, and would miss the
remainder of the season.
Still
under contract for the 2011 season, Grant began rehabbing his ankle
immediately, and returned to the field in week one. Coaches and players were
outspoken about what great shape Grant appeared to be in, and he showed
virtually no signs of being slowed by the offseason surgery. He averaged nearly
five yards per carry during the first three weeks of the season, but simply
wasn’t getting many attempts. The Packers’ offense is of course geared towards
the pass, so I thought it might have simply been a function of game planning.
As the season went on, however, it became clear that the coaching staff wanted
to see the younger/bigger James Starks develop into their number one back.
Though Grant may
no longer possess his 4.43 combine speed, he proved he hadn’t lost much by
outrunning both Oakland and Detroit’s defenses for long touchdowns. On his
touchdown against Detroit, he caught a quick screen pass in the left flat,
weaved around some nice blocking, and simply outran and allegedly athletic
secondary for 80 yards. Furthermore, Grant was not putting the ball on the
ground. He finished the regular season with a total of one fumble. Yes he lost
a fumble in the playoff game against the Giants, but the Packers were grasping
at straws at that point in the game, and we can hardly put the blame on Ryan
Grant for that clunker of a performance.
Now I am well
aware of the fact that running backs (with a few notable exceptions) do not
produce after the age of 30 anymore. The position is too physically taxing and
there are just too many collisions to survive. Grant is not yet 30, but will be
by next year. That being said, he is not the typical 29 year old starting tail
back in terms of wear and tear. Going in to the 2012 season, the average number
of career carries for any starting back age 29 or older is 1349. There is in
fact only one player in that group of 11 that has less carries than Grant (who
has 924, or a solid two seasons under the average), and that would be the
late-blooming Fred Jackson of Buffalo at 817 carries, who just signed a two
year, $8.7 million contract extension. Grant could be had for a fraction of
that price, and Green Bay can certainly afford to pay him both in terms of cash
available and salary cap space.
The Packers appear
set to enter the season with the young James Starks, the younger Alex Green
(who showed promise but is coming off major knee surgery), and the younger
still Brandon Saine. This will easily be the least experienced position group
heading into the season, and is no doubt cause for concern. I know the coaching
staff is high on all three of these players (as they’ve stated repeatedly), but
at some point it seems like all their praise may just be an attempt to cover up
a glaring need. Youth is certainly your friend if you’re a running back, but
aside from potential, that’s all this group has. Doesn’t proven performance count
for something?
Grant has stated
over and over again (both by himself and through his agent, Alan Herman) that
he would like to return to Green Bay and is ready and willing to talk about a
new contract. Grant is an intelligent man that has reportedly drawn interest
from multiple teams this offseason (including the Patriots and the Lions), so I’d
be shocked if he and his agent were truly out of line with their contract
requests. The Packers have reportedly not even so much as called Herman or
Grant to inform them they’ve moved on, which is a rather classless move in my
opinion. It’s one thing to keep your options open in the event of injury, but I
would think an open dialogue would be the least the organization could do for a
player that’s been around for five years now.
Again, the NFL is
a business first, and I do not envy some of the personnel decisions Ted
Thompson has to make. He has wisely parted ways with several veterans in the
past, and I’ve applauded him for doing so. This situation, however, feels more
like a repeat of the Cullen Jenkins mistake (Thompson’s worst move as Packers
GM in my opinion) than it does a repeat of the Al Harris release. I honestly
feel that Grant should be resigned for fairly obvious football reasons. He
knows the offense well, would know his teammates well, could mentor the younger
backs during their formative years, and would be inexpensive. Unless Grant was
absolutely horrible in some aspect of the game that isn’t visible on stat sheet
or to an interested fan, I truly don’t understand the logic behind letting him
go.
Grant seems
genuinely hurt by the way the Packers have handled his free agency, and I don’t
blame him. If the Packers have made up their minds to move on, let him know! If
they’re waiting for an injury to strike before they bring him back, let him
know! Now, there could easily have been communication between the parties that
I’m unaware of since Grant’s last public statements (especially since I’m privy
to precisely zero insider information), but I have been wholly unimpressed with
the Packers’ approach to this situation. Let’s show some of our trademark class
and treat a veteran player with the respect he deserves.
I agree that they should be communicating with him more. I love Grant and what he has done for the team, but I also think he's a very average back. He may have more experience than the other backs we have, but he's not a major upgrade. If he was, we would not have been splitting time with Starks last season.
ReplyDeleteVision seems to be his best skill, and I'm shocked that he ran a 4.43. He's not the kind of guy that runs past people.
He was on the open market and no one signed him...which would indicate that other teams agree. Think he'd come back for a veterans minimum salary?
I think calling Grant 'average' is probably fair at this point in his career. I'm not sure that we could label any of our other backs even 'average' at this point, since we know so little about them. Starks has been occasionally very good but inconsistent, and the other two, who knows?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't seem like Grant is interested in signing for the veteran minimum, as he was reportedly 'offended' by the Detroit Lions offer. He may not have any other choice soon, because as you said, nobody else has signed him yet. He'd have to swallow plenty of pride to sign with the Packers at the minimum, but I'd love to see it.
Hm...good point about being offended by Detroit's offer. I had forgotten about that.
Delete