GREEN BAY, Wis. Ryan Grant lobbied the Green Bay Packers to sign veteran running back Ahman Green and applauded their decision to finally make the move last Wednesday.
Should he have?
There are two ways to look at it if you're Grant.
On the one hand, bringing in Green relieves some of the pressure on Grant to produce like a guy who is worthy of the four-year, $18 million contract he received in August 2007. On the other hand, it implies that the Packers no longer think Grant is capable of being a franchise back and probably would be better suited for a job-sharing role.
If the Packers simply wanted to fill the position vacated when third-down back DeShawn Wynn was lost for the season with a knee injury, they would have signed veteran free agent Dominic Rhodes or elevated practice squad running back Kregg Lumpkin. Instead, they turned to Green, a former franchise back whose career took a detour because of injuries.
There are several reasons the Packers took a shot with Green, but simple logic will tell you he might be able to fill gaps that are missing in the team's mediocre running game.
Things like:
Better production on first down.
Better production on screen passes and check-downs.
Better production running to the left side.
Upon signing Green, no one on the Packers' coaching staff, including head man Mike McCarthy, characterized the move as having anything to do with Grant, even though the fourth-year back ranks 18th in the NFL in yards with 347, 31st in yards per carry at 3.8 and 28th in runs of 20 or more yards with one.
Still, McCarthy did say he thought the move upgraded the position and provided the Packers with someone who is a good fit for his zone running scheme.
"He still has excellent in-line quickness," McCarthy said after Green's first practice Wednesday "He really has the ability to drop his pads and run with forward lean and the things you always liked about his running style.
"I'd like to see more of him."
Green, who has been out of football since November, won't play against the Cleveland Browns on Sunday at Cleveland Browns Stadium, but there's a chance he'll be available when the Minnesota Vikings come to Green Bay next Sunday. Common sense would tell you it's going to be awhile before he's effective, if he's effective at all at age 32.
At this point, the Packers' running game shouldn't really scare anyone. Green Bay ranks 19th mostly on the strength of some late-game finishes against St. Louis and Detroit, when the Packers were able to beat down a demoralized opponent.
When you're talking about production in key areas, such as on first down, the Packers are not a good running team. Obviously, the offensive line plays a part in that, but the right side of the line is solid, and backup center Scott Wells has done a fine job against some tough opponents.
McCarthy's reluctance to stick with the run is another factor. The Packers are running the ball just 39.6 percent of the time and that's not enough to get a rhythm going. But still, he should be able to count on 4 yards on first down.
Through five games, the Packers are running the ball 44 percent of the time on first and 10. They rank 28th in yards on those downs. Grant averages 3.4 yards a carry on first and 10 and, while full rankings weren't available for that stat, San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson ranks 20th in the league with an average of 4.3, so you can imagine how far down the list Grant is.
It's something the Packers acknowledge is a problem.
Should he have?
There are two ways to look at it if you're Grant.
On the one hand, bringing in Green relieves some of the pressure on Grant to produce like a guy who is worthy of the four-year, $18 million contract he received in August 2007. On the other hand, it implies that the Packers no longer think Grant is capable of being a franchise back and probably would be better suited for a job-sharing role.
If the Packers simply wanted to fill the position vacated when third-down back DeShawn Wynn was lost for the season with a knee injury, they would have signed veteran free agent Dominic Rhodes or elevated practice squad running back Kregg Lumpkin. Instead, they turned to Green, a former franchise back whose career took a detour because of injuries.
There are several reasons the Packers took a shot with Green, but simple logic will tell you he might be able to fill gaps that are missing in the team's mediocre running game.
Things like:
Better production on first down.
Better production on screen passes and check-downs.
Better production running to the left side.
Upon signing Green, no one on the Packers' coaching staff, including head man Mike McCarthy, characterized the move as having anything to do with Grant, even though the fourth-year back ranks 18th in the NFL in yards with 347, 31st in yards per carry at 3.8 and 28th in runs of 20 or more yards with one.
Still, McCarthy did say he thought the move upgraded the position and provided the Packers with someone who is a good fit for his zone running scheme.
"He still has excellent in-line quickness," McCarthy said after Green's first practice Wednesday "He really has the ability to drop his pads and run with forward lean and the things you always liked about his running style.
"I'd like to see more of him."
Green, who has been out of football since November, won't play against the Cleveland Browns on Sunday at Cleveland Browns Stadium, but there's a chance he'll be available when the Minnesota Vikings come to Green Bay next Sunday. Common sense would tell you it's going to be awhile before he's effective, if he's effective at all at age 32.
At this point, the Packers' running game shouldn't really scare anyone. Green Bay ranks 19th mostly on the strength of some late-game finishes against St. Louis and Detroit, when the Packers were able to beat down a demoralized opponent.
When you're talking about production in key areas, such as on first down, the Packers are not a good running team. Obviously, the offensive line plays a part in that, but the right side of the line is solid, and backup center Scott Wells has done a fine job against some tough opponents.
McCarthy's reluctance to stick with the run is another factor. The Packers are running the ball just 39.6 percent of the time and that's not enough to get a rhythm going. But still, he should be able to count on 4 yards on first down.
Through five games, the Packers are running the ball 44 percent of the time on first and 10. They rank 28th in yards on those downs. Grant averages 3.4 yards a carry on first and 10 and, while full rankings weren't available for that stat, San Diego's LaDainian Tomlinson ranks 20th in the league with an average of 4.3, so you can imagine how far down the list Grant is.
It's something the Packers acknowledge is a problem.
