Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Report: Packers Agree To Term With Ryan Grant

By Category

Report: Packers Agree To Term With Ryan Grant

Jason Wilde OWNS the running back beat:

This, obviously, makes a lot of sense since Grant is familiar with the offense and was quite productive the last two months of 2011. At the same time, it's a bit surprising in that it took this long to bring Grant back.

All in all, this seems a no-brainer.

  • Like Like
  • 5 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (71) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Evan's picture

I guess this was inevitable.

cow42's picture

And so it's come to this.


White and Harris must suck.

Oh well - we're talking about a 3rd RB... Green, Kuhn, Grant.

Geez, just look at that stable of backs... Green - Kuhn - Grant.

That's pretty f'n bad.

cow42's picture

actually, grant's probably #4... Green, Cobb, Kuhn, Grant

packeraaron's picture

Almost as bad as Jackson-Starks-Kuhn. That worked out terribly.

Mike's picture

That worked out because the line gelled at the right time and Arodge was flawless. This just feels like the injury that breaks the camel's proverbial back. I hope Im wrong. I'll tell you one thing, Tinkering Ted sure knows how to build depth. There is absolutely no team in the NFL that could go through this many injuries only to win a SB, go 15-1 and currently sit at 8-4 a top the division. I so sick of these weekly injury reports. Gvie the Pack a break (not literally)

Evan's picture

Starks' injury sucks, but he is by no means the straw that breaks the camel's back. As long as Rodgers is upright and healthy, I like their chances.

packeraaron's picture

Starks' injury breaks the camel’s proverbial back? Not even close.

cow42's picture

I actually think Jackson/Starks/Kuhn was better.
In reality, during the playoffs it was Starks/Jackson/Kuhn

'10 Starks > '12 Green
'10 Jackson > '12 Kuhn
'10 Kuhn > '12 Grant

And please stop comparing this team to 2010.

This season's D is not as good.
This season's OL is not as good.
This season's QB is not unconscious (in a good way).
This season's injuries have been to more important players.

bryce's picture

Agree with your assessment of this years squad compared to 2010 100%

Charlie M's picture

Cow, you had me until you said Rodgers was "unconscious" in 2010. In the playoffs and week 16 against the Giants, yes, but at this point in both seasons 2012 Rodgers is better than 2010 Rodgers.

Keith's picture

Just because Jackson-Starks-Kuhn worked out doesn't mean that stable of backs didn't suck and that this stable also doesn't suck. It's not the end of the world, but it is inarguable the Packers backfield could use an upgrade.

Franklin Hillside's picture

You're being very un-Dude.

mark's picture

Calmer than you are.

Mike's picture

Only took a while because they wanted Starks and Green to have a shot while also giving Benson the chance to return from his injury. Hopefully, another year off that ankle surgery will mean he is closer to who he was before that injury.

bomdad's picture

Grant works for this offense. He's got enough long runs on film to get a DC to think about him and pull a safety out of deep cover. He usually plays great against the Bears, who we could see once or twice more. And he is a mudder.

RC Packer Fan's picture

Well, Grant should be fresh.

This does not surprise me after I heard this morning that Starks might be done.

All I can say is the Packers better bring in at least 2 RB's in the draft next year. we can not live through this stuff for another year. Add a guy in the 2nd or 3rd ronds and a guy in the 6th or 7th round.

I would rather have 4 RB's capable then having the mess we have now.

Hopefully Thompson and his scouts are listening because we need to find some new RB's.

Chad Toporski's picture

Alex Green was a 3rd round pick and James Starks was a 6th round pick. Doesn't matter how many you add to the roster if they all get injured. Plus, draft position doesn't guarantee any specific level of production.

Fish/Crane's picture

holes make running backs

lebowski's picture

Exactly. We need a stud center more than one or two of the average running backs in the upcoming draft.

Jay's picture

I like the thought of that Barret JOnes kid from Alabama. Talk about versatile

PadLevel's picture

Wouldn't matter who we drafted for the O-Line. Until we get rid of James Campen, our O-Line will continue to stink. McCarthy will realize it some day, hope it is not the same day he is driven out of Packerland too.

Tony's picture

Cool with me. Maybe he'll play like he's got a little something to prove.

bryce's picture

good point

packsmack25's picture

One of my all-time favorites! This is great. Experience, locker room presence, just a great addition!

Dennis eckersley's picture

RG25 is back!!!

Other than averaging .75 fumbles/game in the playoffs, I love me some ryan grant

PackerPete's picture

I doubt this will help. He'll be 30 this Sunday, and nobody wanted him before the season. He signed with the Redskins I think end of September, but they got rid of him again end of October. Didn't see him when he played there, but one of my buddies is a die-hard Redskins fan, and he said (and I quote) "he is done". I guess this is truly an emergency signing.

GBinSTL's picture

Not sure how your diehard skins fan would really know that he is "done". He had only one carry for 5 yards with the skins.

djbonney138's picture

I believe we did want him. I think I remember he wanted big dollars and we declined.

Ct Sharpe Cheddar's picture

They have someone better,that stud who chewwed up the Giants d,they got him in the 6th round

Fish/Crane's picture

Like Lincoln....when the chips are against the lads....Grant is summoned.

Norman's picture

+1, very clever Fish/Crane!

woodson4president's picture

Why would a skin fan know more about grant than a packer fan? This is a good signing for the end of the season green is playing pretty well and grant sees holes better than any of our rbs. With the lack of holes we will help not hurt us. And yeah cow....I really wish u had a life..or friends...or somebody to keep u on ur own teams sight. Shouldn't u be on there saying "See I told you guys we shoulda been starting Alex Smith"?

cow42's picture

it doesn't matter who they start at qb.

'9ers could beat the Packers with gore running the wildcat all game... every play.

this is not a joke.

they are THAT good.

Denver's picture

I guess the Rams didn't get your memo, cow.

cow42's picture

teams lose games they shouldn't.
no one goes undefeated.
were the '10 Dolphins better than the '10 Packers?

murphy's picture

Why do you post here?

Denver's picture

True, which is why I'll start worrying about the '12 49ers if and when the '12 Packers play them again.
That's at least 5 weeks away which is a hell of a long time in the NFL.

Tommyboy's picture

Dude...seriously. I've never seen so much pessimism in my online life.

The 49ers are so good they could beat the Packers without a qb. Yet, teams lose games they shouldn't. With that logic, why couldn't the 49ers lose to the Packers? Yet, I suspect you give <1% chance of that happening.

The 49ers are really good. If they played the Packers again, I would (sadly) predict a 49ers win. Okay, I just want that to be clear. I too would predict a 49ers win.

Here's the difference, I would at least watch the game with anticipation and not vomit on the jersey of every person lacing up green and gold. If they lose, I would be disappointed, but at the rate you're going, it always sounds like you take it as a personal attack, and anyone who hints at any optimism is clueless.

You're going to have a stroke, dude.

cow42's picture

i guess i'm so pessimistic because i had such high hopes.

i see rodgers' years slipping away.

got that first one.

had a chance to be something special.

now i see the window closing.

every season another roster flaw needs to be repaired... if it's not a week d-backfield, it's the lack of a pass rush. if it's not a lack of a running game, it's the inability to protect the quarterback.

i know all teams have holes, it just seems like this team can never be BALANCED... be respectable at everything... there's always something that they're MONUMENTALLY bad at. last season it was defending the pass. this season it pass pro.

the prime years of a GREAT quarterback are being wasted... and it bothers me.

packeraaron's picture

<em>i guess i’m so pessimistic because i had such high hopes.</em>

When? All you did all off-season was talk about how bad this team was going to be...

Rocky70's picture

Unfortunately, cow, you're correct. Alot of these dudes simply don't understand that any team with an elite QB has to "cash in" while they can.

It's very possible that after AR retires, fans will look back &amp; see many lost opportunities. The "love-fest" that fans have for TT &amp; MM now will disappear. ----- Hey, I expected several Lombardi Trophies after SB 31 with #4 at the helm. ---- It never happened.

Tommyboy's picture

I think this is fair to see for every team, though. Over the last 15 years, who has been the most successful franchise? The Patriots? 3 Super Bowls and 5 appearances (6 if you go back an additional year in their loss to the Pack). Yet, I strongly suspect that Pat fans felt AWFUL last year with their defense (as they should have) and struggling running game. In fact, even at 16-0, I'll bet they felt like there were holes. The system is setup to allow teams only to clean up so many gaps.

People complain about TT being cheap. He works under the same floor and ceiling as every other GM. There's not much room to maneuver. He also needs to be careful so that we can sign Rodgers and hopefully resign the likes of people like Matthews, Raji, and maybe even Jennings....oh, and Bush. What would we do without Jarrett Bush? :)

People forget about resigning Jennings once already, resigning Williams for a straight STEAL compared to what he would have gotten on the open-market, shoring up the secondary for much cheaper than anticipated, even after unexpectedly losing Collins.

Have there been errors? Well sure. But the people who want to bring up Harrell and Pat Lee and Brian Brohm have unbelievably selective memories. And show me ONE GM of any era who didn't make some awful picks.

And to Rocky - do people still not respect the hell out of the Wolf/Holmgren/Favre era? People may not favor TT,MM, and AR like they did with Lombardi and Starr - that may, in fact, NEVER be duplicated. I do think it's a real reach to think that the love will "disappear."

Anyway, what was I talking about again? Oh yeah, Jarrett Bush.

cow42's picture

"When? All you did all off-season was talk about how bad this team was going to be…"

not true - it took me until 1/2 way through the 2nd quarter of the first game to realize that this team wasn't going to accomplish anything significant this season.

packeraaron's picture

You also said they wouldn't make the playoffs.

cow42's picture

and they may not.

they're gonna need 11 wins.

are they about to go 3 of 4?

that's debatable.

The poster formerly known as Bearmeat's picture

Cow. I think you are a decent dude. But man, you are really a weird guy.

I can't, for the life of me, see what makes you tick.

Fish/Crane's picture

that loss was due to a bogus illegal formation call "Lining up over the center" for the record

toolkien's picture

This is little late in coming, but this Cow character needs to get a clue. The Packers are tied for the most wins, regular and post-season, since 2009, have the most wins against playoff caliber teams, hold the best overall spot for average rankings of relevant statistics, and are tied for the best post-season "score card" with New Orleans (a SB win, a Wild Card appearance, and a Divisional appearance). In other words, THEY ARE THE BEST TEAM IN FOOTBALL SINCE 2009.

And all you can do is weep and moan because the aren't "cashing in" like a dynasty of the 60's, 70's and 80's. In case you missed it (which is probably very likely) the days of dynasties are over. The NFL barely has the titanic teams it used to have out of which dynasties could emerge. For what the NFL is the last 20 years or so, the Packers have been one of the best, and the best in the recent window of relevancy. If it's not good enough, learn to knit.

Lastly, for all the "fixes" that are necessary and "imbalances" etc etc, the Packers have washed out of the playoffs due to GIVEAWAYS. Look it up. Nine of the last 12 SB champions won the playoff turnover margin, the other 3 were 2nd in turnover margin for that year. Since 2009, the year the Packers won the turnover margin, they won it all, when they turned it over two out of the first three offensive plays, and again in overtime, they washed out. And when they gave the ball away 4 times last year, they washed out. IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH WHATEVER PERCEIVED HOLES you think you saw. If the Packers make the playoffs (now at ~88%) and if they win the turnover margin, they will win it all. It's as simple as that. And there's little that the regular season, pessimistically broken down play by play, game by game, is going to tell you one way or the other which way the turnover margin is going to go. They just have to make the playoffs first. And then hang onto the ball.

LACheez's picture

so Cow - what would you do to fix this team? who would you draft next year? free agents? what else?

you like to constantly point out what you think is wrong, but i'm curious to know what you would do to fix the issues.

cow42's picture

no clue.
i'm not a player, coach, or front office person.

the people who get paid millions to do that job should do that job.

what the hell do i know about running a football team?

no one posting here knows sh*t about running an NFL organization.

we're all just observing.

packeraaron's picture

Which, of course, is cow's way of admitting that he just likes to complain.

cow42's picture

funny thing is...

most people don't like my "tone" and don't like hearing what i have to say...


very rarely can the people who take exception to my observations say that I'm flat out wrong.

often times complainers are right.

toolkien's picture

Often times complainers are right?

Or perhaps there are people who are whiners that their team isn't #1 by more. They are intolerably spoiled because even though they have a mountain of toys most kids would sell their little brother have, they don't have the one that comes in that slightly different shade of blue so "f**k it, I'm so underprivileged".

If this is your attitude - Super Bowl or it's a wasted year - I can only imagine your reaction if the Packers do win it all, a terse nod of recognition and a "don't disappoint me next year like you almost did this year" tumbling from your lips.

I don't know how old you are, but there was a time when all the Packers had to do was lose their starting running back and the season went from an optimist's long shot at a playoff birth to no hope. Now, we've got a team that has had one of the toughest schedules at the beginning of the year and a boat load of injuries since, and is one historically horrible call away from being the 2nd seed and a bye in the playoffs. And it's doom and gloom.

In 2009, the Packers broke the franchise scoring mark, and had a good defense. In 2010, the offense had a few injuries and a down year, but the defense was the 2nd best since the Lombardi era. Coming out of 2010, I allowed myself the "what if" the Packers field a 2009 offense and a 2010 defense at the same time? They would be great. But I also thought what if they fielded 2010 offense and a 2009 defense? Well, in 2011 they ended up with an historically great offense and a mediocre defense, and if they had hung onto the ball in the playoffs, stood as good a chance as any. And going into 2012, the "what if's" were the same. And lo and behold, the Packers, where it counts in all practicality are fielding a 2010 offense and a 2011 defense (their points given up and QB rating surrendered are a little better than last year, but not hugely) and they effectively 9-3 with a playoff bye if Mr. Magoo hadn't been on the field reffing. So I have my answer what the Packers could be made of if they weren't running up high end points or only giving up historically low points. They are a playoff caliber team and would trade spots with only three other teams in the NFL as of this moment. If that isn't something to be amazed by, a "down season" which still has a team decently positioned, and would be even more so if it weren't for that terrible call, then I don't know what would be amazing. This a year to appreciative of that this team can whether the set backs so well and still be relevant.

But I guess for some if their hopes for a Lombardi aren't stroked by every play and every game, all they can do is be sour about it. And it's sad for you to have the bar set so high that you can't find any wonderment in having 10-11 guys of quality potency on the IR and STILL be in such decent shape. I shudder to think how you're going to react when the Packers inevitably go back to the 4-12 years serially and hopes for anything are dashed because one guys goes down.

PackersRS's picture

Grant was only good late in the season. The Packers are getting him even fresher.

Maybe he's gotten too slow to play, but if the past is any indication, we're getting a good back, that knows the protections and the scheme.

Fish/Crane's picture

so true...somehow he would appear faster than almost December and January...that was a funny thing about Grant..nice post.

woodson4president's picture


Point Packer's picture

Starks durability, or lack there of, is simply incredible. Is the dude made of chop sticks?

This makes sense. Get Grant in space and he can do some good things. Not in space, falls back-ward.

Mojo's picture

I think part of Stark's problems staying healthy, is he runs too upright and takes direct shots from tacklers instead of leaning and sliding off tackles like many of the great RB's do. There were at least two carries against the Queens where he took the full brunt of the defensive player, including the one he got injured on.

Mojo's picture

Like him or not, Grant did not deserve to have his last carry as a Packer be a fumble (last years Giants playoff game).

The positives with Grant are he's smart, knows the system and at least was a strong durable carrier, who rarely fumbled, at least in the past. He doesn't move well laterally, but neither does Starks or Green. Benson was the best at that. Just more vanilla than ever now. Figures that this happens after Starks has one of his best games in a long time.

FITZCORE 1252&#039;S EVO's picture

Fresh legs. Knows the system. This could be great.


PadLevel's picture

Any worries that Grant usually takes 8-10 regular season games to finally get his game going? That was his pattern in 2009 and 2011, hope he can quickly find his groove

THEMichaelRose's picture

I think this is a little irrelevant, as far as future playcalling is concerned. Green is the guy going forward. But Grant will have his moments, we'll see what he makes of them.
Regardless, I'm happy they brought him back, instead of going for some young, unproven guy just because he's young and cheap and different. Probably a positive for the locker room.

cow42's picture

yup, old, broken, and cheep is way better than young, cheep, and different.

murphy's picture

Cheap is also way better than cheep.

cow42's picture


PackerBacker's picture

There are only 4 weeks left in the season. You want them to bring in a new young player who knows nothing about the playbook? Benson had a hell of a time learning the playbook in a few weeks and he was a veteran. There isn't much time left. They had to bring in someone who knew the playbook and could help out quickly.

Fish/Crane's picture

Playbook shmaybook I know the dang playbook.....just take the ball and run to daylight..

PacMan's picture

Got to wonder what Grant is getting paid. His career was over but Packers didn't have much of a choice climbing back to within reach of a top seed and very needed bye week.

PackerBacker's picture

He was with nobody before we picked him up so I'm guessing Vet league minimum.

woodson4president's picture

Talk is cheep?

bryce's picture

I also like to argue.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook



"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"The Bears still suck!"
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."