A:

Grant's a lot better than Stewart or Jones. He -- Grant -- has already proven he do it. And his role is already penciled in; he'll be Green Bay's starting tailback, carrying the ball 300-plus times and cranking out something like 1,300 yards and 12 TDs. With Brett Favre gone, that team probably will run the ball more. It's early, but I can't believe that Grant will even be available when you would be picking at No. 4. More likely, you would stay put at No. 1 and select Grant there. I would select Grant, a proven option, over any of the four rookie running backs expected to go in the first round -- McFadden, Mendenhall, Stewart and Jones. Things may change by July, of course. Let's see where these guys get drafted, for example. But that's the way I feel today. I have only two problems with Ryan Grant. No. 1, he is a poor receiver. His yards-per-catch average was the worst of any regular starting tailback last year. So I'll bet the Packers will replace him on passing downs, and Grant won't make a big impact as a receiver. And No. 2, I'm a little worried about his contract situation. Grant is an exclusive rights free agent. He doesn't have a contract, but unlike a restricted free agent or an unrestricted free agent, he can not negotiate at all with other teams. This is because he has only one year of experience as a pro. So leverage-wise, he's stuck. He pretty much has to play for $375,000, or whatever else the Packers, through the goodness of their hearts, are willing to give him. Grant would like to get a big contract -- a Michael Turner-sized contract. And he arguably deserves that, after tearing up the league over the second half of last season. But with no leverage, he has no ability to force the Packers to cough up that kind of cash. So they'll want to get him at something more like what Seattle gave to Julius Jones -- $4 million per year or whatever. It's a crappy deal, and it could get ugly. You may recall that Antonio Gates got caught in an identical contract situation a few years back, and he wound up missing most of training camp and the team's opening game.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

I expect Michael Turner to share time with Jerious Norwood. Maybe a 70-30 split on playing time. Turner is a good back; he's got some speed and he can run people over. Whether the Falcons can put together a good enough offensive line in front of him remains to be seen. And Norwood definitely should be a factor there. I think he's the real deal -- probably the fastest running back in the league. Over the last two years, I believe Norwood has a higher yards-per-carry average than anyone. LaDainian Tomlinson, Adrian Peterson, Larry Johnson, Tatum Bell. Anyone. So Norwood needs to get 10 touches per game. Too early to say where Turner will wind up on my board. My guess is somewhere around 18th.

In regards to Walker, I believe that contract is structured so that he gets $12 million this year -- $11 million to sign, plus a $1 million base salary. Then he's due another $9 million in 2009 ($5 million as an offseason bonus, and a $4 million salary). That's a lot of coin for a receiver who's undergone three knee surgeries and hardly played last year. There have been whispers about chronic knee problems and bone-on-bone issues, but I suppose the Raiders doctors signed off on him. With the amount of money the team is spending, they ought to know. Because if he's anything less than his usual self, I imagine the team may be left considering cutting him next spring when that $5 million bonus is due. Regardless of his health, I don't see Walker doing much in an offense that's ranked 30th in passing two years in a row.

• Comments
• Add Comment

A:

Ken Whisenhunt says that Matt Leinart will be the starter, and I believe him. I think Warner is better right now, but Leinart is 12 years younger and the team has a lot of money invested in him. They need to get his career going. Warner will be 37 on opening day; he's not the long-term answer. And while he got the hot hand during the second half of last year, there are no guarantees that he'd play that way again. Warner has long had a history of hanging onto the ball too long, leading to sacks, fumbles, interceptions and injuries. The team lost an overtime game against San Francisco, for example, when Warner held onto the ball way too long and wound up fumbling when sacked in the end zone. Over the last two years, Warner averages more turnovers per play (one per every 22 pass/run attempts) than any other quarterback with at least 400 of those attempts. Leinart will be the guy, and he could be pretty good.

• Comments
• Add Comment