I would not be surprised if TT has another defensive heavy draft with a sprinkle of OL, and maybe a RB & QB(wolfe-style)
I would not be surprised if TT has another defensive heavy draft with a sprinkle of OL, and maybe a RB & QB(wolfe-style)
"I would love to have a guy that always gets the key hit, a pitcher that always makes his best pitch and a manager that can always make the right decision. The problem is getting him to put down his beer and come out of the stands and do those things." - Danny Murraugh
Well I guess Crosby is the "bee's knees" then. I am sorry I am not sold on the progress he has made, and I would rather have a rock of a kicker from 45 yards and in than one that has a 47% chance of making a 54 yard field goal.
Crosby is servicable, no doubt, but do you trust him with the game on the line from 46 yards out? At this point in his career he should be counted on to nail that kick, and I don't think many of you can express that kind of faith in him.
Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz
40-49 yards
Akers - 83/117 70.9%
Crosby - 26/37 70.3%
I trust him about as much as most of the better kickers, maybe not as much as Vinatieri, but a whole lot more than Nick Folk. It doesn't matter, if it comes down to a 46 yard FG, and it's Crosby or Vinatieri I'm going to be pacing the room. If it's Nick Folk, I'll be loading my pistol.
"Never, never ever support a punk like mraynrand. Rather be as I am and feel real sympathy for his sickness." - Woodbuck
Would you trust him any less than you would trust Akers to make that kick? Their success rates are almost identical from 40+.
One of my problems with MM (and with many fans) is that they seem to expect a 40+ yard field goal should be almost as certain as an extra point kick. It's not, for any kicker. A ball shaped like a football is shaped, kicked broadside so it will either float or tumble is not very stable aerodynamically. It will not always fly "true". Over a distance of 40+ yards it will wonder, even without the outside influence of wind. From the center of the field, the kicker has a tolerance of 9'3' on either side of dead center. If the kick comes from the hash mark, the tolerance is less due to the angle. That's not a lot from 40 yards away or more.
Last edited by Patler; 01-22-2011 at 12:59 PM.
Nice to see you post again, nutz. this forum misses some of your insights.
Guys, thanks for the warm welcome!
Just a few thoughts:
I am not a huge Ryan Grant fan. His style of running is conducive to a short career. His straightforward, smashmouth mentality is fun to watch. But it hasn't been hugely successful (not necessarily this year), which is interesting seeing that we have such a deadly pass attack. We definitely don't have a good line, which hurts, but how many more years does Grant actually have? I'd love to see DeAngelo Williams in green and gold. He could catch some passes out of the backfield and be a Jamaal Charles type of guy.
I agree that the Packers MUST address their O-Line this offseason. With Tauscher probably done and Clifton nearing the end (yes I know he made the Pro Bowl this year, but he's going to be 35), there's not a lot of experience and/or good players. Bulaga is going to be solid, but Colledge...ugh.
Somebody a few posts back talked about moving Barnett outside, which I think would be a pretty good idea. But didn't he reject the idea a few years ago? We'll have a lot of depth a LB if we can resign some of these guys we picked up as fill-ins this year. Might we draft Clay's little bro, Casey, to compliment him on the other side in the mid rounds of the draft?
Finally, I think this Mason Crosby talk is interesting. Not that I think Crosby is bad, but I'd like to see the Packers upgrade. The guy has a huge leg, but he definitely has struggled with accuracy this year. He's been better as of late, but he hasn't been great. I like Crosby, but I do wonder whether or not upgrading him is a priority...probably not.
Barnett rejected it a couple of years ago when the Packers drafted Hawk and Abdul Hodge. The thought was that Barnett would be asked to move to the strong side and Hodge would play the middle. That was in the 4-3 defense where the strong side backer ate up blockers, ala Poppinga. Barnett had every reason to turn that down, considering how poorly Hodge performed in the NFL.
In the 3-4 Barnett would have a better opportunity to make big plays.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote