It is official -- Bulaga and Sitton are on the left side

[rbaloha1]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-offensive-line-undergoes-a-makeover-4u9q9at-205911961.html

[wist43]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-offensive-line-undergoes-a-makeover-4u9q9at-205911961.html

First off, great avatar... the only way to fly :wink:

And on the article - Holy Shit!!!

The only one staying put is EDS - lol... really, I'm speechless :-?

[Pugger]

This is good. Let's put our best tackle on Aaron's blind side. We can't let our $110m QB keep getting hit like he has been any longer! Sitton did pretty fine in the Pro-Bowl and it will be interesting to see who wins the RT job - Newhouse, Barclay or Sherrod.

[wist43]

This means a couple of things off the top - doesn't look good for Sherrod, and RT probably belongs to Barclay.

Assuming it takes at least a few games to gel... that opening tilt in SF could be ugly.

[packrulz]

Newhouse allowed 11 sacks, not acceptable. This should help the running game too. This may have been brewing even before the draft.

[Patler]

No surprise at all about Bulaga. I didn't see the move of Sitton coming at all, but thinking about it, flipping Sitton and Lang does make some sense.

RT during training camp could be a real battle. I expect Barclay to win it.

Now lets hope Bulaga can stay on the field.

[Joemailman]

This means a couple of things off the top - doesn't look good for Sherrod, and RT probably belongs to Barclay.

Assuming it takes at least a few games to gel... that opening tilt in SF could be ugly.

Well, I think that's why they're making the move now. The more reps they can get at new positions the better. It shouldn't be an issue for Bulaga. He played LT at Iowa, and played there without incident in a game in early 2010. I see this as more evidence that MM is serious about running the ball. As you say, this gives Barclay a shot at the lineup, and Bulaga will be more effective in run blocking than Newhouse was. Newhouse will now be in a battle just to make the team.

[Guiness]

Didn't see this coming at all. I see Sitton and Bulaga as the better run blockers, and expected them to stay on the right. I think Wist is right (unlike his feelings about the draft - had to get that one in there!) that Barclay's play allowed this to happen. It does also bode very badly for Sherrod, although I guess if he plays well Bulaga can always switch back over.

[Old School]

Given that MM is moving 3 veterans from the get-go, they should be in sync by the time the season opens. At RT, my money is on Barclay. He impressed me with the way he took to the challenge last year. If Sherrod can play, Newhouse is in trouble.

[woodbuck27]

No surprise at all about Bulaga. I didn't see the move of Sitton coming at all, but thinking about it, flipping Sitton and Lang does make some sense.

RT during training camp could be a real battle. I expect Barclay to win it.

Now lets hope Bulaga can stay on the field.

Yes .... toss The two new guys ( J.C. Tretter and David Bakhtiari) into the mix and it will be interesting.

PACKERS!

[Fritz]

Well, I think that's why they're making the move now. The more reps they can get at new positions the better. It shouldn't be an issue for Bulaga. He played LT at Iowa, and played there without incident in a game in early 2010. I see this as more evidence that MM is serious about running the ball. As you say, this gives Barclay a shot at the lineup, and Bulaga will be more effective in run blocking than Newhouse was. Newhouse will now be in a battle just to make the team.

I am glad other posters think that Bulaga can make that transition no problem. If that's the case, then this is an excellent move, as is the flipping of Sitton and Lang. I don't agree with Joe that Newhouse will battle to make the team - he's the perfect backup as he can and has played both left and right tackle.

It's Sherrod I'm concerned with. This move suggests they're done waiting for him, that he's not necessarily going to be ready for training camp - or that what they've seen of him suggests he's not as good as they hoped. If I remember correctly, he was seen as strictly a left tackle (?) yet I remember seeing him at right tackle for the Pack.

Maybe Barclay is the next Tauscher - body looks like Winnie the Pooh's, attitude plays like Clint Eastwood.

I'm reading that Tretter may be competing with Van Roten for the backup center spot? Two Ivy Leaguers? Perhaps while they pedal the kids' bikes back from training camp they can argue whether it's Marxis or New Critical literary criticism that is less relevant today.

[QBME]

It's Sherrod I'm concerned with. This move suggests they're done waiting for him, that he's not necessarily going to be ready for training camp - or that what they've seen of him suggests he's not as good as they hoped. If I remember correctly, he was seen as strictly a left tackle (?) yet I remember seeing him at right tackle for the Pack.


On the other side of the coin I think this is a positive indicator that Bulaga either is, or almost assuredly will be, pretty much healed up from his injury. Great news there.

[Fritz]

Good point.

I'm rooting for Sherrod. Seems like he's gotten a bit of a bum rap to me - I think he showed some flashes (I know, big disagreement there) before he went down.

I also wonder how all this plays out for Andrew Datko. That kid has size, and supposedly has put on a few pounds. If he's got the skills he was said to have - his seventh round draft pick status appeared to be due to his shoulder injury history - then there is some serious competition this year.

Good, we don't want fat and happy campers. Maybe that's what went wrong last year. ?

[3irty1]

Terrible news for Sherrod but likely the best way to ensure we've got our best 5 on the field for the SF game. Sitton and Bulaga vs Smith and Smith week 1 is going to be a lot more fun to watch. The competition for a spot on the OL is straight forward now. Bak, Newhouse, Sherrod, and Barclay all have a shot IMO.

[MadScientist]

Assuming it takes at least a few games to gel... that opening tilt in SF could be ugly.
Another ready made excuse to hide the fact that the Packers don't have an OL coach worth shit.

Not sure what to expect from this. Sitton should be fine, but I expect Bulaga to go from being a good RT to a fair LT. The right side... at least Rodgers will see them coming.

[Zool]

It's Sherrod I'm concerned with. This move suggests they're done waiting for him, that he's not necessarily going to be ready for training camp - or that what they've seen of him suggests he's not as good as they hoped. If I remember correctly, he was seen as strictly a left tackle (?) yet I remember seeing him at right tackle for the Pack.

Sherrod was playing adequately on the right when he snapped his leg. There's a little tape on him doing it at least. A better O-Line and run game makes ARod's overall numbers go down and I would bet his yards per attempt go up. He should take less hits and be on the run less.

I watch Brady stand flat footed so often and wonder what Rodgers could do with time like that.

[rbaloha1]

Great move.

Persian guy can backup at lt. Cornell guy can backup at one of the guards.

Now -- the defensive line???

[3irty1]

If Bak or Barclay win the RT job at least the Packers should have a nice group of run blockers.

[RashanGary]

The Sitton part definitely wasn't expected. Barclay must have came in really ready to compete. I can't imagine they make this move without having confidence that the RT spot would be OK.

Gonna be an interesting TC, that's for sure.

[Pugger]

Good point.

I'm rooting for Sherrod. Seems like he's gotten a bit of a bum rap to me - I think he showed some flashes (I know, big disagreement there) before he went down.

I also wonder how all this plays out for Andrew Datko. That kid has size, and supposedly has put on a few pounds. If he's got the skills he was said to have - his seventh round draft pick status appeared to be due to his shoulder injury history - then there is some serious competition this year.

Good, we don't want fat and happy campers. Maybe that's what went wrong last year. ?

I don't know if it is the death knell for Sherrod. I'm thinking MM was sick and tired of having is wonderful QB getting hit all the damn time and wasn't wild about the idea of putting basically a rookie in there in Sherrod. If Sherrod is ready to go he may surprise us all and win the RT spot.

I think this move has been on MM's mind for a while now. I'd wager Sitton played some RG at the Pro-Bowl as an experiment by MM to see how he'd fair over there! After seeing Josh was just fine in there Mike decided now was the time to make The Move.

[smuggler]

I'm usually optimistic about most things Packer, but this really concerns me. Watching Michael Oher fall apart on the left side after playing so well on the right as a rookie really has me nervous about Bulaga moving over.

[Pugger]

I'm usually optimistic about most things Packer, but this really concerns me. Watching Michael Oher fall apart on the left side after playing so well on the right as a rookie really has me nervous about Bulaga moving over.

Bulaga played LT at Iowa so it isn't like he's never played the position before. After Sitton's audition at the Pro-Bowl MM decided to make this change. Having this competition at RT will only make that spot better too.

[RashanGary]

My opinions on the players:

Bulaga, to me, is the most overrated OL player we have. Everyone talks about last years hiccups, well, there were a lot of them. He scares me more than he does most.

Sitton, I think he could play LG, RG or RT well. No worries wherever they put him

EDS, I'm not a fan. He doesn't scare me, but I sure don't like him. I don't like him at all, at guard and I think he's a stop-gap type player at center

Lang, he's alright. I'm fine with him starting inside.

Barclay, I'm a fan. I think he's a more natural hands player than Bulaga. He seemed to stick to his guy really well, especially for a rookie. I could see him being a staple for us.

Newhouse, I don't like him anywhere but LT, and even there he's average at best. If Bulaga flops at LT (and I could see it) we might be forced to keep him around. Otherwise, he's probably gone after this season.

Sherrod, a total project. He might be our 3rd string LT this year and never see the field. He could also be, by far, the best long term LT we have on the team. A complete guessing game.

Bakhtiari, I like the steadiness and predictability of his college game. He could end up anywhere. I like his chances, but who the hell knows where he's going to play.

Tretter, who the hell knows. Ivy league project.

Van-Rotten/whoever else. Who knows.


This whole thing is a big cluster fuck. MM is making this move for RIGHT NOW. He's had it with our OL play. This is a drastic move. We have almost as many wild-cards on the OL as we have cards. Sitton is the only clear-cut starter beyond this year. After that, you just never really know who's where, who's what or who's who. TC is going to be a big hit this year. We're a SB team with 4 position changes on the OL from teh start of last year. Bizarre.

[Patler]

We're a SB team with 4 position changes on the OL from teh start of last year. Bizarre.

It will be changes at all 5 positions from the start of last year, won't?

Newhouse - Lang - Saturday - Sitton - Bulaga
Bulaga - Sitton - EDS - Lang - Whoever

[KYPack]

Most teams put their two slugger types at RG & RT. Sitton is our resident tough guy mauler type, he might even be a pretty good RT. Bulaga? He's a clumsy bugger that was playing like shit at RT before his injury. Bulaga move to LT? That's a big I dunno. Now you are gonna play your shaky T at LT? he's gonna face each team's premier pass rusher every game. Bulaga vs Peppers, fer instance, could get very ugly very early.

MM isn't just thinking outside the box, he's destroyed the box and is playing with the packing material, like a kid at Christmas.

I like it, but it's scary as shit.

[RashanGary]

It will be changes at all 5 positions from the start of last year, won't?

Newhouse - Lang - Saturday - Sitton - Bulaga
Bulaga - Sitton - EDS - Lang - Whoever

Oh yeah, even more bizarre. The whole thing just makes my head spin when I try to guess what's coming. You try to put a likely scenario together, but the only thing I can be sure of (and even this is barring injury) is that Sitton will be a good player for us. After that, who the hell knows anything.

[3irty1]

I don't see it as a cluster fuck, I see it as the Packers playing it as safe as possible and hedging their bets. They've effectively consolidated all the question marks on the line to one competition at right tackle with a super healthy competition. Its got to make you feel better about week 1 facing smith and smith but it could be the nail in the coffin for Sherrod. If I wasn't buying steak before I probably am now.

[Zool]

Oh yeah, even more bizarre. The whole thing just makes my head spin when I try to guess what's coming. You try to put a likely scenario together, but the only thing I can be sure of (and even this is barring injury) is that Sitton will be a good player for us. After that, who the hell knows anything.

Time to update the signature?

[pbmax]

Woof. Didn't see Sitton and Lang switching sides. Sitton on occasion misses a pass block like Colledge used to (less frequently though); lunges and the guy isn't there. Not sure that is better on the left side. Lang probably can make the switch. I can't see a team making a decision to be a left handed running running team so this has to be about:

1. Left tackle is getting an upgrade no matter what they need to do. This speaks mainly about Newhouse but also the level of trust in Sherrod right now. If they thought Newhouse could do it, they might ride out Sherrod coming back to backup/upgrade. This means strong doubts about both.

2. Barclay, Barclay, Barclay.

3. Its either EDS or Tretter at center. I can't see them moving Lang twice.

4. Could this be a trial? They have played musical chairs before, but that was always with younger players finding a spot. This seems different.

[Pugger]

Most teams put their two slugger types at RG & RT. Sitton is our resident tough guy mauler type, he might even be a pretty good RT. Bulaga? He's a clumsy bugger that was playing like shit at RT before his injury. Bulaga move to LT? That's a big I dunno. Now you are gonna play your shaky T at LT? he's gonna face each team's premier pass rusher every game. Bulaga vs Peppers, fer instance, could get very ugly very early.

MM isn't just thinking outside the box, he's destroyed the box and is playing with the packing material, like a kid at Christmas.

I like it, but it's scary as shit.

I think you are being rather severe towards Bulaga. He played like crap against the seahens but he's played well most of the time during his career. I'd rather have him there than another season watching Newhouse get beat like a drum at Aaron's blindside. :?

[RashanGary]

MM isn't just thinking outside the box, he's destroyed the box and is playing with the packing material, like a kid at Christmas.



LMFAO. I've been watching the show, "vikings", a TV show on the History Channel. The English talk about them as fighting as if they don't fear death, like men possessed. I'll admit, there is something about a charismatic, fearless leader that makes you just say, "fuck it, let's run out there and swing our axes." That's sort of the feeling I get here. It's like we're heading west with a new navigation tool that nobody has used and then see if we can't win a battle when we get there.

Fer'fucks'sake, if nothing else, this will be a wild adventure ending in a few fatalities.

[3irty1]

Bold strategy going with the Vikings analogy for the Packers. Even if they are the axe swinging kind.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think you are being rather severe towards Bulaga. He played like crap against the seahens but he's played well most of the time during his career. I'd rather have him there than another season watching Newhouse get beat like a drum at Aaron's blindside. :?

Agreed. Bulaga has been a solid starter at RT. Somebody you put there and don't worry about. The occasional bad game that all players have. (Injuries notwithstanding.) Will he be a solid starter at LT? That I'm not sure about.

[RashanGary]

Woof. Didn't see Sitton and Lang switching sides. Sitton on occasion misses a pass block like Colledge used to (less frequently though); lunges and the guy isn't there. Not sure that is better on the left side. Lang probably can make the switch. I can't see a team making a decision to be a left handed running running team so this has to be about:


This is true. The only thing that keeps Sitton from being the perfect player is that one in ever 3 or 4 game pure whiff. Like fuck it, I text-book blocked my guy 199 times in a row, but this time I'm just going to dive at air and let him run free.

The only thing worse than not knowing what you're going to get is knowing exactly what you're going to get and then not getting it. He rarely misses, but when he does, he really makes it count.

Mother fucker, this is scary.

[pbmax]

Most teams put their two slugger types at RG & RT. Sitton is our resident tough guy mauler type, he might even be a pretty good RT. Bulaga? He's a clumsy bugger that was playing like shit at RT before his injury. Bulaga move to LT? That's a big I dunno. Now you are gonna play your shaky T at LT? he's gonna face each team's premier pass rusher every game. Bulaga vs Peppers, fer instance, could get very ugly very early.

MM isn't just thinking outside the box, he's destroyed the box and is playing with the packing material, like a kid at Christmas.

I like it, but it's scary as shit.

Yep. In the article McCarthy sort of agrees, in a historical sense, with Spoon about bigger, more powerful guy/angry bear at RG rather than LG, but Lang is bigger like a Tackle, he's not a mauling Rivera compared to Sitton's fleet footed Wahle. Plus M3 gives the lie to that kind of thinking by confirming the Packers don't scheme to run strong side right like traditional teams liked to do.

This is all about making the blindside as consistently protected as possible. Bulaga and Sitton might not be the best match or even have the most desirable talent for the Left side, but they are playing the best (and are arguably the best players) among those currently healthy enough to man the positions.

No more hoping. This is a new decree for the left side. Thou shalt not be shaky, learning or unavailable.

[rbaloha1]

The move is not bizarre imo. Two best linemen protecting AR backside is wise.

BB played lt in college. Unsure if shorter arms are a liability but have faith BB is a significant upgrade over Newhouse.

EDS is a mauler and holds his ground -- unspectacular but creates running lanes.

Generally right handed teams run to the right side -- expect Lacy to run more to the left than traditional right handed teams.

[denverYooper]

If Bak or Barclay win the RT job at least the Packers should have a nice group of run blockers.

I actually wonder if this is part of the run game re-tool. New stable of backs, M3 talking about power guys on the right, etc, etc.

[run pMc]

Most teams put their two slugger types at RG & RT. Sitton is our resident tough guy mauler type, he might even be a pretty good RT. Bulaga? He's a clumsy bugger that was playing like shit at RT before his injury. Bulaga move to LT? That's a big I dunno. Now you are gonna play your shaky T at LT? he's gonna face each team's premier pass rusher every game. Bulaga vs Peppers, fer instance, could get very ugly very early.

MM isn't just thinking outside the box, he's destroyed the box and is playing with the packing material, like a kid at Christmas.

I like it, but it's scary as shit.

Do not like this move for exactly these reasons.
Maybe it will pan out, maybe they're just doing this as an experiment -- and OTAs are a good time for that.

Going back to his Iowa days (per the scouting reports) Bulaga struggles with speed rushers, I think he'll have trouble with NFL-level rushers on that side.

If they're trying to say that Bulaga > Newhouse, that's no surprise, but I'm not sure one of the other guys won't step up. So they have Bulaga, Newhouse, Barclay, Bahktiari, Datko, Sherrod pushing for OT.
Clearly they don't want Lang back out there...I think he could be ok at RG, but I'm not sure why they want to move Sitton...he's Pro Bowl caliber at RG.

If this more than just tinkering around during OTAs, I will have lots of reservations about this. Whatever they decide, they need improvement in their run-blocking and they need to cut down on the hits/sacks/pressures on Rodgers. 51 sacks is way too high and Graham Harrell can't even make it to the RB without tripping and fumbling.

[Mazzin]

This makes me so happy to see, I think Bulaga will be fine on the left, that's where I thought he would eventually end up once we drafted him. I don't think Newhouse gets the boot this year, it just wouldn't be prudent, year after year we are decimated by injuries I LOOOOVE the idea of having battle tested back ups, and I'd assume he could play guard in a pinch. I think JC will compete for the center job, I'm not to big on EDS but the staff love him, and they get paid to evaluate so I'm sure they know better than me. I'm in the majority here hoping that Barclay wins the RT job, with Sherrod, Newhouse, Bak, and JC as our back ups. Was Datko on our practice squad last year, and if so can we hide him again?

[Mazzin]

Also Zool, I have to say your avatar has always been one of my favorites. Bubbles is the best character on easily one of the greatest shows ever. REP

[Fritz]

Seems one's opinion of the move hinges upon one's opinion of Bulaga.

Though there seems to be agreement that this is not a vote of confidence for Newhouse and/or Sherrod, but may be for Barclay.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Most teams put their two slugger types at RG & RT. Sitton is our resident tough guy mauler type, he might even be a pretty good RT. Bulaga? He's a clumsy bugger that was playing like shit at RT before his injury. Bulaga move to LT? That's a big I dunno. Now you are gonna play your shaky T at LT? he's gonna face each team's premier pass rusher every game. Bulaga vs Peppers, fer instance, could get very ugly very early.

MM isn't just thinking outside the box, he's destroyed the box and is playing with the packing material, like a kid at Christmas.

I like it, but it's scary as shit.

The move of Bulaga doesn't worry me too much. He's a solid pass protector, and he's not a slugger type that you speak of. Maybe Barclay gives them more of that. It comes down to whether they like Newhouse or Barclay more long-term. Plus, most of the young guys they have are more RT types than LT types, so it gives them more options if Barclay fails. The strange thing to me is moving Sitton to LG. He is more of the slugger type than Lang, and you'd think they'd want to balance out there line a little bit. Perhaps they want their best pass protectors on the blindside + they plan to run at other team's best pass rushers, so those guys can't just tee off on Rodgers. Perhaps moving Sitton gives them a better chance at that.

[HarveyWallbangers]

And I'm not sure this says anything about Sherrod. Good or bad. He's worked at RT before. Really, I think the shift of Bulaga comes down to Newhouse or Sherrod at LT vs. Barclay, Newhouse, Sherrod, Bakhtiari, Datko at RT. They probably feel like Newhouse and Sherrod were their only other options at LT--whereas shifting Bulaga to LT allows a bunch of competition at RT.

[wist43]

The line has been a sieve no matter how you slice it - this is a desperation move. I don't think I've ever heard of a team doing something like this... it isn't unheard of to flop a couple of guys, but to reorder the entire line - wow!! I'm still shocked.

They flip-flop the entire line b/c of a lack of production; they draft more offensive linemen out of the same cookie cutter mold they've been using for years, and then say they have no idea where they will play - why does anyone wonder why we have problems on the OL??

Why didn't they just try a new formula for evaluating OL in the draft... like some drive blocking ability and toughness?? Wonder where the circus midget will end up??

[Patler]

The strange thing to me is moving Sitton to LG. He is more of the slugger type than Lang, ...

Do you really think so? I thought it was more the opposite, Lang more of a brute than Sitton, although maybe not a lot of difference between them.

I wonder if moving Sitton was somewhat due to how much Sitton and Bulaga enjoy playing next to each other. At the end of 2011 and at the start of 2012, in several articles each mentioned how much they both are into the thinking of the other. Both mentioned that their work together was as good as either had experienced with others. they just instinctively knew what the other would do. Perhaps MM sees the two together as better than each with someone else.

[The Shadow]

I don't see this as a desperate move at all - I think they want to upgrade left tackle & are pretty high on Barclay. Newhouse can be a backup and anything from Sherrod can be a bonus.

[hoosier]

Well, I think that's why they're making the move now. The more reps they can get at new positions the better. It shouldn't be an issue for Bulaga. He played LT at Iowa, and played there without incident in a game in early 2010. I see this as more evidence that MM is serious about running the ball. As you say, this gives Barclay a shot at the lineup, and Bulaga will be more effective in run blocking than Newhouse was. Newhouse will now be in a battle just to make the team.

Agreed, it is a relief to hear there will not be endless shuffling during TC. But even if Barclay beats him out at RT I don't see Newhouse struggling just to make the team. Right now he would be their top backup at LT. His competition for backup are Sherrod, Datko and the guy they drafted from Colorado. I would bet money on Newhouse in that competition.

[Pugger]

Didn't the Ravens move Oher from LT to RT in the playoffs last year?

[Joemailman]

Agreed, it is a relief to hear there will not be endless shuffling during TC. But even if Barclay beats him out at RT I don't see Newhouse struggling just to make the team. Right now he would be their top backup at LT. His competition for backup are Sherrod, Datko and the guy they drafted from Colorado. I would bet money on Newhouse in that competition.

Packers will probably keep 8. Bulaga, Sitton and Lang are locks. EDS and Barclay are good bets. The 2 rookies, being 4th round picks, would have to be terrible not to make the team. That could leave Newhouse and Sherrod battling for the last spot. It's always possible one of the rookies will suffer a mysterious injury late in the preseason and be put on IR.

[red]

i like then move and have wanted it for awhile now (the bulaga move, not the sitton move). you put your best lineman in the most important spot

the sitton move is a surprise to me like it is to everyone else, but M# said he wanted the left side to be better. well he made it better by putting his best 2 linemen on that side

and i agree with some others, i think this shows that the team is just about ready to give up on sherrod. he was a project to begin with and he's now missed his first 2 seasons in the NFL. if he doesn't show a big improvement in TC i can see him being cut

[gbgary]

i'll bet things will be set up differently by game one. I just don't think he's quick enough to be an LT. he'll going up against every team's best rusher. but that's just me. I don't think it means a thing about sherrod. mm wouldn't have said what he did last week.

[hoosier]

Packers will probably keep 8. Bulaga, Sitton and Lang are locks. EDS and Barclay are good bets. The 2 rookies, being 4th round picks, would have to be terrible not to make the team. That could leave Newhouse and Sherrod battling for the last spot. It's always possible one of the rookies will suffer a mysterious injury late in the preseason and be put on IR.

In your scenario (keeping two rookies, which I agree is likely) I think they keep 9. Maybe if Sherrod proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that he can do it then Newhouse could be expendable, but if there is any doubt at all I cannot see Newhouse getting traded or cut.

[3irty1]

I think Newhouse has never been more tradeable.

[KYPack]

I think Newhouse has never been more tradeable.

These moves have everybody stirred up!

I was about to make a post that Newhouse was never more valuable.

I'd argue with ya, 31, but I don't know who is right.

The two 4th rnd kids are involved in this move, I wonder how their roles are percieved?

[Bretsky]

This is about gettin the best players in the most important spots. IMO Bulaga is no star but he's solid. He'll be a better LT than the Smellow. Sitton is good wherever he goes and Lang is decent. Sherrod sucks....I'm not watching his three to five good plays in his career and saying the dude was pulling it together. He blows. Send him sailing along with Brad Jones to JAG Land if they are even that good.

MM also probabaly realizes his 4th round LT is needs to get a lot stronger to contribute at LT......or maybe anywhere this year.

EDS ....not a Fan

DAM................BRIAN SCHWEKE anybody ???????? Dude would also have looked nice with our 3rd round draft pick.

When Tennessee drafted him two picks before our 4th, that is when profanity started bouncing off the Packer Room Walls in the Basement

[Patler]

Bulaga was drafted to be the LT of the future. On an interim basis, he played LG where he seemed to have the upper hand to start until an injury. He became the emergency RT after never practicing there.

I'm not worried about him at LT. I'm not holding my breath for All-Pro awards coming his way, but I expect a significant improvement over what Newhouse has been.

I also expect Barclay to follow Bulaga's developmental path and be much improved in year two. The kid is a scraper. I don't expect significant fall-off from Bulaga at RT to Barclay.

[wist43]

I've made this argument before, but you homers quickly shout it down... the OL has been in constant turmoil since the TT/MM regime began. It's just a fact.

The only time we ever had any stability on the line was when Clifton and Wells were still here, and TT inherited those guys. When they left, TT had two more positions to screw around with and it's been a carnival of "versatility" ever since.

This move certainly admits that Sherrod is a bust, and Newhouse isn't good enough; TT has never cared about the center position, and still doesn't; then to put the capper on it, TT turns around and drafts two guys who are cut out of the same mold as all the other failed prospects.

I don't mind the move b/c it does help our left side, at least on paper - but it's a flawed philosophy that has us in this mess to begin with.

[Patler]

I've made this argument before, but you homers quickly shout it down... the OL has been in constant turmoil since the TT/MM regime began. It's just a fact.

The only time we ever had any stability on the line was when Clifton and Wells were still here, and TT inherited those guys. When they left, TT had two more positions to screw around with and it's been a carnival of "versatility" ever since.

This move certainly admits that Sherrod is a bust, and Newsome isn't good enough; TT has never cared about the center position, and still doesn't; then to put the capper on it, TT turns around and drafts two guys who are cut out of the same mold as all the other failed prospects.

I don't mind the move b/c it does help our left side, at least on paper - but it's a flawed philosophy that has us in this mess to begin with.

You keep writing this over an over, but who on here HAS been satisfied with the O-line? Who has shouted you down? I can't think of anyone who has. Haven't we all criticized the O-line just as you have? For the most part, no one has been too enthralled with the draft picks over the years, especially those this year. Who has disagreed with you about the O-line even in general?

I hoped things were changing. Bulaga and Sherrod were different than his previous picks. Both are bigger men then previous picks, with the chance to get even bigger. But, picked in the lower end of the first round they come with question marks. That's just a fact of life. Datko is a big guy, too; but may never play.

As for the announced changes, I've been pimping Bulaga for LT since last year, not because he is a budding all-pro, but he will be better than Newhouse. That makes it a step in the right direction.

[HarveyWallbangers]

This is about gettin the best players in the most important spots. IMO Bulaga is no star but he's solid. He'll be a better LT than the Smellow. Sitton is good wherever he goes and Lang is decent. Sherrod sucks....I'm not watching his three to five good plays in his career and saying the dude was pulling it together. He blows. Send him sailing along with Brad Jones to JAG Land if they are even that good.

Sherrod doesn't suck. The dude hasn't played enough to judge him. He showed some good play and some bad play, but he didn't suck. Like Justin Harrell, he hasn't stayed healthy. Like Harrell, if he had stayed healthy, he'd probably be a pretty good player. Also, don't write him off yet. McCarthy says he's in the competition at RT.


Confirming those changes to Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, McCarthy said he has moved Bryan Bulaga to left tackle, Josh Sitton to left guard, T.J. Lang to right guard and has kicked off a three-way competition at right tackle among Don Barclay, Marshall Newhouse and Derek Sherrod.

[Pugger]

I think because of what happened to J. Harrell some folks automatically assume Sherrod is just another Harrell. Harrell's problem was he screwed up his back lifting and that did him in. I've seen other players come back from serious fractures like Sherrod's so I'm not ready to declare Derek a bust. We'll see if he is a full participant in the OTAs later this month.

[RashanGary]

I think because of what happened to J. Harrell some folks automatically assume Sherrod is just another Harrell. Harrell's problem was he screwed up his back lifting and that did him in. I've seen other players come back from serious fractures like Sherrod's so I'm not ready to declare Derek a bust. We'll see if he is a full participant in the OTAs later this month.

I'm with you on this. By the time he plays he'll be about a year and a half from seeing the field (if he plays in the preseason.)

A year and a half out of football is a long time. And it's not like he has a lot of experience. He came from Mississippi State. He lacked fundamentals and strength. He's hasn't really been able to practice or work out right since he got in the league. You'd have to look at him similar to a rookie. Except now, rather than being a regular rookie, he's a rookie who's missed 18 mos of football.

Giving up on a high upside player like Sherrod would seem silly. He's got all of the tools and he's a solid person. If his gets back from this injury, he has a real shot at becoming all he can be.

But you have to give him time, even still. It's been a series of bad events for the guy, but he has a chance. Probably mid-season or next year though. You hate to wait that long, but patience can be a virtue. It might be in this case.

[RashanGary]

As for the announced changes, I've been pimping Bulaga for LT since last year, not because he is a budding all-pro, but he will be better than Newhouse. That makes it a step in the right direction.

If Barclay turns into the play it looks like he might be, Lacy (and/or one of the other running backs comes on) and this new left side can run block. . . . Just having balance will slow down the pass rush. As an individual pass protector, I'm not sure Bulaga is all that much better than Newhouse, but his overall game (being a run blocker too) combined with the new look running game, could be enough where the sum of the parts sort of adds up to a little more.

I don't dislike this move, at all. It's a huge shake-up, and there's not a lot of certainty going forward, but they had to do something to get the run game going (which will probably give a boost to all areas of the offense.)

[bobblehead]

If Sherrod is ready to go he may surprise us all and win the RT spot.


If Sherrod were ready to go, none of this would have happened. He is a bigger longer more athletic guy than Bulaga and a more natural LT imho.

This to me means one thing and one thing only. Sherrod is still a year away, and as long as MM was moving Bulaga, he was making the best run blocking OL he could. Right now, I would bet dollars to donuts that Barclay is the RT on day one. In addition to making the best run blocking OL, I believe we are upgrading the LT spot (2nd most important offensive position) significantly which had to be done.

[Pugger]

Bobble, you might be right but then again MM and company may be weary of seeing Aaron get hit like he did with Newhouse over there and the prospect of a kid that has been out of football for 18 months protecting Rodgers' blindside wasn't all that appealing. Seeing who will win the RT spot this summer will be one of the more interesting battles.

[Carolina_Packer]

MM rolled the dice last year when they didn't move Bulaga over to LT and let Newhouse have his chance to solidify the position. It didn't work out. It gave MM time to see if Derek would make a full recovery from his injury. Unfortunately sometimes it's just a wait and see. At some point, you have to make a decision on what is best and go with based on the information you have. That's what MM can control now.

To me, a desperation move would have been to keep waiting until training camp to see if Derek was ready, only to find out he was not. Telling four guys they have to make a position switch at that point would have been much more challenging. I think MM did the right thing for the team based on the information he had now and the time left before the preparation begins.

I wonder where Andrew Datko fits into the picture potentially? I think you could project a depth chart based on who you think will win the RT spot.

Here is one depth chart that I saw from a site called ourlads.com

LT 75 Bulaga, Bryan 10/1 69 Bakhtiari, David 13/4 77 Datko, Andrew 12/7
LG 71 Sitton, Josh 08/4 64 Van Roten, Greg CF12
C 62 Dietrich-Smith, Evan CF09 72 Gerhart, Garth SF12
RG 70 Lang, TJ 09/4 73 Tretter, JC 13/4 68 Hughes, Kevin SF13
RT 74 Newhouse, Marshall 10/5 78 Sherrod, Derek 11/1 67 Barclay, Don CF12

If Sherrod is ready health-wise in training camp, I don't know how he couldn't compete and win the RT spot. Again, IF HEALTHY by training camp, does he almost have to win the RT spot to stay with the team? It would seem pretty embarrassing to be a bench warmer if he's cleared medically and was a full participant in practice. I also think that depth chart discounts what Barclay might do. Also, Newhouse wasn't a stiff at TCU. He played OT. He might excel with the move to RT, unless they want to make him the backup at LT because he knows the position. I guess they could let him compete for the starting spot at RT and then move him back to backup LT once it shakes out.

[bobblehead]

The line has been a sieve no matter how you slice it - this is a desperation move. I don't think I've ever heard of a team doing something like this... it isn't unheard of to flop a couple of guys, but to reorder the entire line - wow!! I'm still shocked.

They flip-flop the entire line b/c of a lack of production; they draft more offensive linemen out of the same cookie cutter mold they've been using for years, and then say they have no idea where they will play - why does anyone wonder why we have problems on the OL??

Why didn't they just try a new formula for evaluating OL in the draft... like some drive blocking ability and toughness?? Wonder where the circus midget will end up??

I believe they did this for the sole purpose of not having Newhouse at LT. He was, imo, a bottom 5 starting LT in the league. I believe that if Sherrod were healthy and ready to go he would be the starting LT unless he fell on his face in camp.

Just my 2 cents.

[bobblehead]

This is about gettin the best players in the most important spots. IMO Bulaga is no star but he's solid. He'll be a better LT than the Smellow. Sitton is good wherever he goes and Lang is decent. Sherrod sucks....I'm not watching his three to five good plays in his career and saying the dude was pulling it together. He blows. Send him sailing along with Brad Jones to JAG Land if they are even that good.

MM also probabaly realizes his 4th round LT is needs to get a lot stronger to contribute at LT......or maybe anywhere this year.

EDS ....not a Fan

DAM................BRIAN SCHWEKE anybody ???????? Dude would also have looked nice with our 3rd round draft pick.

When Tennessee drafted him two picks before our 4th, that is when profanity started bouncing off the Packer Room Walls in the Basement

I thought you were the big draft/college fan. Did you ever watch sherrod in college??

[KYPack]

I think you are being rather severe towards Bulaga. He played like crap against the seahens but he's played well most of the time during his career. I'd rather have him there than another season watching Newhouse get beat like a drum at Aaron's blindside. :?

Yeah, I gave BB a shot. He is a decent hand, mostly. Smart guy, very prepared with film study, work-out warrior, does all the things you need to do. He's the classic over-achiever, a limited athlete who built himself into a #1 pick. He does real well against guys of equal or lesser ability.

Against the elite?

Look out Nurse.

Bulaga panics when he gets whipped by the top guys and totally freaks out. Lange does the same thing. When things go bad, you must get hold of things and go back to your fundamentals. Bulaga has a tendency to skitz out and try to play harder or quicker or something & it doesn't work. Overall, he has played very well at times, but now we are moving to the side where most teams have their elite pass rush man. I just don't like the percentage of having a limited guy minding that store for us. But was Marshall a better answer at that spot? Hell, I couldn't say that either.

The big move I wanted to see happen was Lang move to C. Have one of the new boys play LG and Sherry become Superman at LT was probably a pipe dream anyway. Let's do the coach's plan. It's aggressive as shit. If this line falls apart, they will look at Mac more than the boys.

[woodbuck27]

If Sherrod were ready to go, none of this would have happened. He is a bigger longer more athletic guy than Bulaga and a more natural LT imho.

This to me means one thing and one thing only. Sherrod is still a year away, and as long as MM was moving Bulaga, he was making the best run blocking OL he could. Right now, I would bet dollars to donuts that Barclay is the RT on day one. In addition to making the best run blocking OL, I believe we are upgrading the LT spot (2nd most important offensive position) significantly which had to be done.

With two more OT's in via the DRAFT:

What's going to happen to OT Marshall Newhouse?

GO PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

Yeah, I gave BB a shot. He is a decent hand, mostly. Smart guy, very prepared with film study, work-out warrior, does all the things you need to do. He's the classic over-achiever, a limited athlete who built himself into a #1 pick. He does real well against guys of equal or lesser ability.

Against the elite?

Look out Nurse.

Bulaga panics when he gets whipped by the top guys and totally freaks out. Lange does the same thing. When things go bad, you must get hold of things and go back to your fundamentals. Bulaga has a tendency to skitz out and try to play harder or quicker or something & it doesn't work. Overall, he has played very well at times, but now we are moving to the side where most teams have their elite pass rush man. I just don't like the percentage of having a limited guy minding that store for us. But was Marshall a better answer at that spot? Hell, I couldn't say that either.

The big move I wanted to see happen was Lang move to C. Have one of the new boys play LG and Sherry become Superman at LT was probably a pipe dream anyway. Let's do the coach's plan. It's aggressive as shit. If this line falls apart, they will look at Mac more than the boys.

Yes KY... it's going to be intriguing.

I do think this:

MM will be as safe as baked beans and brown bread on a Saturday >>>

He's untouchable.

PACKERS !

[Packman_26]

Let's think about what this really can mean for Sherrod. The guy has missed a year and a half because he broke both bones in his leg and wasn't really in the running for the starting LT position when he got hurt in the first place. Even if McCarthy thought he is back to 100% today, why would he put him back in the running for LT right away without any meaningful playing time? Better yet, what would it say about him if it did? If you keep Bulaga on the right side, the options at LT would be Newhouse and Sherrod. One guy that he wasn't satisfied with last year and one guy that no one really has any idea what he will be able to do. I don't see how this can be viewed as anything other than simply favoring Bulaga over Newhouse and in turn, giving the RT position possibly four viable options with Newhouse, Barclay, Sherrod, and Bakhtiari. I think it's pretty clear that this is the safest play and gives eight offensive lineman a chance for playing time.
If you just don't like all or most of the offensive lineman on the team, fair enough, but that really isn't the issue here. This is the best way to possibly get your 5 best without heavily counting on one of the question marks.

[pbmax]

Bulaga was drafted to be the LT of the future. On an interim basis, he played LG where he seemed to have the upper hand to start until an injury. He became the emergency RT after never practicing there.

I'm not worried about him at LT. I'm not holding my breath for All-Pro awards coming his way, but I expect a significant improvement over what Newhouse has been.

I also expect Barclay to follow Bulaga's developmental path and be much improved in year two. The kid is a scraper. I don't expect significant fall-off from Bulaga at RT to Barclay.

I thought so too when Bulaga was drafted. but subsequent events (Sherrod pick) and the fact that all Packer O line prospects have either played Left Tackle or project to it make me think I was too certain initially.

Bulaga, outside of injuries and the bad start to the year last year, is a picture perfect right tackle with the only weakness being speed on edge. Sherrod was the one who projected most clearly to the left.

But with Newhouse having been found wanting (also the Packers possibly believing he has topped out) and Sherrod no sure thing in terms of his availability, Bulaga is the best candidate available and it makes sense to give him as much time as possibly. But I worry about his trouble with speed on the left side.

But if he is there for camp and preseason, we will get a first hand look at how he fits. I am curious, how much have we seen of Bulaga at Left Tackle?

Patler mentioned his time at LG prior to a camp injury, but where did he practice after that? Because he had 12 starts and played in all 16 games in his rookie year and I think the starts were all at Right Tackle. How much of him have we seen at LT?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't see how this can be viewed as anything other than simply favoring Bulaga over Newhouse and in turn, giving the RT position possibly four viable options with Newhouse, Barclay, Sherrod, and Bakhtiari. I think it's pretty clear that this is the safest play and gives eight offensive lineman a chance for playing time.

Indeed.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I thought so too when Bulaga was drafted. but subsequent events (Sherrod pick) and the fact that all Packer O line prospects have either played Left Tackle or project to it make me think I was too certain initially.

Bulaga, outside of injuries and the bad start to the year last year, is a picture perfect right tackle with the only weakness being speed on edge. Sherrod was the one who projected most clearly to the left.

But with Newhouse having been found wanting (also the Packers possibly believing he has topped out) and Sherrod no sure thing in terms of his availability, Bulaga is the best candidate available and it makes sense to give him as much time as possibly. But I worry about his trouble with speed on the left side.

But if he is there for camp and preseason, we will get a first hand look at how he fits. I am curious, how much have we seen of Bulaga at Left Tackle?

Patler mentioned his time at LG prior to a camp injury, but where did he practice after that? Because he had 12 starts and played in all 16 games in his rookie year and I think the starts were all at Right Tackle. How much of him have we seen at LT?

There are definitely question marks. But, worst case scenario, it shouldn't be hard for Bulaga to move back to RT and Newhouse back to LT. McCarthy wants these guys working hard at their new positions, so he won't publicly say this, but I think that is his fallback plan.

[pbmax]

If Sherrod were ready to go, none of this would have happened. He is a bigger longer more athletic guy than Bulaga and a more natural LT imho.

This to me means one thing and one thing only. Sherrod is still a year away, and as long as MM was moving Bulaga, he was making the best run blocking OL he could. Right now, I would bet dollars to donuts that Barclay is the RT on day one. In addition to making the best run blocking OL, I believe we are upgrading the LT spot (2nd most important offensive position) significantly which had to be done.

I think when McCarthy, if being completely honest, said there was no timetable for Sherrod's healthy return to normal practice, that sealed the move.

But even if there was I am not sure if they would trust him yet. And I am not sure they want to yank 3 positions around anymore this year by switching back. I almost cannot imagine the performance from a LT prospect that would unseat Bulaga now.

What is puzzling is why there is no timetable for Sherrod. If it was just medical, there is almost always a timetable. I suspect he simply still isn't comfortable trusting that leg yet, or its giving him discomfort in some way.

[pbmax]

There are definitely question marks. But, worst case scenario, it shouldn't be hard for Bulaga to move back to RT and Newhouse back to LT. McCarthy wants these guys working hard at their new positions, so he won't publicly say this, but I think that is his fallback plan.

I would agree except they have switched Guards too. If they feel a need to move Bulaga back to the right, does Sitton stay?

[pbmax]

I've made this argument before, but you homers quickly shout it down... the OL has been in constant turmoil since the TT/MM regime began. It's just a fact.

The only time we ever had any stability on the line was when Clifton and Wells were still here, and TT inherited those guys. When they left, TT had two more positions to screw around with and it's been a carnival of "versatility" ever since.

This move certainly admits that Sherrod is a bust, and Newhouse isn't good enough; TT has never cared about the center position, and still doesn't; then to put the capper on it, TT turns around and drafts two guys who are cut out of the same mold as all the other failed prospects.

I don't mind the move b/c it does help our left side, at least on paper - but it's a flawed philosophy that has us in this mess to begin with.

I can understand turmoil in terms of the way they train rookie lineman (learning two or three positions). But the starters have been relatively set given age and FA.

Clifton was the unquestioned starter until age and injury made him a part time player. They used Lang and Colledge to emergency fill in when injuries started and replaced him with Newhosue full time in 2013, which was the first year he wasn't on the roster. That's not too strange for a team with a retiring Pro Bowler.

Wells was let go due to contract and filled with everyone's favorite method of player acquisition and yielded Jeff Saturday. When he was beyond done, his backup took over.

LG was Colledge then Lang after Colledge left in FA. No drama.

The right side has been slightly more dramatic. RG was going to be a FA or backup but none delivered. Whitticker started and was a poor match. Then Spitz for 2 or 3 years and then when he got injured they put Sitton in there. That ended the drama.

Right tackle was a mess due to Tauscher's age. This position has seen the most turmoil though some of it was a function of Tauscher's health. Tausch, Barbre, Moll and Lang had time as #1. Moll, Colledge and Giacomini were worked as backups. Bulaga solved this in 2010.

With the exception of RT, does any of this seem like more turmoil than typical?

[KYPack]

I would agree except they have switched Guards too. If they feel a need to move Bulaga back to the right, does Sitton stay?

Yeah, Sitton stays.

I was gonna start a thread on this, but I'm no Red. My boring ass threads get two replies and disappear.

I've been watching last season replays on NFL channel. They are compressed, so if you dvr 'em, you can watch a whole game in a short time after buzzing thru the commercials.

Think I've spotted some stuff. Lang and House had other problems on that left in pass pro. They worked poorly as a unit. Newhouse, as has been mentioned, is very paranoid about the speed rush. He had a tendency to go deep and/or wide to guard against getting beat on the edge. Lang OTOH is aggressive. He would check his man, but would many times crash to the inside (often times to help the pathetic Saturday) far too often. This would create a seam.

Smart DC's would send the RDE/OlB wide. Give Lang an inside read, then blitz the newly created rush lane. It worked. A lot. The two guys on the left have to work together, creating a moveable wall to protect. Cliffy was flat brilliant at covering his man, but also keeping the "wall" intact. Newhouse didn't seem to get the concept and played like an individual. So did DJ. Sitton looks like wall all by himself. I think him and bulaga will keep their position better. Those two are probably our best drive blockers. Maybe we can improve in both areas. Pass pro and rush blocking on the left with a little old fashioned team work.

[Cleft Crusty]

Wells was let go due to contract and filled with everyone's favorite method of player acquisition and yielded Jeff Saturday.

Clefty had granddaughter set up an RSS feed to report sarcasm and this was the first hit

[pbmax]

Think I've spotted some stuff. Lang and House had other problems on that left in pass pro. They worked poorly as a unit. Newhouse, as has been mentioned, is very paranoid about the speed rush. He had a tendency to go deep and/or wide to guard against getting beat on the edge. Lang OTOH is aggressive. He would check his man, but would many times crash to the inside (often times to help the pathetic Saturday) far too often. This would create a seam.

Outside of Newhouse giving up on a speed corner rush too early once his man flew past, that is my most common recollection of the left side. How many guys got penetration between LT and LG. Its odd enough you don't see it unless you get beat one on one clean which is what Colledge would occasionally do. He'd go for the feint inside and then not be able to recover when the guy went to his left.

Remember the Umenyiora hit on Rodgers arm that disturbed a throw to an open Jennings (or Nelson) deep down the left sideline? Don't remember which game, but it was one of the losses. Same gap given up. I think it was Clifton who was trying to stymie him and just didn't get enough of him early. Might have been a stunt.

[pbmax]

Hold on a second. Who is backing up Left Tackle?

[bobblehead]

I thought so too when Bulaga was drafted. but subsequent events (Sherrod pick) and the fact that all Packer O line prospects have either played Left Tackle or project to it make me think I was too certain initially.

Bulaga, outside of injuries and the bad start to the year last year, is a picture perfect right tackle with the only weakness being speed on edge. Sherrod was the one who projected most clearly to the left.

But with Newhouse having been found wanting (also the Packers possibly believing he has topped out) and Sherrod no sure thing in terms of his availability, Bulaga is the best candidate available and it makes sense to give him as much time as possibly. But I worry about his trouble with speed on the left side.

But if he is there for camp and preseason, we will get a first hand look at how he fits. I am curious, how much have we seen of Bulaga at Left Tackle?

Patler mentioned his time at LG prior to a camp injury, but where did he practice after that? Because he had 12 starts and played in all 16 games in his rookie year and I think the starts were all at Right Tackle. How much of him have we seen at LT?

This....and its good to be in agreement with you again.

[Carolina_Packer]

Hold on a second. Who is backing up Left Tackle?

If not being considered for the starters job at RT, I would think Andrew Datko (http://www.drafttek.com/2012-NFL-Draft-Prospect-Profiles/scouting-report-andrew-datko.asp). If Datko is allowed to compete for and wins RT, then I would think Newhouse since he is already comfortable there, and is probably more of a backup than a starter. God forbid Bulaga goes down again, then you'd have a player who could go in and play who has experience.

[wist43]

I can understand turmoil in terms of the way they train rookie lineman (learning two or three positions). But the starters have been relatively set given age and FA.

Clifton was the unquestioned starter until age and injury made him a part time player. They used Lang and Colledge to emergency fill in when injuries started and replaced him with Newhosue full time in 2013, which was the first year he wasn't on the roster. That's not too strange for a team with a retiring Pro Bowler.

Wells was let go due to contract and filled with everyone's favorite method of player acquisition and yielded Jeff Saturday. When he was beyond done, his backup took over.

LG was Colledge then Lang after Colledge left in FA. No drama.

The right side has been slightly more dramatic. RG was going to be a FA or backup but none delivered. Whitticker started and was a poor match. Then Spitz for 2 or 3 years and then when he got injured they put Sitton in there. That ended the drama.

Right tackle was a mess due to Tauscher's age. This position has seen the most turmoil though some of it was a function of Tauscher's health. Tausch, Barbre, Moll and Lang had time as #1. Moll, Colledge and Giacomini were worked as backups. Bulaga solved this in 2010.

With the exception of RT, does any of this seem like more turmoil than typical?

Yes, it is a lot of turmoil... and Lang didn't just come off the bench and step into the LG position, he came from RT, and then I think Barbre flopped around at RT for a while - so it's never as straight forward as grooming a guy to take over - and that's how the world turns on the Packers OL.

Some of that is inevitable to whatever extent, but the Packers revel in it... they rank their linemen 1-whatever and the 6th linemen is first off the bench no matter who goes down. Then they compound the loss of that starter by moving someone to accomodate the 6th linemen, and they've effectively weakened two positions.

It has to hurt cohesion and timing - which is one of the reasons they moved both Sitton and Bulaga, instead of just Bulaga.

Add it all up, and it creates a sloppy line - the cookie cutter "versatility" template; nobody having a set position; and playing musical chairs when someone goes down... add it all up, and it's a problem inandof itself.

I think the best way to describe the our line is 'sloppy'... which is due to Thompson and McCarthy's approach. This move is drastic, and evidence of just how dysfunctional the line has become.

[Carolina_Packer]

Yes, it is a lot of turmoil... and Lang didn't just come off the bench and step into the LG position, he came from RT, and then I think Barbre flopped around at RT for a while - so it's never as straight forward as grooming a guy to take over - and that's how the world turns on the Packers OL.

Some of that is inevitable to whatever extent, but the Packers revel in it... they rank their linemen 1-whatever and the 6th linemen is first off the bench no matter who goes down. Then they compound the loss of that starter by moving someone to accomodate the 6th linemen, and they've effectively weakened two positions.

It has to hurt cohesion and timing - which is one of the reasons they moved both Sitton and Bulaga, instead of just Bulaga.

Add it all up, and it creates a sloppy line - the cookie cutter "versatility" template; nobody having a set position; and playing musical chairs when someone goes down... add it all up, and it's a problem inandof itself.

I think the best way to describe the our line is 'sloppy'... which is due to Thompson and McCarthy's approach. This move is drastic, and evidence of just how dysfunctional the line has become.

I think it's cool when there are divergent opinions on the board. It would be kinda boring if one person made a point and everyone else just nodded all the time. However, I have read a lot of your stuff lately, especially these criticisms of how they have brought together the offensive line. So, I gotta ask. If you were the Packers GM, given a 123 million dollar salary cap and the committed cap numbers they have now, how would you draft and develop offensive lineman? Would you go free agency? Critical analysis is one thing, having a better solution is another. I only ask that to have you back up your criticisms with some of your ideas as to what would work. I'm not saying that as a challenge, it's just that you have a strong opinion, so I figured you had some ideas different than what the team is doing now.

[Patler]

I thought so too when Bulaga was drafted. but subsequent events (Sherrod pick) and the fact that all Packer O line prospects have either played Left Tackle or project to it make me think I was too certain initially.

Bulaga, outside of injuries and the bad start to the year last year, is a picture perfect right tackle with the only weakness being speed on edge. Sherrod was the one who projected most clearly to the left.

But with Newhouse having been found wanting (also the Packers possibly believing he has topped out) and Sherrod no sure thing in terms of his availability, Bulaga is the best candidate available and it makes sense to give him as much time as possibly. But I worry about his trouble with speed on the left side.

But if he is there for camp and preseason, we will get a first hand look at how he fits. I am curious, how much have we seen of Bulaga at Left Tackle?

Patler mentioned his time at LG prior to a camp injury, but where did he practice after that? Because he had 12 starts and played in all 16 games in his rookie year and I think the starts were all at Right Tackle. How much of him have we seen at LT?

I don't look at the Sherrod pick as an indictment against Bulaga as LT. They knew they needed to replace both Clifton and Tauscher, Bulaga had shown a lot of promise at RT in 2010, and they had a chance to pick another highly rated tackle in 2011. They even mentioned that each could end up at either spot, but since Bulaga had settled in so well at RT, Sherrod would be looked at on the left si de first(guard and tackle).

As a rookie, in preseason, Bulaga played both guard and tackle on the left, and seemed to be doing well at both. It didn't take long for them to think he could be an upgrade from Colledge, and I think started a preseason game or two at LG, then shifted to LT. The injury ended that. When he came back, he backed up on the left, and jumped in on the right with no practice there, or so they said.

[Carolina_Packer]

I don't look at the Sherrod pick as an indictment against Bulaga as LT. They knew they needed to replace both Clifton and Tauscher, Bulaga had shown a lot of promise at RT in 2010, and they had a chance to pick another highly rated tackle in 2011. They even mentioned that each could end up at either spot, but since Bulaga had settled in so well at RT, Sherrod would be looked at on the left si de first(guard and tackle).

As a rookie, in preseason, Bulaga played both guard and tackle on the left, and seemed to be doing well at both. It didn't take long for them to think he could be an upgrade from Colledge, and I think started a preseason game or two at LG, then shifted to LT. The injury ended that. When he came back, he backed up on the left, and jumped in on the right with no practice there, or so they said.

A great place to be as a team is when you have two bookends who play together for 5 or more years straight. Every team would love to be in that position. The challenging position to be in is replacing those guys. What stinks is when they get hurt. It slows down their development, and the team's productivity to where they need to mix and match offensive lineman. As fans, you'd love to see the players never get hurt and have a 5 or more year run together as a line. Injuries make continuity difficult. Since the Packers don't go the high priced free agent route, signing someone like Jake Long wasn't going be be in the cards. So, you get spoiled when a Tauscher and Clifton play together so long, but it's not like you can just draft their replacements two years before they decide to hang it up and have them ready to step right in ala A-Rod and Favre. How much money do you want to commit to the guys who are holding down the job presently vs. when you get the replacement guy? Again, it stinks when your first round OT's go down with injury because it hurts your plan to re-build the line. As a team, you aren't going to go out and sign anyone off the street at the point the players are injured, and even if you did, what kind of quality would you be getting? I guess all you can hope for given the present system is enough quality depth. But obviously the reserve guy isn't going to be as good as the starter, otherwise he would be the starter, so that's partially the issue of last year's line. If Sherrod doesn't get that nasty injury in K.C. at the end of 2011, and comes back healthy for the 2012 campaign and Bulaga doesn't get hurt in week 9 last year, who knows what the line may have looked like or how they would have performed. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas, as the saying goes.

[woodbuck27]

Yes, it is a lot of turmoil... and Lang didn't just come off the bench and step into the LG position, he came from RT, and then I think Barbre flopped around at RT for a while - so it's never as straight forward as grooming a guy to take over - and that's how the world turns on the Packers OL.

Some of that is inevitable to whatever extent, but the Packers revel in it... they rank their linemen 1-whatever and the 6th linemen is first off the bench no matter who goes down. Then they compound the loss of that starter by moving someone to accomodate the 6th linemen, and they've effectively weakened two positions.

It has to hurt cohesion and timing - which is one of the reasons they moved both Sitton and Bulaga, instead of just Bulaga.

Add it all up, and it creates a sloppy line - the cookie cutter "versatility" template; nobody having a set position; and playing musical chairs when someone goes down... add it all up, and it's a problem inandof itself.

I think the best way to describe the our line is 'sloppy'... which is due to Thompson and McCarthy's approach. This move is drastic, and evidence of just how dysfunctional the line has become.

Let's for once and all time. Cut out the diplomacy crap.

We're adults here. We're supposed to be solid football fans here. What do we gain by acting delusional? Acting lik a buch of homers. The Rah Rah Boy's/Girl's Booster Club. Just lovely...really lovely ... nice ...great ... lovely.

What's wrong with our OL ...our DL?

The clear cut TRUTH!? It's the prospect's/talent that MM's staff... the coach's for the DL and OL are provided with.

Ted Thompson has, try as he has, had a horrid time supplying talent for the DL and OL. Trying to get it to what we enjoyed (well ...on our teams OL) before his arrival as Green Bay Packer GM.

He's given it the Ole College try? Ted has tried for sure. Yet... success has certainly alluded him. Ted Tompson as tried hard. Within his means and personality. His limited ability to assert himself. He's done all he can.

The bottom line and for whatever the reason!?

Whether it's plain and simple bad luck, over the top rotten adversity; or simply >>> not enough talent. Ted Thompson has frustratedly and generally... failed since the last Super Bowl.

That failue in terms of defeating the real players.

The Green Bay Packers are like bullies in terms of 'the BIG PICTURE'. They beat up the little guys. The Big Guys!?? It's in your face. The answer 'obviously in your face'.

Asa Packer fan. I need that to be fixed. I want the Green Bay Packers winning a Super Bowl, ASAP.

I hope that every member here somehow comes to grips. See's it as clearly 'as a fly on your nose'.

You can ignore TRUTH. The Green Pay Packers need a brand new blueprint. When I read that hogwash of what MM is proposing for the OL. I cannot believe that he's that naive.

Ted has tried and just 'simply' cannot get it done. I mean in terms of the OL and DL. If he continues to fail there >>> TT's simply failing.

Why does TT not get to where he must?

Part of the reason for that is he's a nice guy. Nice guy's and?....you've got it.

The worst thing and Ted Thompson. He's slow on the draw. A horrid procrastinator. He's slow !!!! He's not on the ball.

Ted Thompson is 'the anti- Bill Belichick'. Bill Belichick 'manages'' the NE Patriots every fricken hour of ever fricken' day. That man is clearly ruthless. There's .....zero..... rest for Bill Belichick and thus he's the BEST.

Like him or not Bill Belichick is...the BEST GM/HC.

Bill really tries so hard. The way he does it. The Pat's will always, with him and Tom Brady, be in the conversation for Super Bowl. I've serious doubts that, in 2013. The Green Bay Packers will be in that same concersation.

ThE TRUTH.

Cheer all you want to for OUR team. I applaud you for you fervour. Yet seriously... we're short of serious consideration and 'the ultimate prize'. The Super Bowl. We make the playoffs in the NFC. WE do not run deep into the playoff's after this season's regular schedule.

Why? ...There's so much work to do. There's so much for Green Bay Packer GM Ted Thompson >>> to really get right>>> in terms of realistic/proper focus.

Will Ted Thompson get there? I hope that he's reading Packerrats. Presently if he is he's ignoring some real talent here.

Not paying attention to Wist43.

Come on Ted !

[woodbuck27]

I think it's cool when there are divergent opinions on the board. It would be kinda boring if one person made a point and everyone else just nodded all the time. However, I have read a lot of your stuff lately, especially these criticisms of how they have brought together the offensive line. So, I gotta ask. If you were the Packers GM, given a 123 million dollar salary cap and the committed cap numbers they have now, how would you draft and develop offensive lineman? Would you go free agency? Critical analysis is one thing, having a better solution is another. I only ask that to have you back up your criticisms with some of your ideas as to what would work. I'm not saying that as a challenge, it's just that you have a strong opinion, so I figured you had some ideas different than what the team is doing now.

Simple ..... you look closely how another franchise has done it. Managed to reach a clear success. ie The San Francisco 49ers RE: the OL. You learn from other's success. You don't try to re-write the book. You cast all ego aside and study and understand and look at what you have and in a certain time frame make the blueprint and find the parts that fits it.

It's no different than 'life', and developing 'life skills'.

WOW >>>that's fine ! >>>That works>>What do I have to change>>> to get there?

Design>>procure>>develop>>>succeed.

Celebrate ! >>> Laugh alot. :lol:

PACKERS !

[Fritz]

Let's for once and all time. Cut out the diplomacy crap.

We're adults here. We're supposed to be solid football fans here. What do we gain by acting delusional? Acting lik a buch of homers. The Rah Rah Boy's/Girl's Booster Club. Just lovely...really lovely ... nice ...great ... lovely.

What's wrong with our OL ...our DL?

The clear cut TRUTH!? It's the prospect's/talent that MM's staff... the coach's for the DL and OL are provided with.

Ted Thompson has, try as he has, had a horrid time supplying talent for the DL and OL. Trying to get it to what we enjoyed (well ...on our teams OL) before his arrival as Green Bay Packer GM.

He's given it the Ole College try? Ted has tried for sure. Yet... success has certainly alluded him. Ted Tompson as tried hard. Within his means and personality. His limited ability to assert himself. He's done all he can.

The bottom line and for whatever the reason!?

Whether it's plain and simple bad luck, over the top rotten adversity; or simply >>> not enough talent. Ted Thompson has frustratedly and generally... failed since the last Super Bowl.

That failue in terms of defeating the real players.

The Green Bay Packers are like bullies in terms of 'the BIG PICTURE'. They beat up the little guys. The Big Guys!?? It's in your face. The answer 'obviously in your face'. We're adults?
Asa Packer fan. I need that to be fixed. I want the Green Bay Packers winning a Super Bowl, ASAP.

I hope that every member here somehow comes to grips. See's it as clearly 'as a fly on your nose'.

You can ignore TRUTH. The Green Pay Packers need a brand new blueprint. When I read that hogwash of what MM is proposing for the OL. I cannot believe that he's that naive.

Ted has tried and just 'simply' cannot get it done. I mean in terms of the OL and DL. If he continues to fail there >>> TT's simply failing.

Why does TT not get to where he must?

Part of the reason for that is he's a nice guy. Nice guy's and?....you've got it.

The worst thing and Ted Thompson. He's slow on the draw. A horrid procrastinator. He's slow !!!! He's not on the ball.

Ted Thompson is 'the anti- Bill Belichick'. Bill Belichick 'manages'' the NE Patriots every fricken hour of ever fricken' day. That man is clearly ruthless. There's .....zero..... rest for Bill Belichick and thus he's the BEST.

Like him or not Bill Belichick is...the BEST GM/HC.

Bill really tries so hard. The way he does it. The Pat's will always, with him and Tom Brady, be in the conversation for Super Bowl. I've serious doubts that, in 2013. The Green Bay Packers will be in that same concersation.

ThE TRUTH.

Cheer all you want to for OUR team. I applaud you for you fervour. Yet seriously... we're short of serious consideration and 'the ultimate prize'. The Super Bowl. We make the playoffs in the NFC. WE do not run deep into the playoff's after this season's regular schedule.

Why? ...There's so much work to do. There's so much for Green Bay Packer GM Ted Thompson >>> to really get right>>> in terms of realistic/proper focus.

Will Ted Thompson get there? I hope that he's reading Packerrats. Presently if he is he's ignoring some real talent here.

Not paying attention to Wist43.

Come on Ted !


You are one strange ranger. But where would we be without you?

[bobblehead]

I think it's cool when there are divergent opinions on the board. It would be kinda boring if one person made a point and everyone else just nodded all the time. However, I have read a lot of your stuff lately, especially these criticisms of how they have brought together the offensive line. So, I gotta ask. If you were the Packers GM, given a 123 million dollar salary cap and the committed cap numbers they have now, how would you draft and develop offensive lineman? Would you go free agency? Critical analysis is one thing, having a better solution is another. I only ask that to have you back up your criticisms with some of your ideas as to what would work. I'm not saying that as a challenge, it's just that you have a strong opinion, so I figured you had some ideas different than what the team is doing now.

Isn't it pretty clear that he thinks guys should be groomed for their most natural position and the backups should be backing up a limited range instead of shuffling 3 guys for one injury? I mean, I don't agree with wist on most of this, but I think his actual opinion to the way it aught to be is pretty crystal clear.

[MJZiggy]

Simple ..... you look closely how another franchise has done it. Managed to reach a clear success. ie The San Francisco 49ers RE: the OL. You learn from other's success. You don't try to re-write the book. You cast all ego aside and study and understand and look at what you have and in a certain time frame make the blueprint and find the parts that fits it.

It's no different than 'life', and developing 'life skills'.

WOW >>>that's fine ! >>>That works>>What do I have to change>>> to get there?

Design>>procure>>develop>>>succeed.

Celebrate ! >>> Laugh alot. :lol:

PACKERS !

I'm curious as to how you define success here.

[wist43]

Isn't it pretty clear that he thinks guys should be groomed for their most natural position and the backups should be backing up a limited range instead of shuffling 3 guys for one injury? I mean, I don't agree with wist on most of this, but I think his actual opinion to the way it aught to be is pretty crystal clear.

Ya afraid to hang out with the uncool kids?? :cool:

Some teams value the trenches, the Packers do not - they value T's, but not interior linemen... I should think that obvious.

They value T's on the offensive line, and are perpetually trying to make college tackles into pro guards and center. They've never drafted a center, and even though many of the tackles they've drafted were projected to guard, and I don't mind that per se, the fact is the Packers will not outright draft a guard or center. The Packers would never consider drafting a Chance Warmack or Jonathon Cooper in the 1st round.

We don't have any drive blockers, and rarely call power running plays. Our guards have size, but their strength is zone blocking and pass protection (which really isn't very good either) - as a result, our team is viewed as being soft.

It's not as if I'm the only one making this argument - it's obvious enough to many, that the question gets posed to TT and MM from time to time. They of course always dismiss it, but when you pass on size, for the smallest OT in the draft - what are we supposed to make of that??

We were pushed around by stronger, more physical teams last year - it was hard to watch.

[rbaloha1]

Wist, excellent points.

Remember we are running wco that relies more on nimble linemen than maulers. Generally zbs and screen teams require linemen that can get to the second level.

Lacy will give us the identity of a power running team with finese linemen LOL! Persian guy is a finisher and TT did bring in a blocking te.

Agree about the pain of watching packer linemen getting dominated at the point of attack which some posters continually dismiss.

[woodbuck27]

I'm curious as to how you define success here.

That definition is centered on the following mj:

The San Francisco 49ers RE: the OL. You learn from other's success.

The San Fran 49er have a premier OL. How did the 49ers achieve that Rep. as having such a top OL?

That might be TT's focus and in terms of improving our OL.

So my definition of success here would be:

A recognized significant level of achievement, based in certan criteria of result (s) pertaining to a focused goal (s). ... Success

One of TT goals might sensably be to get MM and the OL coach the talented people on the roster that demonstrate a large improvement in protecting Aaron Rodgers. Has he done that in this off season?

Nope...He's taken a half hearted swipe at getting in some more people for 'competition' on the OL As Packer fans we cannot expect that those two young men he drafted in Rd. 4 of this last draft will mean the difference.

Success will be measured in significantly less QB SACKs.

TT would acquire the proper talent to give the team's OL, a real shot at achieving success. Recognition of that via measurement. ie TT wants QB SACKS reduced by a minimum 33%.

That goal cannot be reached or 'success' attained. Unless he takes specific action. mj TT needs to get a solid LT. TT needs to find a Pro Bowl Center again. TT ignored the Center position in his last draft. That was neglegence on his part. The best he did for the team was 'possibly'; acquire via the draft in Rd. 4 picks for depth.

TT knows that our OL needs improvement at the LT spot. TT knows generally that the Packers OL isn't doing a proper job protecting the QB. TT's style in this draft was like swinging at shadows.

Alot of whiffs at and more...nothing.

PACKERS !

[rbaloha1]

That definition is centered on the following mj:

The San Francisco 49ers RE: the OL. You learn from other's success.

The San Fran 49er have a premier OL. How did the 49ers achieve that Rep. as having such a top OL?

That might be TT's focus and in terms of improving our OL.

So my definition of success here would be:

A recognized significant level of achievement, based in certan criteria of result (s) pertaining to a focused goal (s).

One of TT goals might sensably be to get MM and the OL coach the talented people on the roster that demonstrate a large improvement in protecting Aaron Rodgers.

Success might be measured in less QB SACKs.

He would acquire the proper talent to give the team's OL, a real shot at acheving outstanding success and recognition from those that recognize such.

PACKERS !

Niners have a different offensive system that emphasizes power running. The niners draft the correct linemen to match their system (i.e Iuapti, Staley, etc.)

It could be argued the Packers do not always the correct o-linemen for MM's system.

[swede]

That definition is centered on the following mj:

The San Francisco 49ers RE: the OL. You learn from other's success.

The San Fran 49er have a premier OL. How did the 49ers achieve that Rep. as having such a top OL?



http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z236/dsteenswede44/boy_hand_raised.jpg

Because they sucked bad for so many years they had a long string of top draft picks!

[woodbuck27]

http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z236/dsteenswede44/boy_hand_raised.jpg

Because they sucked bad for so many years they had a long string of top draft picks!

Smart Boy Swede !!

You receive points for that response. That response answers 'certainly' ... a part of the question. That response is a contribution.

'Often' the best indicator of a resolution to change your direction is failure>>>more failure should certainly get the attention you deserve.

This in terms of football and Packer football:

To look clearly at any part of the team. Examine that part i.e. the OL or DL and ** tear it down...build over if and where that's determined as necessary.

In terms of the focus of this thread...or 'the Packers Offensive Line'. The Green Bay Packers and MM's plans to 'again' shuffle his deck.The deck that his esteemed GM,Ted Thompson has provided him. **

That's what the San Fran 49ers certainly have done /are doing... all over their roster in terms of positions. With the added challenge of better ensuring a successful future. Not just on their OL. Right now that team is the new model of how to manage for success.

The Green Bay Packers don't even appear to be addressing the problem. It certainly appears as if Ted Thompson is perfectly content with the status quo. How and why that's the case is not my place as a Packer fan to even really try to understand. I just simply accept that Ted Thompson is a very strange/an eccentric man.

Does Ted Thompson study the San Fran 49ers as I do? You know the 'keep your friends close... your enemies closer', sorta thing.

The measure of 'the success' of that team's (San Fran 49er's) resolution and action. Has been far more than how that team handles the Green Bay Packers; and that obviously ... easily.The real measure of the San Fran 49ers success is the dynamic process of winning the next Super Bowl.That remains to be seen; yet certainly appears imminent with any fairness in terms of adversity in the back of their minds.

What we're seeing in the Green Bay Packers over the course of the last two seasons. Is a direction 'polor opposite'... in terms of success Vs the San Fran 49ers.

It amazes me that serious Packer fans don't see that.

As I've posted before. Too many Packer fans. Those as passionate as I am over the Green Bay Packers. Have a far different emotional bent in terms of 'anything Packers and success'. These fans are too easy to spot. The Packer fans that defend the direction and 'status quo' of the Green Bay Packers with 'juvenile or snide responses. A clearly negative recourse or counter productive to real success and how that's achieved. In their blind loyalty such response is nothing more than destructive. It adds nothing positive to the discussion.

I'm too polite to post right back:

Thanks a bunch ....and now please...take a hike. Ignorance will always have it's place in our free society. :-)

Thes acker fans are perplexing and consistent. They can be counted on to remain stagnated. Defend any criticism (s) no matter to what degree based on sound observation and measurement with:

Stuff like....Wern't you around when the Green Bay Packers won Supwer Bowl XLV? I want to immediately respond. How old are you? In my book. Such responses 'only' demonstrate a flaw in that person. That flaw may merely be related to immaturity and not at all anything to do with a rotten attitude or silly arrogance.

Yet common sense weighs in on all of that ...until the ...GIANT LEAP... phfffftt ... screw that silly Packer fan. That fan is like a persistent deer fly, on an otherwise wonderful day, fishing a perfect trout stream. You simply keep brushing it away. You center focus on catching bigger older trout.

My feelings and anything like that is to want to respond something like ..."and what has that got to do with anything Green Bay Packers and 2011-12?"

Frankly... why return such response to any man/woman that points to ... lives in Green Bay Packer past. Is Super Bowl XLV 'a measure of success now/today' !? To even offer that simple rebuttal to such Packer fans. Would in all likelihood be a waste of effort. Added to that, a possible burden of certain frustration.

Nope...I simply brush the pest away...politely 'of course'.

I've learned this a long time ago.

You can never contend with arrogance or ignorance. Add any stubborness to that and you've got certain trouble. All the same I worry about such Packer fans. I worry because their not helping today. Those Packer fans contribute 'only' towords one thing>>> more acceptance of failure in their delusions/blindness. Those fans are simple and content to live in the past. Such people are all too common.

People like Wist43 and I are by far 'a minority'. It takes proper attention to being accurate in analysis and dedicated to insightfulness and caring. Courageous enough to issue the report to the deluded to join our cause. A cause for which we will be attacked as a gurantee. Attacks that we are strong enough to deal with.

The 'yea sayers' see... are actually the 'nay sayers'. They cannot possibly even see just how badly their beloved Green bay Packers arev slipping and that being definitely the case since Super Bowl XLV.Thank Goodness for them and their bottom line... without any recourse towords 'simply' thinking:

They can always turn to responses pointing to the past. Super Bowl XLV. Which excuse me...frankly, is merely cute... hardly helpful.

My arguments are clearly centered on one value. The good of the Green Bay Packers. I'm every Packer fans 'BEST FRIEND'. So by the way is Wist43.

I admire Wist43 as more than 'just' a very solid poster.

He's...well yes ...'the Moses of Packerrats'

If Wist43 is Moses then...am I Aaron?

He and I are about today/tomorrow and nothing to do with any tiring reference to past success. Ancient Green Bay Packer history in terms of success and the 2013 season has zero relevency.

Super Bowl XLV was just wonderful and long gone. I want to determine what happened since then and ask questions and get right down to why? Why 'the Green Bay Packers' are now 'door mats' for the best NFL teams.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_XLV

Yes ... remember this with pride. I do so with all four Super Bowls. I do so experienceing those wins as a Packer fan. Yet as a realist and today. All four wins are .....history....gone. We cannot succeed living in our pasts. Pasts that are both good and bad. To get to tomorrow 'smiling'. We need to examine the now. Do so clearly/honestly. Where necessary and after a constant effort to see misdirection...change ...fix it.

Evaluate it...fix it....focus all attention on goal setting and measurement. Is that fixed yet?

Super Bowl XLV. Lovely and OLD.

That success has little to do with today in terms of how the Green bay Packers have performed Vs solid NFL teams. Against teams that easily take the Green Bay Packers 'down town'. Against teams that frankly...embarrass 'the Green Bay Packers'.

The reason for this is simple to diagnose. It's been before you on Packerrats.The reasons...Ted Thompson surely has access to such information. I'm actually informed here that Ted Thompson has superior information than I may gleen as a mere Packer fan.

If that's the TRUTH ..what in hell is he doing with that superior information but little to nothing. Another announcement by the Green Bay Packers HC Mike McCarthy that again the Packer Offensive line will be re-shuffled.

Well whoopi doo. Let the bells chime !! Isn't that 'just great'. That great ...isn't very likely to solve very much Packer fans that's centered on OL and success.

Sorry for the news.

This news proves clearly to me that:

I assume too much and Ted Thompson !?? Ted Thompson and NOT fixing the Packers OL. Evidence of that being 'a fact' or TRUTH is clearly in evidence by MM's anouncement of this shuffle.

Old underwear is just that ... old underwear. Sometime you need to toss it and shop for and purchase new.

How would you fix the Packer OL problems? Those problems are certainly as we all should know/realize as BIG. How should Ted Thompson finallly get down to task and Fix our well below average Offensive Line? Would you sincerely hope to do that with the Packers currently on the roster? If you respond in the affirmative.

Count yourself as one of the deluded.

Somehow may 'the force' be with thee.

It sure was that ... and Super Bowl XLV. Sometimes the most improbable things ... happen to the most improbable beneficiary (any NFL Team) In this case or specific reference..... the Green bay Packers. .

As my Dear Mom often advised...

"Edwin...always find somewhere in your heart 'a blessing' for the less gifted, the less fortunate."

We all exist to somehow negatively or positively and hopefully, ultimately serve one another to make this a better world. We're like the ingredients of an especially good soup...a contribution of sorts.

GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

In this thread we're focusing on the Packers OL. It's become a mess.

Hopefully we can discuss the other mess that's the Packers DL. Lots to be concerned about there. Well actually... Wist43 is keeping Y'all up to speed on that.

Worthy; Daniels; Raji; Wilson; Neal and Miller.That mix and lots going on. Pickett and aging and soon retiring!? >>> More concern.

New blood and this draft and 'just drafting', isn't going to fix all that's necessary to fix on the lines, in terms of 'anytime soon'. A real fix will take patience but when will it really ever get stated?

If you'd care to look into grading and the PFF... Pro Football Focus Way... here's a LINK:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

For what it may be worth...Regarding the Green Bay Packer Needs Analysis I'll add this LINK Fr. the same site:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/02/09/2013-team-needs-green-bay-packers/


I'm going to post this information. So at least all Packerrats may possibly be focused on 'the facts'... or 'the down and dirty', and the Packers Offensive Line ( OL ).

http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/pff-ranks-packers-offensive-line-21st-overall

Which is 'of course' strictly speaking/thinking...is offensive. Any :shock: to any of you? This post will then... if that's the case.... enlighten you.

In lay terms the Green Bay Packers Offensive Line 'is very bad'. It's that way because of a lack of decent talent on the roster. I'm positive it's not anything to do with coaching, that limited talent.

The Packers Offensive Line fails in terms of certain basic needs:

A) Protecting the teams QB...and we should all clearly see this:

Aaron Rodgers and his over cautious tendencies...holding on and on and on to the damn ball too long...doesn't help himself. That man is going to seriously with that way ...hurt himself.

Aaron Rodgers is too much the Anti-FAVRE and that to his own destuction. He's hardly the exciting gunslinger. He's not creative.

B) The Packers OL fails terribly in 'the running game'.

Again the reason is clearly in the Packer roster for OL ...'no talent'. Ted Thompson cannot find a decent Big man on the OL and the DL inspite of all he's done, trying to do just that. Ted Thompson's record and 'Big Men' and his drafting skill are well... sadly pathetic.

Ted thompson hit a homer bringing Ryan Pickett to the Packers but overall he's stubborn to FA unless a man will sacrifice all ego in terms of compensation.

I read 'the sighs and the what if's' and that isn't going to cut it in terms of an answer. Yes his picks have gone south in terms of health or injury.

So I say>>> cut to the chase Ted. Don't be so fricken' slow >>> to the drawing board. Stop waiting and waiting, because waiting isn't helping the Packer coaching staff in terms of talented personnel on the roster. Talent proper and decent enough to mold an efficient OL.

Smarten up...wake up Ted Thompson. Please...anyone.

His efforts >>> no efforts....and the OL.

If TT has to be so fricken EGO Draft ECCENTRIC and ignore the fruits of FA or even a trade option. He has to strictly focus on the Packers OL and DL. Not accumulating picks for LB and WR from obscure Colleges. TT cannot afford such nonsence at the sacrifice of higher picks. He cannot waste luxury picks. He certainly shouldn't give such away to his worst enemy...the San Fran 49ers.

Frankly... after what I've seen in this off season. Ted Thompson has in my view gone for a really long snack. When will he ever truly come out of his cave?

I'm just plain and simple sick of his invisability and silly ass nonsence and more picks for prospects that won't contribute to the Packers basic needs.

Ted Thompson is on such a level, and seriously close to being deemed, 'out to lunch' ... it's really sad. I like Ted Thompson and can't help wonder, even be concerned over what up with that man?

That man ...the Green Bay Packer GM....... surely... has access to this stuff:

http://cheeseheadtv.com/blog/pff-ranks-packers-offensive-line-21st-overall

That stuff is in Ted Thompson's face ....accurate. What's he ever...ever...ever going to do about it? Based on his past>>>little to nothing. Ted's way is like geting people to move into a house when the roof is worn out.... leaking and in general disrepair.

First do what >>> needs to be first. If it's just the DRAFT Ted. Draft for the need that is>>> the priority need. Poor Ted obviously doesn'r even recognize that need. He imagines that solving a running game in the NFL is accomplished by drafting a solid prospect from the college game that set up behind an awesome College Offensive Line.

Message to Ted Thompson:

Ohh that RB you drafted in round two. Eddie Lacy....right. Not a bad move but well except for 'just maybe' this. It's simply a ...'by the way', Ted.

Eddie Lacy's Alabama Crimson Tide's Offensive Line incuded a versatile offensive lineman named Barrett Jones that you ignored last week in the draft. and ...Ohh Ted...who did you draft at center? Surely your going to eventually get around too fixing the issue that was created when you allowed your once Pro Bowl Center, Scott Wells to walk in Free Agency?

Ted? Ted?? ... Ohh.................Ted?

Ohh fellow Packerrats...Don't even imagine trying ... to lace me with any silly ass propoganda to refute such information.

That information shouts ALARM !!

ALARM and NEGLECT !!!

Please .....give us all here some decent ideas as to what TT has to finally get around to doing .....to fix the OL... just that please.

woodbuck27

[pbmax]

Rodgers not the anti-Favre. Only anti-Favre the Older. Favre the Younger was very much the textbook definition of holding the ball too long. Neither liked to throw the ball away. Favre used to make ill-advised throws at the end of holding the ball too long, Rodgers takes the sack.

Number of Playoff appearances in the last decade: San Francisco 2 (its 4 if you go back 12 years)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Green Bay 7 (its 9 if you go back 12 years)

Super Bowl wins in last decade:
San Fran: 0
Packers: 1

There are two first round picks who SHOULD be starting on the O line and barring a broken leg, would be starting for the Packers.
San Fran: 3 first round picks

There are many ways to skin a cat and to take the 49ers approach and meld it to the Packers players and coaches would produce problems. The 49ers have a raft of young talent and can now backfill backups almost in any method they prefer in the short term. They certainly can use 12 draft picks to trade up several times in a draft.

The Packers are trying to churn out double win seasons and will not be drafting early in any round in most cases. Much of their best young talent is on their second or third contract in Rodgers case. The biggest challenge facing a successful team is maintaining that success level. Adopting the 49ers talent acquisition model from a time when they were terrible is a bad option. To do it, you would need to constantly trade up, thereby reducing the number of picks and your replenish rate.

Thompson doesn't need to change the approach. The Packers need to turn out one or two better lineman either by choosing better players with the choices they have or developing better players with the coaches they have.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see a decade of laughingstock play just to get better draft picks for Ted.

[MJZiggy]

Rodgers not the anti-Favre. Only anti-Favre the Older. Favre the Younger was very much the textbook definition of holding the ball too long. Neither liked to throw the ball away. Favre used to make ill-advised throws at the end of holding the ball too long, Rodgers takes the sack.

Number of Playoff appearances in the last decade: San Francisco 2 (its 4 if you go back 12 years)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Green Bay 7 (its 9 if you go back 12 years)

Super Bowl wins in last decade:
San Fran: 0
Packers: 1

There are two first round picks who SHOULD be starting on the O line and barring a broken leg, would be starting for the Packers.
San Fran: 3 first round picks

There are many ways to skin a cat and to take the 49ers approach and meld it to the Packers players and coaches would produce problems. The 49ers have a raft of young talent and can now backfill backups almost in any method they prefer in the short term. They certainly can use 12 draft picks to trade up several times in a draft.

The Packers are trying to churn out double win seasons and will not be drafting early in any round in most cases. Much of their best young talent is on their second or third contract in Rodgers case. The biggest challenge facing a successful team is maintaining that success level. Adopting the 49ers talent acquisition model from a time when they were terrible is a bad option. To do it, you would need to constantly trade up, thereby reducing the number of picks and your replenish rate.

Thompson doesn't need to change the approach. The Packers need to turn out one or two better lineman either by choosing better players with the choices they have or developing better players with the coaches they have.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see a decade of laughingstock play just to get better draft picks for Ted.

^^ This.

[Carolina_Packer]

Rodgers not the anti-Favre. Only anti-Favre the Older. Favre the Younger was very much the textbook definition of holding the ball too long. Neither liked to throw the ball away. Favre used to make ill-advised throws at the end of holding the ball too long, Rodgers takes the sack.

Number of Playoff appearances in the last decade: San Francisco 2 (its 4 if you go back 12 years)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Green Bay 7 (its 9 if you go back 12 years)

Super Bowl wins in last decade:
San Fran: 0
Packers: 1

There are two first round picks who SHOULD be starting on the O line and barring a broken leg, would be starting for the Packers.
San Fran: 3 first round picks

There are many ways to skin a cat and to take the 49ers approach and meld it to the Packers players and coaches would produce problems. The 49ers have a raft of young talent and can now backfill backups almost in any method they prefer in the short term. They certainly can use 12 draft picks to trade up several times in a draft.

The Packers are trying to churn out double win seasons and will not be drafting early in any round in most cases. Much of their best young talent is on their second or third contract in Rodgers case. The biggest challenge facing a successful team is maintaining that success level. Adopting the 49ers talent acquisition model from a time when they were terrible is a bad option. To do it, you would need to constantly trade up, thereby reducing the number of picks and your replenish rate.

Thompson doesn't need to change the approach. The Packers need to turn out one or two better lineman either by choosing better players with the choices they have or developing better players with the coaches they have.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see a decade of laughingstock play just to get better draft picks for Ted.

I'm not comparing the talents, just putting SF in the same situation as Green Bay.

Anthony Davis breaks both the bones in his leg late one season and is gone the whole next season.
Joe Staley goes down with a hip injury in week 9 of the following season.

That's going to have an effect on a team's season. Are the reserves going to be just as good as the starters? No, they are reserves. Let's look at how the OL was built:

Joe Staley, LT 1st round pick 28 in 2007
The 49ers acquired Staley after trading into the first round with the New England Patriots. The Niners gave their 2008 1st Round Pick(which became Jerrod Mayo) and a 4th Round pick in 2007. The Patriots subsequently traded the fourth round pick (110 overall) to the Oakland Raiders for wide receiver Randy Moss.

He started as a RT and swapped over to LT the next year. Had he been injured at any point in his early development, it would have set the team back, especially since they gave up a first round pick to acquire him.

Mike Iupati, LG, drafted 1st round, pick 17
#17: Carolina → San Francisco (PD). Carolina traded this selection to San Francisco for 2009 second- (43rd overall; Carolina selected Everette Brown) and fourth-round selections (111th overall; Carolina selected Mike Goodson).

Jonathan Goodwin, C, drafted by Jets in 5th round 2002
He's 34 now. On August 3, 2011, Goodwin signed with the San Francisco 49ers as an unrestricted free agent.

Alex Boone, RG, undrafted free agent in 2009
After being signed by the San Francisco 49ers as an unrestricted free agent following the 2009 NFL Draft, he was released on the final day of roster cuts. He was subsequently signed to the practice squad. He was signed to the active roster on January 6, 2010. In the 2012 season he exceeded expectations by becoming a starter, and by performing at or near Pro Bowl caliber levels.[2] One journalist called Boone one of the most underpaid players in the NFL.

Anthony Davis, RT, drafted 1st round, pick 11 in 2010
#11: multiple trades:
#11: Chicago → Denver (PD). Chicago traded this selection, a 2009 first-round selection (18th overall; Denver selected Robert Ayers) and a 2009 third-round selection (84th overall; traded to Pittsburgh, who selected Mike Wallace), and quarterback Kyle Orton to Denver for quarterback Jay Cutler and a 2009 fifth-round selection (140th overall, Chicago selected Johnny Knox).[source 1]
#11: Denver → San Francisco (D). Denver traded this selection it acquired from Chicago to San Francisco for a first-round selection (13th overall; traded to Philadelphia, who selected Brandon Graham) and a fourth-round selection (113th overall; traded to New England, who selected Aaron Hernandez).

So, in my example, Joe Staley and Anthony Davis both go down. Who does that leave them with for healthy starting OL? Iupati. He's obviously good. We have Sitton. He's good too. What does it leave them with at center? A journeyman on his 3rd team who is still productive, but getting up there in years. Finally they have Alex Boone, an undrafted free agent who was on their practice squad and really made good once he got an opportunity.

We spent 2 first rounders on OT, they spent 4 first round picks to get 3 first rounders since they had to give up a first rounder to get Staley back in 2007. We had an old center last year who was just a stop gap. Now we have someone we hope is the next Alex Boone. They both entered the league in 2009 as undrafted free agents and now EDS is getting a shot. We'll see if he makes good.

So, the difference in the path taken to build the offensive line is Mike Iupati (a first rounder pick) and Josh Sitton (a fourth round pick). Otherwise, we both drafted OT's in the first round, they have an undrafted guard they hit on and we have T.J. Lang. Then it's journeyman guy at center vs. EDS. They are not built so wildly different if you really look at it. What is the difference by and large? Health for one and body type/scheme. They always wanted to run the ball with Gore and we have not had a strong commitment to the run. This year we drafted a bruiser and an edge guy at RB, so that might just change. SF can show different looks on offense with what they have built. Green Bay is identified mostly by the passing game with the exception of when they could get a few solid performances from James Starks in the playoffs in 2010. I think the commitment level is about to change. That will make the Packers less predictable and help the offense and Aaron Rodgers even more.

Now we just need a run of good health and with that some continuity and I think we will be OK. I can't control what Thompson does with the draft or how he and MM build an OL, so I don't stress about it. I wish them well.

[woodbuck27]

Rodgers not the anti-Favre. Only anti-Favre the Older. Favre the Younger was very much the textbook definition of holding the ball too long. Neither liked to throw the ball away. Favre used to make ill-advised throws at the end of holding the ball too long, Rodgers takes the sack.

Number of Playoff appearances in the last decade: San Francisco 2 (its 4 if you go back 12 years)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Green Bay 7 (its 9 if you go back 12 years)

Super Bowl wins in last decade:
San Fran: 0
Packers: 1

There are two first round picks who SHOULD be starting on the O line and barring a broken leg, would be starting for the Packers.
San Fran: 3 first round picks

There are many ways to skin a cat and to take the 49ers approach and meld it to the Packers players and coaches would produce problems. The 49ers have a raft of young talent and can now backfill backups almost in any method they prefer in the short term. They certainly can use 12 draft picks to trade up several times in a draft.

The Packers are trying to churn out double win seasons and will not be drafting early in any round in most cases. Much of their best young talent is on their second or third contract in Rodgers case. The biggest challenge facing a successful team is maintaining that success level. Adopting the 49ers talent acquisition model from a time when they were terrible is a bad option. To do it, you would need to constantly trade up, thereby reducing the number of picks and your replenish rate.

Thompson doesn't need to change the approach. The Packers need to turn out one or two better lineman either by choosing better players with the choices they have or developing better players with the coaches they have.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see a decade of laughingstock play just to get better draft picks for Ted.

Rodgers not the anti-Favre. Only anti-Favre the Older. Favre the Younger was very much the textbook definition of holding the ball too long. Neither liked to throw the ball away. Favre used to make ill-advised throws at the end of holding the ball too long, Rodgers takes the sack. pbmax

That's what I mean.The way that Aaron Rodgers handles himself in or out of the pocket assists his high SACK number. In that sense his high SACK number isn't all on the inefficiency of the OL. ..... woodbuck27

Ted Thompson's picks as Packers GM ... Up To Date ... April 28, 2013

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/ttpicks28-v09m63m-205052051.html

"There are two first round picks who SHOULD be starting on the O line and barring a broken leg, would be starting for the Packers." pbmax

Maybe!?

The two tackles that TT selected in Rd. 1 are B. Bulaga (will start LT in 2013) and D. Sherrod who's strictly now, a wait and see RE: starting at either tackle position. D. Sherrod 'in fact' may not be effective or ready to go anywhere on our OL this season. Evidence of that is TT going OL-OL... back to back picks #109 D. Bakhtiari and #122 J.C. Tretter >>> in Rd. 4 Draft 2013. .... woodbuck27

Thompson doesn't need to change the approach. The Packers need to turn out one or two better lineman either by choosing better players with the choices they have or developing better players with the coaches they have. pbmax

Wist43 and I are focusing our argument on TT not watering down the draft by trading down for more picks. That TT has a more reasonal prospect approach or higher chance for delivering a decent prospect to MM and the coaching staff if he selects that needed OL candidate/prospect or DL candidate/prospect whatever position/prospect in higher rounds. Going with more than an assumption that >>>higher quality prospects generally are drafted earlier than lower quality prospects.

We're claiming that Ted Thompson 'in fact' is smarter, to change his approach.

The draft isn't the equivalent to 'a Ted Thompson sandbox', where his mother supplied along with that sandbox all sorts of different toys. Less toys means more room for Ted to play and really get to discover those fewer toys. Fewer toys means greater toy appreciation and less neglect of all toys overall.

RE: The coaches and developing the players that TT does supply them. You want an orange pick an orange not an apple. If TT only supplies apples when MM and his coaching staff need to develop efficient oranges>>> the end result is defeated at the beginning by a TT bent that fails time and time... over and over again.

MM: I need an orange TT...draft me nothing but an orange, please and thank you.

TT: Tell you what MM. Is it OK if I draft something that looks like an orange. Even if it's an apple? I'm going to do that MM.

MM: Scratches his head because the bottom line. He's the HC of 'THe Green Bay Packers'.

MM: Is wearing a T-Shirt embazoned with this logo. In Ted I trust. Then it must be/has to be...so. .... woodbuck27

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see a decade of laughingstock play just to get better draft picks for Ted pbmax

Well that's where every Packer fan is headed if TT doesn't get a grip. .... Woodbuck27

GO PACK GO!

[woodbuck27]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/204935441.html

Q: The evaluations of David Bakhtiari seem to indicate that he is a finesse player who lacks strength. Is he tough enough to help the Packers or just another soft player?


A: Bob McGinn - Dave: Bakhtiari's issue is strength and power. He is on the short side for LT and seems to lack pop for LG, RG and RT. He's just 21. He needs to get bigger and stronger. Scouts don't think he can get on the field and be a legitimate player until his weight and strength increase. His niche might be as a guard for a zone team that cuts a lot. But with GB incorporating more power run game last year I'm not sure where he figures here. It will be very interesting to see where McCarthy and James Campen lined him up initially.

[pbmax]

I have yet to see a convincing argument against trading down.

3irty1 ran some numbers that demonstrate Thompson has not veered into the foolishness of trying to acquire every starter among the lower rounds and he effectively points out the cost prohibitiveness of being wrong high in the draft.

And I would bet that is we used a more reasonable list of effective starters that the original wist list, which was constructed to help him make his claim, those numbers would look even more favorably at the bottom of the draft.

Just because every poster here knows who Brian Schwenke is, and has read his draft profile on NFL Draft Scout and has seen his You Tube highlights and saw the National Championship games does not make him a better selection than either of Thompson's two O line picks.

We know a name; the Packers, hopefully, know the player he will become.

[denverYooper]

Poor drafting, reckless management, I don't even know how Murphy lets these bums stick around.

These are dark days, my friends.

[rbaloha1]

Poor drafting, reckless management, I don't even know how Murphy lets these bums stick around.

These are dark days, my friends.

Again, A-rod masks the problems which continues to make everyone appear good. Takeaway AR -- no playoffs.

It is just live Favre's success allowed numerous coaches head coaching opportunities. Some succeeded (Gruden, Reid, etc.). Some failed (Mornenenwig, etc.)

In regards to the niners drafting success due to draft position -- hogwash. When you draft higher you must also pick the correct players which the niners consistently doing. The Cowboys 90's success from the Walker trade was selecting the CORRECT PLAYERS.

The Packers selected #5 overall and selected Hawk. The niners select #6 and selected Vernon Davis. The Packers with a mid first round pick selected Justin Harrell.

[KYPack]

Poor drafting, reckless management, I don't even know how Murphy lets these bums stick around.

These are dark days, my friends.

Yep, we are definitely in a huge heap of shit, kids.

There is only one thing I can do.

Gonna fashion myself a good tinfoil hat, to protect myself from all these huge chunks of sky that are raining down on all of us.

[rbaloha1]

Yep, we are definitely in a huge heap of shit, kids.

There is only one thing I can do.

Gonna fashion myself a good tinfoil hat, to protect myself from all these huge chunks of sky that are raining down on all of us.

Dad, you will protect us.

[Brandon494]

Love the move, for one it puts our best lineman on Rodgers blind side and he it also gives us the best run blocking unit if Barclay wins the RT spot. I would think Marshall backs up RT and Sherrod at LT while both rookies will be backups on the interior line. I can't wait to see what Rodgers can do with a solid running game this season if everything works out.

[pbmax]

nm

[Fritz]

I'm not comparing the talents, just putting SF in the same situation as Green Bay.

Anthony Davis breaks both the bones in his leg late one season and is gone the whole next season.
Joe Staley goes down with a hip injury in week 9 of the following season.

That's going to have an effect on a team's season. Are the reserves going to be just as good as the starters? No, they are reserves. Let's look at how the OL was built:

Joe Staley, LT 1st round pick 28 in 2007
The 49ers acquired Staley after trading into the first round with the New England Patriots. The Niners gave their 2008 1st Round Pick(which became Jerrod Mayo) and a 4th Round pick in 2007. The Patriots subsequently traded the fourth round pick (110 overall) to the Oakland Raiders for wide receiver Randy Moss.

He started as a RT and swapped over to LT the next year. Had he been injured at any point in his early development, it would have set the team back, especially since they gave up a first round pick to acquire him.

Mike Iupati, LG, drafted 1st round, pick 17
#17: Carolina → San Francisco (PD). Carolina traded this selection to San Francisco for 2009 second- (43rd overall; Carolina selected Everette Brown) and fourth-round selections (111th overall; Carolina selected Mike Goodson).

Jonathan Goodwin, C, drafted by Jets in 5th round 2002
He's 34 now. On August 3, 2011, Goodwin signed with the San Francisco 49ers as an unrestricted free agent.

Alex Boone, RG, undrafted free agent in 2009
After being signed by the San Francisco 49ers as an unrestricted free agent following the 2009 NFL Draft, he was released on the final day of roster cuts. He was subsequently signed to the practice squad. He was signed to the active roster on January 6, 2010. In the 2012 season he exceeded expectations by becoming a starter, and by performing at or near Pro Bowl caliber levels.[2] One journalist called Boone one of the most underpaid players in the NFL.

Anthony Davis, RT, drafted 1st round, pick 11 in 2010
#11: multiple trades:
#11: Chicago → Denver (PD). Chicago traded this selection, a 2009 first-round selection (18th overall; Denver selected Robert Ayers) and a 2009 third-round selection (84th overall; traded to Pittsburgh, who selected Mike Wallace), and quarterback Kyle Orton to Denver for quarterback Jay Cutler and a 2009 fifth-round selection (140th overall, Chicago selected Johnny Knox).[source 1]
#11: Denver → San Francisco (D). Denver traded this selection it acquired from Chicago to San Francisco for a first-round selection (13th overall; traded to Philadelphia, who selected Brandon Graham) and a fourth-round selection (113th overall; traded to New England, who selected Aaron Hernandez).

So, in my example, Joe Staley and Anthony Davis both go down. Who does that leave them with for healthy starting OL? Iupati. He's obviously good. We have Sitton. He's good too. What does it leave them with at center? A journeyman on his 3rd team who is still productive, but getting up there in years. Finally they have Alex Boone, an undrafted free agent who was on their practice squad and really made good once he got an opportunity.

We spent 2 first rounders on OT, they spent 4 first round picks to get 3 first rounders since they had to give up a first rounder to get Staley back in 2007. We had an old center last year who was just a stop gap. Now we have someone we hope is the next Alex Boone. They both entered the league in 2009 as undrafted free agents and now EDS is getting a shot. We'll see if he makes good.

So, the difference in the path taken to build the offensive line is Mike Iupati (a first rounder pick) and Josh Sitton (a fourth round pick). Otherwise, we both drafted OT's in the first round, they have an undrafted guard they hit on and we have T.J. Lang. Then it's journeyman guy at center vs. EDS. They are not built so wildly different if you really look at it. What is the difference by and large? Health for one and body type/scheme. They always wanted to run the ball with Gore and we have not had a strong commitment to the run. This year we drafted a bruiser and an edge guy at RB, so that might just change. SF can show different looks on offense with what they have built. Green Bay is identified mostly by the passing game with the exception of when they could get a few solid performances from James Starks in the playoffs in 2010. I think the commitment level is about to change. That will make the Packers less predictable and help the offense and Aaron Rodgers even more.

Now we just need a run of good health and with that some continuity and I think we will be OK. I can't control what Thompson does with the draft or how he and MM build an OL, so I don't stress about it. I wish them well.


This is a good, thoughtful post. It takes into account one factor that changes the whole equation: injuries. That's not to say that if Bulaga and Sherrod hadn't gotten hurt they'd have been awesome - but the point is, we'll probably never know. Although I have hope both will be healed and we can see.

As fans, we are uncomfortable with discussing the impact of injury too much, because we've been taught that that's excuse making. And to some degree it is. But you still ought to account for it in discussions like these, because several of these posts have been dismissive of the Thompson offensive line drafts without considering injury as one factor, especially when compared to SF's healthy line.

We might be hailing Ted as an offensive line drafting genius had Sherrod not gotten hurt, and Bulaga as well. We might not. But we'll never know.

[Patler]

Injuries to high draft picks have influenced roster building and team performance.

Had Murphy not been injured, who knows how anxious TT would have been to draft Jennings, or Jones, or Nelson. One of those later picks might have been spent on another position.

Had Harrell not been hurt and instead performed reasonably well, who knows what different complexion the defense might have.

Had Collins not been hurt, he could be playing for years yet, and teamed with Burnett the back end could be a strength of the defense instead of a question mark.

Had Sherrod not been injured, maybe the line would be set for a number of years, except for center.

You can even take it a step further, and say had Spitz not been injured after taking over at center, that position might have been stable today, too. Of course, that would have required a new contract with Spitz too.


Injuries are always a part of the game, but it seems the Packers have had more than their fair share of career ending or career altering injuries to prominent players who could/should have had a strong impact on the team today.

[woodbuck27]

Hold on a second. Who is backing up Left Tackle?

Yesterday afternoon Sunday 05 May, 2013...I got thinking more about your question, pb.

I look at it this way. Who's our backup LT? First>>>Who's our starting LT?

The latest announcement informs us that Bryan Bulaga will shift over to LT. That's left to be determined RE: Will he be even close (r) to a better fit than the latest 'disaster', in terms of run support, Marshall Newhouse. Who in all fairness was on ... his... learning curve. Who in all fairness was getting it and protecting Aaron Rodgers better late in the season and the pass.

In that regard and LT efficiency... the fact that the running game was improved must be factored in.

We've gone from discussing the running game and the Zone Blocking System. That's morphed into what? To the latest news and Green bay Packer OL and more>>> political musical chairs.

How long ago was it that we were discussing 'the new' Zone Blocking System (ZBS) and the efficiency that will lend to the Packer running game? Running game >>> what running game, under the watchful eye of Ted Thompson and in terms of any consistency after Ryan Grant?

What running game, when MM somehow loses sight of a game plan and focus? Aborting a working strategy not continuing to exploit that running game. When that running game is working on that day >>> that game.

What's that >>>why's that... Packer fans? You know the answer. If that answer is the correct one. Do you seriously expect a real change in the Packer offensive primary weapon ..the passing game? It better change as opposition defenses have caught up to that.

The Packers running game.

Ted Thompson's latest 'new' focus. His latest focus in the 2013 draft. A different flavour/focus than where he correctly went in the 2012 draft; and sadly left 'only' partially finished.

Decisions >>>decisions. Ohh .... what to do!?

The newest focus 'a HUGE investment' >>> Aaron Rodgers. A new presumption. RB 'talent' will protect TT's investment in Aaron Rodgers.

Sadly that thinking seems to me to be flawed. There's a huge glitch in that thinking/strategy:

Before you can drive a vehicle (the brand new/shiney RB) down **a new highway.

**The NFL >>> and the Packer's OL Vs the Best NFL Team's DL. (see below please **).

Winding the clock back 'in review':

Your, 'of course' aware that last season. We witnessed just how huge that OL failure was. 51 QB sacks and 33 of those credited directly to the Packer OL. The Packer QB SACK Stat 'negatively padded' via the cautiousness of Aaron Rodgers, contributing to his own demise in terms of another(18) SACK's.

At the final whistle...an enormous 51 QB SACK's total. That must stop or the conclusion is obvious. Someone is going to get seriously banged up. . . . Aaron Rodgers.

** Before the vehicle (s) can get access to 'the highway'. Tha highway has to be constructed...finished...examined ...approved ... and then finally.... opened for traffic (the RB's). Maybe that task isn't so great; looking back on the emergence of DuJuan 'Little big Man' Harris?

I'm likely like you and hope not. I like it to be easy ...too.

Yet ... please allow me to focus on that highway.The question that begs to be asked has again been answered last week. The highway is again under re-construction. Running game and 'new shiny RB's' >>> 'buyer beware'.

The real question should be:

At what stage is the highway at, in terms of completion; or, all good to go/safe for all vehicles?

Have 'the right materials'; 'an ample supply of right materials' ! Been made available by Ted Thompson?

HC Mike McCarthy has to do the best he can with the pieces given him. MM has a confusing puzzel to solve, with pieces from four different puzzels. He has 'sorta' LT pieces, that may fit better as RT pieces. LG pieces that are re-hammered RG pieces.

MM's view = LG>><<RG; with 'a blessing' in dependable G Josh Sitton.

MM has a ***6' - 2 " (308 lb) UFA at Center.

The last *** 'smallish fella' at Center, was allowed to walk in FA. Ignoring the fact that he was a solid puzzel piece. Proof of that; Mr. Wells election to the Pro Bowl. That ignored, for an aged Center from the AFC !? Another 'blind experiment', that 'unfortunately' was doomed to failure. Will 'as I re-call it', continue to cost the Packers CAP this season.

MM's latest response at Center. A UFA and cast-off >>>re-claimed >>>given a second life Packers', Evan Dietrich-Smith. Who in all fairness is at the bottom end, of his learning curve.

MM presents us with an 'OL deck shuffel'. I admire his PR skills... if not his sincerety.

That announcement based in a brand new focus !

The Packers need to accomodate two highly prized draft picks at RB. Eddie Lacy... 'the new pride of the RB stabel' and Johnathan Franklin 'the designated' #2 man.

DuJuan Harris played 'Little Big Man' late last season and will be in a fight to be retained, or his 'thanks and goodbye' will be extended. As Packer fans don't we owe DuJuan Harris's heart for football? DuJuan Harris>>> 'the light' >>> finally came on for Ted Thompson. He finally saw his QB, not knocked on his ass. Answered part of the question, as to how to prevent that 'dangerous event'.

Maybe ...Alex Green gets a reprieve (if the Packers go with four RB's). It's bye bye and thanks for showing up sometimes, Mr.Starks.

We see a deck shuffle. " That's how the Packers OL is built to perform." Errrrcchh ! Nope ! Let's toss that delusion to the curb.

Our OL is weak. Not 'big and strong' is strictly, a partial criticism. I look to the talent level at a paricular position. I'm also aware that we don't live in a perfect world and things Packer.

The basic TRUTH. Our OL is weak. Clear evidence of that TRUTH is it's ranking in terms of the running game. Only three NFL teams 'run block' worse, than the Green Bay Packers OL. So much for the 'to be daunting' ZBS. That's 'morphed' into something else, to provide 'whatever' is the newest flavour/strategy.

How did the Green Bay Packers ever arrive at....... 'so political' !?

Whatever...the truth is.... that the OL is like the 3-4 defensive scheme. Based in the roster choices, clearly not working. The finger is pointed to the size factor. Sure ... but my position is that it's moreso a lack of talent. With TT's attitude of 'NO' to FA. He must focus correctly on a solid strategy towords drafting extremely well. After succeeding at that; TT then needs to be blessed with 'at least', some average luck. He's certainly not naive or aware that one out of two of his draft picks; will 'maybe' be headed North to Canada, after all the prospects 'and NFL', weigh in.

Every puzzel piece has to somehow fit every puzzel spot. As Wist43 points out the Packers draft a tackle assuming he will easily turn out to be a superior guard. Ignoring the simple fact that a tackle is a tackle a guard a guard and please draft a center... to play CENTER.

Those prospects have to transfer/translate their talents to the BIG TIME >>>the NFL.

That generally and optimistically takes about three seasons.

Be patient Packer fans. That's exactly where my Packer fan reality lives.

GO PACK GO !

[pbmax]

Injuries are always a part of the game, but it seems the Packers have had more than their fair share of career ending or career altering injuries to prominent players who could/should have had a strong impact on the team today.

If I could be guaranteed to get an actionable answer to two questions about the Packers instead of any draft picks (or say contribution from draft picks) I would take:

1. Are the Packers doing anything to contribute/prolong to injuries?

2. Why does the defense play disciplined in one game then undisciplined in 2 others?

Solve those two riddles, I like the odds. Unfortunately, odds are long that they get any answers at all.

[Fritz]

Well, we can at least be assured the Packers are trying to get answers to both those questions, and have way more info at their disposal than we do. But who knows whether the answers they come up with can then be translated into actions that will resolve the problems?

[Pugger]

Injuries to high draft picks have influenced roster building and team performance.

Had Murphy not been injured, who knows how anxious TT would have been to draft Jennings, or Jones, or Nelson. One of those later picks might have been spent on another position.

Had Harrell not been hurt and instead performed reasonably well, who knows what different complexion the defense might have.

Had Collins not been hurt, he could be playing for years yet, and teamed with Burnett the back end could be a strength of the defense instead of a question mark.

Had Sherrod not been injured, maybe the line would be set for a number of years, except for center.

You can even take it a step further, and say had Spitz not been injured after taking over at center, that position might have been stable today, too. Of course, that would have required a new contract with Spitz too.


Injuries are always a part of the game, but it seems the Packers have had more than their fair share of career ending or career altering injuries to prominent players who could/should have had a strong impact on the team today.

I'm with you. All of these injuries has made an impact on this team. These major injuries to high draft picks have made it a hell of lot more challenging to win, that's for darn sure. I find it incredible were able to be as successful as we were last year considering Woodson, Jennings, Matthews, Nelson and Bulaga all were unavailable for stretches of games last year and we lost Bishop and Perry too. Of all of the playoff teams last year we were hit the hardest but still managed to win 11 regular season games. With all of the new talent assembled these past 2 years if we can have the health we had in 2011 I like our chances.

[denverYooper]

If I could be guaranteed to get an actionable answer to two questions about the Packers instead of any draft picks (or say contribution from draft picks) I would take:

1. Are the Packers doing anything to contribute/prolong to injuries?

2. Why does the defense play disciplined in one game then undisciplined in 2 others?

Solve those two riddles, I like the odds. Unfortunately, odds are long that they get any answers at all.

At some point, there were a few articles and sound bytes from M3 indicating that they were doing some serious study in the offseason on #1. I wonder if part of the conclusion was that they need to focus more on the running game - through talent and reps. It would make a certain amount of sense, because it allows the OL to be the aggressors more often and should, if they become proficient enough, give the defense more rest, thus lowering their fatigue and all of the negative effects therefrom.

[George Cumby]

Yep, we are definitely in a huge heap of shit, kids.

There is only one thing I can do.

Gonna fashion myself a good tinfoil hat, to protect myself from all these huge chunks of sky that are raining down on all of us.

You may join me in the fallout shelter I dug in my backyard. I have lots of MRE's and HotPockets. You will have to supply your own laxative and toilet paper.

Seriously, though, it's the injury thing which is so troublesome as it doesn't seem to improve.

[woodbuck27]

This is a good, thoughtful post. It takes into account one factor that changes the whole equation: injuries. That's not to say that if Bulaga and Sherrod hadn't gotten hurt they'd have been awesome - but the point is, we'll probably never know. Although I have hope both will be healed and we can see.

As fans, we are uncomfortable with discussing the impact of injury too much, because we've been taught that that's excuse making. And to some degree it is. But you still ought to account for it in discussions like these, because several of these posts have been dismissive of the Thompson offensive line drafts without considering injury as one factor, especially when compared to SF's healthy line.

We might be hailing Ted as an offensive line drafting genius had Sherrod not gotten hurt, and Bulaga as well. We might not. But we'll never know.

Solid or certainly valid factoring Fritz.

Here it goes right now in Canada and the CFL. The Annual CFL College Draft is getting set to go this afternoon. I'm going to watch it on 'the Sports Network' TSN.

There will be 7 Rounds of drafting on the tube.

First on the clock >>> The Hamilton Tiger-cats. The analysis is draft the BEST Canadian available and assist changeing a Hamilton Defense ...that did very badly in the 2012 season. It was actually last in many categories. It should be the large 300 lb plus Defensive Lineman Fr. the Calgary Dynamos....DE (Yup ... no shit!) Linden Gaydosh.

I'm particularly interested to see where the lad that TT is bringing in for... I assume.... a competition at OLB, from Montreal, Canada >>> will be drafted in the CFL. I'm writing of College DE Andy Mulumba.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=114433&draftyear=2013&genpos=DE

Edit:

In fact ....DE Lindon Gaydosh from The Calgary Dynamos and Home...East River, Alberta ...was the first pick of the CFL Draft ...2013 Edition. He's now a Hamilton Tiger-Cat.

[woodbuck27]

Solid or certainly valid factoring Fritz.

Here it goes right now in canada and the CFL. The Annula College Draft is getting set to go this afternoon. I'm going to watch it on 'the Sports Network' TSN.

There will be 7 Rounds of drafting on the tube.

First on the clock >>> The Hamilton Tiger-cats. The analysis is draft the BEST Canadian available and assist changeing a Hamilton Defense ...that did very badly in the 2012 season. It was actually last in many categories. It should be the large 300 lb plus Defensive Lineman Fr. the Calgary Dynamos....DE (Yup) Linden Gaydosh.

I'm particularly interested to see where the lad that TT is bringing in for... I assume.... a competition at OLB, from Montreal, Canada >>> will be drafted in the CFL. I'm writing of College DE Andy Mulumba.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=114433&draftyear=2013&genpos=DE

Edit:

In fact ....DE Lindon Gaydosh from The Calgary Dynamos and Home...East River, Alberta ...was the first pick of the CFL Draft ...2013 Edition. He's now a Hamilton Tiger-Cat.

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/football/cfl/story/2013/05/05/sp-cfl-draft-linden-gaydosh.html

Lindin Gaydosh was just on TV being interviewed after being the first selection of this draft.

At the end of a brief interview he was asked ... What are you going to do now:

His response:

Go crack a beer. I've got a few beers here. Hahaha ...Typical Canuck. :tup:

[rbaloha1]

Any canucks that could help the packers left side?

[woodbuck27]

OK there he goes >>> to >>>The Winnepeg Blue Bombers

The second pick of the CFL Draft >>> presently our own>>> UFA Andy Mulumba.

When he's cut by the Green Bay Packers. CFL fans and especially in Winnepeg we'll enjoy seeing Andy Mulumba defend on the Defensive Line as a Blue Bomber.

PACKERS !

[woodbuck27]

Any canucks that could help the packers left side?

OL >>> LT?

Anyway the BEST OLman... OG/C Corey Watman>>>a tad small for us:

6'- 1" (284 lbs) again from East Michigan >>> just was picked 4th by the Saskatchewan Roughriders.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=84818&draftyear=2013&genpos=OG

Another early selection should be... LG/C Brett Jones from the University of Regina. He's bigger:

http://www.reginacougars.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=1899

[Patler]

Any canucks that could help the packers left side?

Do you mean their "full-right" side?
(Maybe you have to be Canadian to get this one???)

[woodbuck27]

Do you mean their "full-right" side?
(Maybe you have to be Canadian to get this one???)


Where I come from Patler...full-right ...is a referrel to hockey and a goalies equipment. Whether you use regular or a 'full-right' goalie blocker and goalie stick. Which depends on whether or not you catch a puck with you left hand (a normal RH person) or catch a puck with your right hand or your a Southpaw (lefty).

[Patler]

Where I come from Patler...full-right ...is a referrel to hockey and a goalies equipment. Whether you use regular or a 'full-right' goalie blocker and goalie stick. Which depends on whether or not you catch a puck with you left hand (a normal RH person) or catch a puck with your right hand or your a Southpaw (lefty).

Yup, that's what I was referring to. I have run into it generally for lefthanders other than goalies, too. Was at a tournament one time, around Montreal I think. In addition to "Height" and "Weight", the roster had a category of "Hand", and for each player listed either "R" or "F-R" depending the side he shot from.

[Carolina_Packer]

Nerd Alert! OK, so the overall discussion is whether the Pack are doing enough to shore up the offensive line. Someone even suggesting that TT won't draft a center in a higher round. That got me to wondering what the other 31 teams have done about bringing in a starting center. I'm not saying what's right or wrong, just what is.

Here is a tally of each starting center in the NFL by the round they were selected.
1st Round=4, 2nd Round=5, 3rd Round=1, 4th Round=2, 5th Round=3, 6th Round=3, 7th Round=4, Undrafted=10

For the sake of coming up with an average, I considered an undrafted player to be the 8th round.

Round Chosen x Total Number Per Round

1x4=4
2x5=10
3x1=3
4x2=8
5x3=15
6x3=18
7x4=28
8x10=80
________
176 / 32=5.5=league-wide average draft round for a starting center

This means that a lot of clubs are not addressing their center position with very high draft picks. So, while it would seem obvious that choosing a Max Unger (2nd round for Seattle) or Mike Pouncey (1st round for Miami) would provide a more talented player, the data here shows that teams are trending towards finding centers in lower rounds, even in the pool of undrafted talent. See the list of players from each team below.

If someone else wants to look at the OG's and OT's and figure out what the average round per position of the whole league is, that might be interesting info to add to the discussion. You can look up the depth chart data here: http://espn.go.com/nfl/teams

NFC

NFC East
Dallas, Ryan Cook 2nd Round 2006
NYG, David Baas, 2nd Round 2005
Phila, Dallas Reynolds, Undrafted 2009
Washington, Will Montgomery, 7th Round 2006, Carolina

NFC West
Arizona, Scott Wedige, Undrafted 2012
SF, Jonathan Goodwin, 5th Round 2002
Seattle, Max Unger, 2nd Round 2009
St. Louis, Scott Wells, 7th Round 2004 by Green Bay

NFC North
Chicago, Roberto Garza, 4th Round 2001 by ATL
Detroit, Dominic Raiola, 2nd Round 2001
Green Bay, EDS, Undrafted 2009
Minnesota, John Sullivan, 6th Round 2008

NFC South
Atlanta, Todd McClure, 7th Round 1999
Carolina, Geoff Hangartner, 5th Round 2005
New Orleans, Brian De La Puente, Undrafted 2008
Tampa Bay, Ted Larson, 6th Round 2010

AFC

AFC East
Bufalo, David Snow, Undrafted 2011
Miami, Mike Pouncey, 1st Round 2011
New England, Ryan Wendell, Undrafted 2009
NYJ, Nick Mangold, 1st Round 2006

AFC West
Denver, Dan Koppen, 5th Round 2003
KC, Ryan Lilja, Undrafted 2004
Oakland, Stefan Wisniewski, 2nd Round 2011
San Diego, Nick Hardwick, 3rd Round 2004

AFC North
Baltimore, Gino Gradkowski, 4th Round 2012 (Birk retired)
Cincinnati, Kyle Cook, Undrafted 2007
Cleveland, Alex Mack, 1st Round 2009
Pittsburgh, Maurkice Pouncey, 1st Round 2010

AFC South
Houston, Chris Myers, 6th Round 2005
Indianapolis, A.Q. Shipley, 7th Round 2009
Jacksonville, Brad Meester, Undrafted 2000
Tennesee, Fernando Velasco, Undrafted 2008

[Patler]

Very interesting. That so many were undrafted is very surprising to me.

[woodbuck27]

Holy Smokes Carolina_Packer ...come on ...out with it!

You work for PFF:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/

It's awesome to have you aboard Packerrats.

Impressive posting Packer fan.

GO PACK GO !

[woodbuck27]

Comment woodbuck27:

Here's 'a good long read'... that thoroughly examines the latest trends (2008-2012 Seasons) in terms of QB pressures ...Sack's etc. explicitedly from a standpoint of the importance and value of the LT Vs RT defending the defensive rush and his QB.

This is another Pro Football Focus Report It's detailed/thorough in terms of it's analysis and as a result revealing/informative. After reading >>> You'll know alot of what you might feel a need to know about the value of the Packers LT and RT and protecting the ball and QB Aaron Rodgers:

Examining Pressure: Are Left Tackles Overvalued?

By: Steve Palazzolo ... 2013/04/29

Is the Blindside More Valuable to Protect?

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/04/29/examining-pressure-are-left-tackles-overvalued/2/

GO PACK GO !

[Guiness]

Very interesting. That so many were undrafted is very surprising to me.

It is - and amusing is that no team with a 1st round center and only one team with a 2nd round center made the playoffs! That settles it, I'm damn happy the Pack didn't take that Alabama center in the 2nd, they'd be doomed (lies, damn lies and statistics, right?)

Some nice creative work there Carolina_Packer!

[rbaloha1]

Bottom Line: EDS is a big upgrade over Saturday.

[Pugger]

Didn't Dallas just draft a C in the first last month...? :?:

[MadScientist]

Didn't Dallas just draft a C in the first last month...? :?:
Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

[gbgary]

Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

lol...yes they did. jerra got torched for it too. long live jerra.

[Carolina_Packer]

Holy Smokes Carolina_Packer ...come on ...out with it!

You work for PFF:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/

It's awesome to have you aboard Packerrats.

Impressive posting Packer fan.

GO PACK GO !

Thanks, Wood. It was fun to do. The Guards and Tackles will definitely take more time. I'm guessing there will be a lot more 1st rounders on the edges.

[Carolina_Packer]

It is - and amusing is that no team with a 1st round center and only one team with a 2nd round center made the playoffs! That settles it, I'm damn happy the Pack didn't take that Alabama center in the 2nd, they'd be doomed (lies, damn lies and statistics, right?)

Some nice creative work there Carolina_Packer!

Thanks, Guiness!

[Pugger]

Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

:lol:

[rbaloha1]

Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

You do not know that. Lets wait to see what happens on the field.

[Fritz]

True, but it's so much fun to make fun of Jerrah.

[Pugger]

True, but it's so much fun to make fun of Jerrah.

And I hope he continues to run that team into the ground for many years to come!! :cow:

[bobblehead]

Ya afraid to hang out with the uncool kids?? :cool:

Some teams value the trenches, the Packers do not - they value T's, but not interior linemen... I should think that obvious.

They value T's on the offensive line, and are perpetually trying to make college tackles into pro guards and center. They've never drafted a center, and even though many of the tackles they've drafted were projected to guard, and I don't mind that per se, the fact is the Packers will not outright draft a guard or center. The Packers would never consider drafting a Chance Warmack or Jonathon Cooper in the 1st round.

We don't have any drive blockers, and rarely call power running plays. Our guards have size, but their strength is zone blocking and pass protection (which really isn't very good either) - as a result, our team is viewed as being soft.

It's not as if I'm the only one making this argument - it's obvious enough to many, that the question gets posed to TT and MM from time to time. They of course always dismiss it, but when you pass on size, for the smallest OT in the draft - what are we supposed to make of that??

We were pushed around by stronger, more physical teams last year - it was hard to watch.

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

[rbaloha1]

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

Why were there large gaps for the niners to run in?

579.

Love your persistence but the spin is dizzying.

[bobblehead]

If I could be guaranteed to get an actionable answer to two questions about the Packers instead of any draft picks (or say contribution from draft picks) I would take:

1. Are the Packers doing anything to contribute/prolong to injuries?

2. Why does the defense play disciplined in one game then undisciplined in 2 others?

Solve those two riddles, I like the odds. Unfortunately, odds are long that they get any answers at all.

I have argued that MM is too easy on the players regarding contact in the early going. I know that bodies can only take so much, but I also believe you play the way you practice. If you don't hit and get hit in practice, you are not as good at doing it without taking the brunt of the impact. Just like practicing indoors when you know you are playing outdoors. Practicing catching a ball in the cold is important. Practicing contact without getting hurt is also important. I would like to see more contact in practices.

[bobblehead]

Nerd Alert! OK, so the overall discussion is whether the Pack are doing enough to shore up the offensive line. Someone even suggesting that TT won't draft a center in a higher round. That got me to wondering what the other 31 teams have done about bringing in a starting center. I'm not saying what's right or wrong, just what is.



Now, do the same thing for LT and see why TT drafts so many college LT's. The most talented guys play LT (as far as OL)

[bobblehead]

Why were there large gaps for the niners to run in?

579.

Love your persistence but the spin is dizzying.

Because guys blew assignments. Gore did not run between the tackles for swathes of yardage....Love your ignorance, it is....well, why do I bother responding to you? I guess I'm the fool for engaging a bigger fool.

PS, of the 579, how many were through the air, or QB scrambles (which do not come because you blew guys off the ball).

[pbmax]

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

There you go talking sense and specifics when its clear what we really want to talk about is softness and measuring tape

Bahktari's coach, who also coached Clifton apparently, said the zone blocking run game was this kid's wheelhouse. Packer's Report has an interview with the coach.

[wist43]

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Allow me to phrase it this way then... 'when we pass on power for the smallest OT in the draft'.

I would have loved to land a guard like Chance Warmack... he's only 6'2", but at 317 lbs he packs a lot of power. Much more powerful than TJ Lang at 6'4", 318 lbs. It's body type more than anything... and some guys just have natural, functional strength - you hear the term 'country strong', implying the guy is pretty damn strong before he ever sets foot in a weight room.

Brian Winters is a guy who is listed at 6'4", 320 lbs, same as Lang. Yet Winters is best known for being a nasty, tough, strong SOB. Lang on the other hand, in terms of physicality, is very average. It's the type of player the Packers go after that is problematic when going up against power teams.

The Persian guy and Tretter are not big players, but what worries me about them is - given the Packers perverse preference for finesse players, are these guys softies like our current OL - only smaller?? That would be disasterous... if these guys prove to be so underpowered that they can't compete against NFL caliber power players, then they're both wasted draft picks.


Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

Well, I would be one of those "anybody else says" guys... cause I watched those games, and we were completely dominated in the trenches in both games. Most of the running we manufactured were out of spread formations, Cobb, Rodgers, or b/c the Niners only committed six to the LOS, and even then they stuffed us pretty regularly.

The stats don't lie bobble.

Game 1 in September - SF rushed for 32-186 yds (5.8 yd avg); we ran 14-45 (and Rodgers ran for 27)

Game 2 in January - SF rushed for 43-323 (take out K's 16-181, and you still have 27-142, which is a 5.25 yd avg); we rushed 16-104 (Rodgers 28 yds; Cobb 23 yds; and Harris got the rest running out of spread formations mostly)

No bobble - the 49er's righteously kicked the living hell out of us in the trenches, and I did not enjoy watching it.

[smuggler]

In the first game, the 49ers dominated the LoS. In the 2nd game, our D-line played like shit, and they didn't need to. Their d-line put a decent amt of pressure on Rodgers, but not really until we had abandoned the run. The 2nd game was a lot better than the first at the line. The trouble was the team lost contain on some scrambles by Kaep and also ignored him on the read-option plays when he was the keeper. I always say hammer the QB on the read-option. It's a free hit on the other teams QB. Even if Gore gets a 20 yard run, their QB gets rattled and they have to think twice about running that play again too soon.

[Fritz]

Getting back to the original thread topic....I wonder how committed the team is to this move? What if, in a fantasy world, training camp starts and, say, either Sherrod or Datko show up and play lights-out on the left side? Do they re-think the whole thing?

I've read I think that Datko is strictly a left tackle. Anyone know if Sherrod is able to play either side?

[Joemailman]

Getting back to the original thread topic....I wonder how committed the team is to this move? What if, in a fantasy world, training camp starts and, say, either Sherrod or Datko show up and play lights-out on the left side? Do they re-think the whole thing?

I've read I think that Datko is strictly a left tackle. Anyone know if Sherrod is able to play either side?

Sherrod played LT at Miss. St. He was playing RT at the time he was hurt in 2011. I think they're committed to Bulaga at LT for this year. I think they want some consistency at that position and Bulaga will give him that.

[denverYooper]

Allow me to phrase it this way then... 'when we pass on power for the smallest OT in the draft'.

I would have loved to land a guard like Chance Warmack... he's only 6'2", but at 317 lbs he packs a lot of power. Much more powerful than TJ Lang at 6'4", 318 lbs. It's body type more than anything... and some guys just have natural, functional strength - you hear the term 'country strong', implying the guy is pretty damn strong before he ever sets foot in a weight room.

Brian Winters is a guy who is listed at 6'4", 320 lbs, same as Lang. Yet Winters is best known for being a nasty, tough, strong SOB. Lang on the other hand, in terms of physicality, is very average. It's the type of player the Packers go after that is problematic when going up against power teams.

The Persian guy and Tretter are not big players, but what worries me about them is - given the Packers perverse preference for finesse players, are these guys softies like our current OL - only smaller?? That would be disasterous... if these guys prove to be so underpowered that they can't compete against NFL caliber power players, then they're both wasted draft picks.



Well, I would be one of those "anybody else says" guys... cause I watched those games, and we were completely dominated in the trenches in both games. Most of the running we manufactured were out of spread formations, Cobb, Rodgers, or b/c the Niners only committed six to the LOS, and even then they stuffed us pretty regularly.

The stats don't lie bobble.

Game 1 in September - SF rushed for 32-186 yds (5.8 yd avg); we ran 14-45 (and Rodgers ran for 27)

Game 2 in January - SF rushed for 43-323 (take out K's 16-181, and you still have 27-142, which is a 5.25 yd avg); we rushed 16-104 (Rodgers 28 yds; Cobb 23 yds; and Harris got the rest running out of spread formations mostly)

No bobble - the 49er's righteously kicked the living hell out of us in the trenches, and I did not enjoy watching it.

Funny that you singled out Lang. He's consistently one of the Packers meanest guys on the line and the one who's shown to be most adept in your beloved power run game. He played last year with an elbow injury and a Newhouse. I suspect that if they get a consistent C/T around him this year his skills will pop. You'll start to hear things like "Look at the work TJ Lang is doing on the second level to spring Lacy for that 54 yard run".

[Patler]

I think they're committed to Bulaga at LT for this year. I think they want some consistency at that position and Bulaga will give him that.

What worries me about this is Bulaga's history of missing games with injuries.

[3irty1]

For all the tackles we've drafted we sure look a lot better at Guard. Lang and Sitton are the least of our worries IMO. Couple of young studs in the run and pass game. Saying the packers would never draft Warmack or especially Cooper is still ridiculous though. For good enough value Ted would draft anyone. You can't pretend they weren't even on the Packers draft board.

[Patler]

For all the tackles we've drafted we sure look a lot better at Guard. Lang and Sitton are the least of our worries IMO. Couple of young studs in the run and pass game. Saying the packers would never draft Warmack or especially Cooper is still ridiculous though. For good enough value Ted would draft anyone. You can't pretend they weren't even on the Packers draft board.

Ya, if I remember right, there was a story about TT being the one in Seattle who insisted on drafting Hutchinson.

People have been trying for years to pigeon hole TT. He will never do this, he will never do that. But he does.

[pbmax]

In the first game, the 49ers dominated the LoS. In the 2nd game, our D-line played like shit, and they didn't need to. Their d-line put a decent amt of pressure on Rodgers, but not really until we had abandoned the run. The 2nd game was a lot better than the first at the line. The trouble was the team lost contain on some scrambles by Kaep and also ignored him on the read-option plays when he was the keeper. I always say hammer the QB on the read-option. It's a free hit on the other teams QB. Even if Gore gets a 20 yard run, their QB gets rattled and they have to think twice about running that play again too soon.

Raji had the most trouble versus the Niners in the 2nd game. But much of his trouble was a facing a double team at DE or 3 tech that he doesn't often face. When the Niners ran read option, by ignoring the OLB when blocking, they can double team the front and backside of the play. They can, should they wish, double the wide backside of the play as well.

Raji is not Pickett in terms of anchor and holding his ground and is not going to be until he is older.

That combo put Raji on skates at times versus the Niners. He has got to react better to those double teams in the next game. And the LBs have to react faster to take advantage of the space they have to operate. They have to close gaps faster so Walden/Perry/OLB don't need to worry about the give.

[pbmax]

I am not worried about finding a RT so much as I am about the commitment to Bulaga at LT.

RT has a lot of candidates and a decent number of starts to choose from. With Bulaga's slow start, Lang filling in and Barclay' eventual promotion, if the position is consistently manned by one of Barclay, Sherrod and Newhouse, I think the average play at the position will be more productive.

Bulaga at the LT is more worrisome. First, he's going to receive a ton of reps to get his ready. Then the Packers will have to choose who gets the 2nd team reps. Newhouse, Barclay and Sherrod will need reps on the right side for the open audition. That leaves Datko and Bakhitari as the natural 2nd and 3 teamers in camp rotations at LT.

But what happens if Bulaga goes down or is ineffective? They are not going to want to go into the season with Datko as the primary backup at LT and would use Newhouse. Where he will have spent precious little time preparing.

I would prefer this lineup in camp:

Bulaga - Sitton - EDS - Lang - Barclay
Sherrod - Tretter - GVR - Barclay - Newhouse
Bakhtiari - Lang - Tretter - GVR - Sherrod

Bulaga and Sitton are left alone to master new side. Especially since as older vets they would have least trouble moving back to the right if need be. Lang has only been the starting Guard for two years on left, so he sees time there, though 3rd team reps might be OK and keep him fresher.

Bakhtiari is a LT and reps he sees elsewhere would be simply be to round out numbers or give players a break. If he can full go at camp, Sherrod has to be the camp 2nd line LT to get him reps at natural position and to make up for reps he will share on the right. Barclay gets 1st team reps at RT as he was the starter last year. Newhouse could use work at both tackles, but if someone has to give way for others to get work in, he has double digit starts. That, plus, no matter what we eventually think of Bulaga, Newhouse has been found wanting at LT. To have him rep there is a road to nowhere. The only way I rep him there is if Sherrod cannot go in camp.

GVR is great as would only be better if his first name was GJ, so he could have two fantastic set of initials in the Packers tradition. He gets to work at center and guard. Tretter is same.

UDFAs can have spots as soon as Justin Harrell goes to camp and tells us which ones look halfway decent.

[Zool]

Game 1 in September - SF rushed for 32-186 yds (5.8 yd avg); we ran 14-45 (and Rodgers ran for 27)

Game 2 in January - SF rushed for 43-323 (take out K's 16-181, and you still have 27-142, which is a 5.25 yd avg); we rushed 16-104 (Rodgers 28 yds; Cobb 23 yds; and Harris got the rest running out of spread formations mostly)

No bobble - the 49er's righteously kicked the living hell out of us in the trenches, and I did not enjoy watching it.

Superbowl against a supposedly stout Raven D

Gore 19 for 110 and a 5.8 avg
Kapernick 7 for 62 for an 8.9 avg
James 3 for 10 for a 3.3 avg

As a team 29 carries for 182 and a 6.3 average.

Apparently the 49ers kicked the living hell out of a reportedly strong and stout Raven D. I asked this same question multiple times right after the SB but never got an answer.

How will you explain away what is supposedly a stout D that the Packers should be emulating with a D coordinator who is good?

BTW Kapernick was also 16/28 for 282 through the air.

[pbmax]

I love how yardage rushing out of spread formations doesn't count. Should we separate out play action, draws and screens because that is simply the offense fooling the defense?

Big plays, as Capers has repeatedly said, are the key thing to manage.

[rbaloha1]

Because guys blew assignments. Gore did not run between the tackles for swathes of yardage....Love your ignorance, it is....well, why do I bother responding to you? I guess I'm the fool for engaging a bigger fool.

PS, of the 579, how many were through the air, or QB scrambles (which do not come because you blew guys off the ball).

Watch the line play ignoramus dreamer. Quit taking hallucinogenic drugs.

How many tackles did Clay Matthews have in the game? Have you ever played defense against a big physical o-line?

Get in reality and stop bobbling your head brother:no:

[bobblehead]

Allow me to phrase it this way then... 'when we pass on power for the smallest OT in the draft'.

I would have loved to land a guard like Chance Warmack... he's only 6'2", but at 317 lbs he packs a lot of power. Much more powerful than TJ Lang at 6'4", 318 lbs. It's body type more than anything... and some guys just have natural, functional strength - you hear the term 'country strong', implying the guy is pretty damn strong before he ever sets foot in a weight room.

Brian Winters is a guy who is listed at 6'4", 320 lbs, same as Lang. Yet Winters is best known for being a nasty, tough, strong SOB. Lang on the other hand, in terms of physicality, is very average. It's the type of player the Packers go after that is problematic when going up against power teams.

The Persian guy and Tretter are not big players, but what worries me about them is - given the Packers perverse preference for finesse players, are these guys softies like our current OL - only smaller?? That would be disasterous... if these guys prove to be so underpowered that they can't compete against NFL caliber power players, then they're both wasted draft picks.



Well, I would be one of those "anybody else says" guys... cause I watched those games, and we were completely dominated in the trenches in both games. Most of the running we manufactured were out of spread formations, Cobb, Rodgers, or b/c the Niners only committed six to the LOS, and even then they stuffed us pretty regularly.

The stats don't lie bobble.

Game 1 in September - SF rushed for 32-186 yds (5.8 yd avg); we ran 14-45 (and Rodgers ran for 27)

Game 2 in January - SF rushed for 43-323 (take out K's 16-181, and you still have 27-142, which is a 5.25 yd avg); we rushed 16-104 (Rodgers 28 yds; Cobb 23 yds; and Harris got the rest running out of spread formations mostly)

No bobble - the 49er's righteously kicked the living hell out of us in the trenches, and I did not enjoy watching it.

First off, Lang is nasty. He got the job because College was not nasty. He is a brawler, its his forte.

Second, Harris got 4.8 ypc I dont' care what the formation was. If your asking the offense to RUN the ball into an 8 man front, that would be dumb. You are supposed to run into the nickel and pass into the heavy front, and mix it up against the base. In the first game we got mauled (because replacement refs never heard of holding on DB's). I am more concered with week 19 than week one. we were not physically dominated, we were outschemed. I watched the game then, I watched it 2 days ago.

[rbaloha1]

Lang is nasty.

[run pMc]

I am not worried about finding a RT so much as I am about the commitment to Bulaga at LT.

RT has a lot of candidates and a decent number of starts to choose from. With Bulaga's slow start, Lang filling in and Barclay' eventual promotion, if the position is consistently manned by one of Barclay, Sherrod and Newhouse, I think the average play at the position will be more productive.

Bulaga at the LT is more worrisome. First, he's going to receive a ton of reps to get his ready. Then the Packers will have to choose who gets the 2nd team reps. Newhouse, Barclay and Sherrod will need reps on the right side for the open audition. That leaves Datko and Bakhitari as the natural 2nd and 3 teamers in camp rotations at LT.

But what happens if Bulaga goes down or is ineffective? They are not going to want to go into the season with Datko as the primary backup at LT and would use Newhouse. Where he will have spent precious little time preparing.

I would prefer this lineup in camp:

Bulaga - Sitton - EDS - Lang - Barclay
Sherrod - Tretter - GVR - Barclay - Newhouse
Bakhtiari - Lang - Tretter - GVR - Sherrod

Bulaga and Sitton are left alone to master new side. Especially since as older vets they would have least trouble moving back to the right if need be. Lang has only been the starting Guard for two years on left, so he sees time there, though 3rd team reps might be OK and keep him fresher.

Bakhtiari is a LT and reps he sees elsewhere would be simply be to round out numbers or give players a break. If he can full go at camp, Sherrod has to be the camp 2nd line LT to get him reps at natural position and to make up for reps he will share on the right. Barclay gets 1st team reps at RT as he was the starter last year. Newhouse could use work at both tackles, but if someone has to give way for others to get work in, he has double digit starts. That, plus, no matter what we eventually think of Bulaga, Newhouse has been found wanting at LT. To have him rep there is a road to nowhere. The only way I rep him there is if Sherrod cannot go in camp.

GVR is great as would only be better if his first name was GJ, so he could have two fantastic set of initials in the Packers tradition. He gets to work at center and guard. Tretter is same.

UDFAs can have spots as soon as Justin Harrell goes to camp and tells us which ones look halfway decent.

+1

[wist43]

So let me see if I have this straight...

Lang is nasty; Sitton is a pro bowler; Bulaga is very good; and EDS is a major upgrade? We're only suspect in 1 spot? It was Newhouse who gave up 51 sacks and was responsible for all the negative runs?

Listening to you guys, we should have been averaging 140 yds/game on the ground, and given up no more 15-20 sacks - right? Rodgers standing tall in the pocket, reading War and Peace, ala Tom Brady??

That sound about right??

[bobblehead]

So let me see if I have this straight...

Lang is nasty; Sitton is a pro bowler; Bulaga is very good; and EDS is a major upgrade? We're only suspect in 1 spot? It was Newhouse who gave up 51 sacks and was responsible for all the negative runs?

Listening to you guys, we should have been averaging 140 yds/game on the ground, and given up no more 15-20 sacks - right? Rodgers standing tall in the pocket, reading War and Peace, ala Tom Brady??

That sound about right??

Well, I will partially respond. Newhouse was a bottom 5 starting LT and its the most important position on the line. Rodgers occasionally holds the ball too long. EDS didn't start til what week?? (although I don't think he is the future). Bulaga was hurt and the rookie is not developed as a pass blocker.

So, in effect, we had 3 weak spots on the line last year. If Bulaga is healthy we are down to 2, and if the kid developes we might be down to needing a center.

[smuggler]

Improving the running game will decrease the sacks. If adding Lacy/Franklin or focusing more on DuJuan Harris gets more production in the running game, then the line gets better in the passing game, even without personnel changes or improvement by said line.

[Pugger]

Improving the running game will decrease the sacks. If adding Lacy/Franklin or focusing more on DuJuan Harris gets more production in the running game, then the line gets better in the passing game, even without personnel changes or improvement by said line.

Yes.

[Fritz]

So let me see if I have this straight...

Lang is nasty; Sitton is a pro bowler; Bulaga is very good; and EDS is a major upgrade? We're only suspect in 1 spot? It was Newhouse who gave up 51 sacks and was responsible for all the negative runs?

Listening to you guys, we should have been averaging 140 yds/game on the ground, and given up no more 15-20 sacks - right? Rodgers standing tall in the pocket, reading War and Peace, ala Tom Brady??

That sound about right??

Yes. All those sacks Rodgers suffered are in fact the fault of Dom Capers.

[Zool]

And I go unanswered yet again.

[Fritz]

The answer to your question, Zool, is 1963.

[rbaloha1]

So let me see if I have this straight...

Lang is nasty; Sitton is a pro bowler; Bulaga is very good; and EDS is a major upgrade? We're only suspect in 1 spot? It was Newhouse who gave up 51 sacks and was responsible for all the negative runs?

Listening to you guys, we should have been averaging 140 yds/game on the ground, and given up no more 15-20 sacks - right? Rodgers standing tall in the pocket, reading War and Peace, ala Tom Brady??

That sound about right??

The line is not like the niners but serviceable.

Rodgers quick release helps the line but holding the ball too long sometimes makes the line appear poor.

Lacy will help the line appear to be good run blockers.

[Zool]

The answer to your question, Zool, is 1963.

I KNEW IT! Damned govt spies.

[Carolina_Packer]

I heard an interview with Bob Wylie on Sirius XM NFL Radio on "Moving the Chains" and he was talking about the COOL Clinic (Coaches of Offensive Lineman) being held this weekend. Sounds interesting. http://www.thecoolclinic.com/

He said he was very excited about one of the guys speaking there talking about leveraging techniques, but of course wasn't going to give all the info away on the air. The first thing I though was, I wonder if any NFL coaches attend the event (not as speakers but attendees).

If you go here on the web site: http://www.thecoolclinic.com/speakers.htm it lists the itinerary of speakers/events. The specific one I mentioned is this:

Saturday Scott Peters / NFL Offensive Line Veteran - Tip of the Spear Program - New Concepts in Football Leverage.

Did a quick search on Scott Peters and found this on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woSj0ISZeEE

[Fritz]

Tip of the spear?

You grab the end of a guy's wiener, and he'll stop in his tracks, for sure.

Good plan for the offensive line. I hope Campen is there, taking notes on this new technique.

[wist43]

Superbowl against a supposedly stout Raven D

Gore 19 for 110 and a 5.8 avg
Kapernick 7 for 62 for an 8.9 avg
James 3 for 10 for a 3.3 avg

As a team 29 carries for 182 and a 6.3 average.

Apparently the 49ers kicked the living hell out of a reportedly strong and stout Raven D. I asked this same question multiple times right after the SB but never got an answer.

How will you explain away what is supposedly a stout D that the Packers should be emulating with a D coordinator who is good?

BTW Kapernick was also 16/28 for 282 through the air.


And I go unanswered yet again.

Sorry Zool... not ducking you - I just had never touted the Raven defense much last year, so I don't have to defend it. I think the Ravens as an organization are much more committed to playing good defense than the Packers are though. I should think that much is obvious, no??

The Ravens defense has been in decline for a couple of years, especially as Ray Lewis slowed down. Defensively I thought they were hanging by a thread all year - but credit to them, they did put together a stretch run similar to ours a few years ago. Everybody got hot and they held on for a title.

That said, the Ravens are an organization that is committed to playing good defense, and they went out and restocked. They signed Chris Canty, Elvis Dumervil, and a few other defensive FA's; and they drafted Matt Elam, Arthur Brown, Brandon Williams, and John Simon. I like all those guys.

I do wish the Packers as an organization were as committed to playing good defense as the Ravens are. We're an offensive team though, that's our identity... defense takes a backseat.

[bobblehead]

Sorry Zool... not ducking you - I just had never touted the Raven defense much last year, so I don't have to defend it. I think the Ravens as an organization are much more committed to playing good defense than the Packers are though. I should think that much is obvious, no??

The Ravens defense has been in decline for a couple of years, especially as Ray Lewis slowed down. Defensively I thought they were hanging by a thread all year - but credit to them, they did put together a stretch run similar to ours a few years ago. Everybody got hot and they held on for a title.

That said, the Ravens are an organization that is committed to playing good defense, and they went out and restocked. They signed Chris Canty, Elvis Dumervil, and a few other defensive FA's; and they drafted Matt Elam, Arthur Brown, Brandon Williams, and John Simon. I like all those guys.

I do wish the Packers as an organization were as committed to playing good defense as the Ravens are. We're an offensive team though, that's our identity... defense takes a backseat.

Something really worth noting. SF fell behind early and fairly big. They still called 19 run plays to gore. If that had been GB in that game we would have abandon the run in the first Q and had a total of 10 runs max.

[Bretsky]

For what it's worth SF has one of the best OL's in the game and GB's is slightly above average if you are a homer and deficient if you are not

[Bretsky]

Saturday seemed to get worse as the year went on. EDS....he may be an upgrade but he's not average. Realistically if everything turns out well we can be average; that would be better than last year. Hopefully the improved RB's will make them look better and AROD's scrambling hides the weaknesses as well

[RashanGary]

The line is not like the niners but serviceable.

Rodgers quick release helps the line but holding the ball too long sometimes makes the line appear poor.

Lacy will help the line appear to be good run blockers.


Yep, yep, yep

And like said above, running the ball slows down the pass rush as well as changes the coverages AR will see.

[KYPack]

Saturday seemed to get worse as the year went on. EDS....he may be an upgrade but he's not average. Realistically if everything turns out well we can be average; that would be better than last year. Hopefully the improved RB's will make them look better and AROD's scrambling hides the weaknesses as well

You got it B-Man.

Saturday was out of gas. Watch some of those Packer NFL replay games. Saturday should have retired the year before, instead of on the job, like he did to us.

SF's productivity in the SB?

Most of it went down after Haloti Ngata went out with his leg injury.

Ngata, Terrell Suggs & Ed Reed were huge reasons that Balt stopped the read option in it's tracks.

Once big Haloti left the ballgame, the vaunted, unstoppable SF read option finally got rollin'.

[Joemailman]

Saturday seemed to get worse as the year went on. EDS....he may be an upgrade but he's not average. Realistically if everything turns out well we can be average; that would be better than last year. Hopefully the improved RB's will make them look better and AROD's scrambling hides the weaknesses as well

An upgrade is an upgrade. I think it's too early to say how good a Center EDS is. He only started 2 games there. He was below average as a Guard, but the coaching staff felt he was a better Center than Guard.

It's not a stretch to suggest the Packers could be better at Center and both Tackles than they were last year. That could lead to a fairly significant improvement in OL play over last year.

[Fritz]

I wonder what will happen if Datko or even Sherrod (though this seems doubtful given his health) really really shines in camp at LT, and Bulaga struggles?

Would the brain trust move Bulaga back to the right? And is Sitton attached to him at the hip, or would he stay on the left side if Bulaga was moved back to the right?

[pittstang5]

I wonder what will happen if Datko or even Sherrod (though this seems doubtful given his health) really really shines in camp at LT, and Bulaga struggles?

Would the brain trust move Bulaga back to the right? And is Sitton attached to him at the hip, or would he stay on the left side if Bulaga was moved back to the right?

Good question. Moving Sitton would probably depend on how Lang was doing at RG.

[woodbuck27]

1. ... #69 David 'the Triangle' :-? Bakhtiari, David T ... 6-4 300 ...21 Yrs. of age...Rookie Fr. Colorado

2. ... #67 Don Barclay, G/T... 6-4 305 ... 24 Yrs. of age ... 2 YRS. Exp. Fr. West Virginia

3. ... #75 Bryan Bulaga, T ... 6-5 314... 24 Yrs. of age ... 4 YRS. Exp. Fr. Iowa

4. ... #77 Andrew Datko, T ... 6-6 315 ... 22 Yrs. of age ... 1 YR. Exp. Fr. Florida State

5. ... #62 Evan Dietrich-Smith, C/G ... 6-2 308 ... 26 Yrs of age ... 4 YRS. Exp. Fr. Idaho State

6. ... #72 Garth Gerhart, C ... 6-1 310 ... 24 Yrs. of age ... 1 YRS. Exp. Fr. Arizona State

7. ... #68 Kevin Hughes, T ... 6-4 304... 24 Yrs. of age ... 2 YRS. Exp. Fr. Southeastern Louisiana

8. ... #60 Patrick Lewis, C ... 6-1 311 ... 22 Yrs. of age ... Rookie Fr. Texas A&M

9. ... #74 Marshall Newhouse, T... 6-4 319 ... 24 Yrs. of age ...4 YRS. Exp.; Fr. Texas Christian

10. ... #78 Derek Sherrod, T ...6-6 321 ... 24 Yrs. of age ... 3 Yrs. Exp. Fr. Mississippi State

11. ... #65 Lane Taylor, G ... 6-3 324 ... 23 Yrs. of age ... Rookie Fr. Oklahoma State

12. ... #73 JC Tretter, T ... 6-4 307 ... 24 Yrs. of age ... Rookie Fr. Cornell

13. ... #64 Greg Van Roten, G/C ... 6-3 303 ... 23 Yrs. of age ... 2 YRS. Exp. Fr. Pennsylvania

[woodbuck27]

http://host.madison.com/sports/football/professional/tom-oates-moving-bryan-bulaga-to-left-tackle-reflects-shifting/article_81f3a046-9307-5224-b249-d792404d6806.html


Tom Oates: Moving Bryan Bulaga to left tackle reflects shifting nature of NFL

Wisconsin State Journal | toates@madison.com | 608-252-6172 madison.com

" Assuming Bulaga has no trouble making the transition from the right to the left side — a reasonable assumption since he played left tackle at Iowa, is one of the NFL’s better right tackles and appears to be fully recovered from last season’s hip injury — a staggering number of the projected starters at left tackle in the NFL this coming season were first- or second-round picks.

Of the 32 teams, 20 are expected to start first-round draft picks at left tackle. Seven more second-rounders are projected to start, a good indicator it takes a certain level of size and athletic ability to play the position. " Fr. LINK

Please click on LINK above for this entire story.

PACKERS !

[pbmax]

Oates is a good writer and a pretty good mind. but he isn't quick on information upload. I think those rough numbers at left tackle have held since the mid 1990s.

[bobblehead]

http://host.madison.com/sports/football/professional/tom-oates-moving-bryan-bulaga-to-left-tackle-reflects-shifting/article_81f3a046-9307-5224-b249-d792404d6806.html


Tom Oates: Moving Bryan Bulaga to left tackle reflects shifting nature of NFL

Wisconsin State Journal | toates@madison.com | 608-252-6172 madison.com

" Assuming Bulaga has no trouble making the transition from the right to the left side — a reasonable assumption since he played left tackle at Iowa, is one of the NFL’s better right tackles and appears to be fully recovered from last season’s hip injury — a staggering number of the projected starters at left tackle in the NFL this coming season were first- or second-round picks.

Of the 32 teams, 20 are expected to start first-round draft picks at left tackle. Seven more second-rounders are projected to start, a good indicator it takes a certain level of size and athletic ability to play the position. " Fr. LINK

Please click on LINK above for this entire story.

PACKERS !

This isn't a sudden change, I have said this for 5 years (10 if you count before I posted here). I always talk about how LT is the toughest spot to fill and the guys who do it are picked very high.

[woodbuck27]

This isn't a sudden change, I have said this for 5 years (10 if you count before I posted here). I always talk about how LT is the toughest spot to fill and the guys who do it are picked very high.

Generally that's the rule of thumb.

Draft >>> QB, LT, DT, DE and CB in exceptional cases of certain high quality >>> high.

[woodbuck27]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1644033-green-bay-packers-a-scouts-perspective-on-the-changing-of-the-offensive-line

Green Bay Packers: A Scout's Perspective on the Changing of the Offensive Line

By: Bob Fox (Featured Columnist) ... May 19, 2013

" The biggest reason the Packers made the move had to be with No. 12 in mind. That would be quarterback Aaron Rodgers. For the last two seasons, left tackle Marshall Newhouse has given up 24.5 sacks. In 2011 and 2012, Rodgers was sacked 87 times.

Still, even with those issues the last two seasons, Rodgers threw 84 touchdown passes versus just 14 interceptions for 8,938 yards. He had a quarterback rating of 122.5 in 2011 and 108.0 in 2012. He was also the NFL MVP in 2011. Imagine what he could do with solid pass protection. " Fr. LINK

Running the football should also be better for the Packers, according to Landry:

"It also helps them in the running game with the two running backs, Eddie Lacy and Johnathan Franklin. I'm not so sure that Franklin won't be as much of a factor, because he can help in the passing game, as well. I think this makes them a lot better offensively. If they can just stay healthy and get better play defensively, they are going to be real good." Fr. LINK

GO PACK GO !