TT as GM. What's w/ the OL and DL lines? Just Atrocious.....

[SnakeLH2006]

Packnut made some good points on a different topic and Snake got to thinking...

Personally I like Ted as our GM. Seems shrewd with FA and resignings....Good overall and likes to pay the top guys..which again is good.

But what is the core of philosophy of what good GM's/talent evaluators/media, etc. say? Good lines (OL and DL) win games. That is so true in the NFL for many decades.

Packnut made a topic about the sorry state of our OL. Then I thought about that even sorrier DL.

Draft picks (no real FA acquisitions)....and that is is fine. But rarely have they worked out other than "next year" and the year after under TT for either DL or OL, thus far.

Really, Snake likes TT, but to take a body of work over 5 seasons (it has been 5 now) I came to realization that that the OL is pretty below average and the DL is just dreadful coming into 2009.

So WTF now? Ted has done wonders with QB (Rodgers), WR (good drafts, resignings), TE, even RB looks Ok.....CB and Safety look good. LB look awesome IMO....but that subtracts from what is crucial...

The OL looks poor and the DL looks real bad.

I love BJ Raji (see the sig) but one man does not a D make. With Kampy off DL that looks bad for the poor, underequipped personall we have now. The OL looks poor, but how many draft picks do we need? 5 years, and yet it's still a weakness to the most die-hard Packer fan? Really?

Both lines (OL and DL) look weak in comparison to most NFL rosters. If this is the core to win..how do we do that? Arod can have 36 TD's 12 Int's in 2009 (and I love the guy) but if we can't stop guys (DL Run Stuffing, pressures, sacks) or make room (OL run blocking, esp.) we are not going anywhere.

Sad to say..I've been on the TT bandwagon for the past year, but looking at our roster and the body of work (OL and DL transitions on our current roster) it looks moot...as TT has NOT delivered to get us better at the CORE.

This is NOT an ANTI-TT thread...I like TT, but WTF is up with the OL and DL as that much is core with what wins in the NFL, and we (the Pack) are weak in both? WTF? Our 2 biggest weaknesses are now the 2 greatest things to prevent us from being elite (NFL post-season winner). It's pretty straight-forward. OL and DL dominance wins championships. We are far from either on either Line.

[MichiganPackerFan]

A couple seasons ago, we had a lot of depth at the d-line and TT made the decision to trade some depth to strengthen other areas. A couple injuries and slow/non developing draft picks later and it's the questionable/ garbage line of 2008. This just proves there are a couple positions where depth is tremendously important, but none is as important as the DL where it can be instantly stripped by an injury. It's a bit different on the OL where you need five solid players because they don't tend to rotate as much, and seem to play every down.

[Waldo]

So if our offensive line was merely average, would would clearly have the best offense in the NFL? After all, MM has fielded a top 5 offense every year here.

They can't be THAT bad.

While I think that the OL is important, I think that it is most important that you send no more resources than required to be a good OL. IMO this means 1 out of every 5-6 draft picks should be on the OL, and they should make around 20% of the teams total salary cap space tops. Any more and it is impacting other positions too much to field a winner.

The only reason a team should field a great OL is if they didn't cost any more than a good line to construct, and don't get paid any more than a good OL.

I like TT's method of bringing in 1 high ceiling hit-or miss prospect in the mid rounds yearly, then augmenting that as needed. That is a drafting recipe that will take years to fully work (5-8 IMO) but should provide a constant stream of talent.

The only team in the NFL whose fans don't think that their OL is "horrible", is the team whose OL is constantly lauded as the best. Fans don't know how to evaluate the OL, most fans only can evaluate when a bad play is made, don't recognize a good play, and have a poor frame of reference as to how much "bad" a good group has.

Last year fans of the NFL were treated to the best OL in the league, great at getting a yard, stuffed 2 plays straight on 3rd and 4th down on two back to back drives in a critical game. That happens in any single game, most fans of most teams will be up in arms, wanting to replace their line for their "horrible" play.

[Packnut]

OL

A couple seasons ago, we had a lot of depth at the d-line and TT made the decision to trade some depth to strengthen other areas. A couple injuries and slow/non developing draft picks later and it's the questionable/ garbage line of 2008. This just proves there are a couple positions where depth is tremendously important, but none is as important as the DL where it can be instantly stripped by an injury. It's a bit different on the OL where you need five solid players because they don't tend to rotate as much, and seem to play every down.

While I believe there is a serious problem with Thompson's core philosophy about offensive linemen, (insert comment made 5 years ago by Teddy about "guards being a dime a dozen"), the switch to the ZBS has turned out to be a horrendous mistake.

I blame that scheme switch for where we are now. Because of the switch, the Packer brain trust limited themselves to getting linemen made for that scheme in particular. That in turn, cut down the amount of linemen that they could draft or sign through free agency.

The Jags episode also had a negative impact on this whole mess. May-be he would have made a huge difference. In any event, we are where we are which is filled with a ton of what ifs and may-be.

Thompson has assembled what could be a prolific offense at the skill positions. It will help our line a great deal if Grant retains his 07 skills where he only needed a small crease and if Rodgers makes the next step up in progressing through his reads a tad quicker which in turn will cut down on the number of sacks.

It's not all doom and gloom for the o-line. I can see some potential there. It's just it would feel a whole lot better if there were not so many question marks at this point. One huge positive will come the day Moll is cut. The fact that they still think so highly of him worries me greatly.

[sharpe1027]

Re: TT as GM. What's w/ the OL and DL lines? Just Atrocious.

IMO, some of your assumptions are not well supported by the facts. I don't see it anywhere as pitiful as you make it out, but this year will tell us much.

Packnut made some good points on a different topic and Snake got to thinking...

Personally I like Ted as our GM. Seems shrewd with FA and resignings....Good overall and likes to pay the top guys..which again is good.

But what is the core of philosophy of what good GM's/talent evaluators/media, etc. say? Good lines (OL and DL) win games. That is so true in the NFL for many decades.

Yes...and no. The skill players naturally get more attention than the lineman, so good lines deserve more credit than they often get. As a single position, however, there are other positions that are more important.

Packnut made a topic about the sorry state of our OL. Then I thought about that even sorrier DL.

Draft picks (no real FA acquisitions)....and that is is fine. But rarely have they worked out other than "next year" and the year after under TT for either DL or OL, thus far.

Pickett may was an outstanding FA acquisition that has served us very well. He has brought in for several FA OL, Preston being the latest.

Really, Snake likes TT, but to take a body of work over 5 seasons (it has been 5 now) I came to realization that that the OL is pretty below average and the DL is just dreadful coming into 2009.

Our offense has been pretty damn good over the past three years. Our DL was considered deep and talented only two years ago.

So WTF now? Ted has done wonders with QB (Rodgers), WR (good drafts, resignings), TE, even RB looks Ok.....CB and Safety look good. LB look awesome IMO....but that subtracts from what is crucial...

The OL looks poor and the DL looks real bad.

Pickett, Raji, Jolly/Harrell is real bad for a 3-4?

I love BJ Raji (see the sig) but one man does not a D make. With Kampy off DL that looks bad for the poor, underequipped personall we have now. The OL looks poor, but how many draft picks do we need? 5 years, and yet it's still a weakness to the most die-hard Packer fan? Really?

Welcome to the NFL. The biggest ? is that young guys are unproven. Every team deals constantly deals with this.

Both lines (OL and DL) look weak in comparison to most NFL rosters.

No.

[]{ilr]3]

I liked our D-line until Jenkins went down last year. Everything seemed to go down hill from there.

But Picket, Raji, Kampman and Jenkins are some pretty awesome d-linemen and they will be running plently of plays with all 4 down.

I am frustrated with our O-line though. I hope they can develop some solid starters instead of the lets try this guy here or here crap they have been doing.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I think that one area that the line will improve the much is if Justin Harrell can get on the field. He's not like a lot of the DLine Sherman picks (lazy as shit). Reportedly the kid has trained and rehabbed as hard as he can. If we can get some productivity there, the DL will be closer to a strength than a liability.

[Packnut]

OL

So if our offensive line was merely average, would would clearly have the best offense in the NFL? After all, MM has fielded a top 5 offense every year here.

They can't be THAT bad.

While I think that the OL is important, I think that it is most important that you send no more resources than required to be a good OL. IMO this means 1 out of every 5-6 draft picks should be on the OL, and they should make around 20% of the teams total salary cap space tops. Any more and it is impacting other positions too much to field a winner.

The only reason a team should field a great OL is if they didn't cost any more than a good line to construct, and don't get paid any more than a good OL.

I like TT's method of bringing in 1 high ceiling hit-or miss prospect in the mid rounds yearly, then augmenting that as needed. That is a drafting recipe that will take years to fully work (5-8 IMO) but should provide a constant stream of talent.

The only team in the NFL whose fans don't think that their OL is "horrible", is the team whose OL is constantly lauded as the best. Fans don't know how to evaluate the OL, most fans only can evaluate when a bad play is made, don't recognize a good play, and have a poor frame of reference as to how much "bad" a good group has.

Last year fans of the NFL were treated to the best OL in the league, great at getting a yard, stuffed 2 plays straight on 3rd and 4th down on two back to back drives in a critical game. That happens in any single game, most fans of most teams will be up in arms, wanting to replace their line for their "horrible" play.

A simplistic point of view with more holes in it than swiss cheese. I will again use the baseball analogy of "don't tell me how much you hit, tell me when you hit em".

The offensive ranking means nothing when during 4 of those years, a vet QB who mades quick reads and had a inate ability to avoid a sack was under center. We saw the difference last season.

Many teams seem able to pay their linemen without it hurting the rest of the team. To many examples to list through out history.

The "NFL fans are stupid" comment is ludicrous. Instant replay has been fine tuned enough that if you watch for it, you can see what the O-line is doing and remember that they replay damn near every down. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to notice Moll ending up on his ass in the backfield!

Nor do I have to be brilliant in order to understand a crucial hold or offsides at a key point in a drive or in a game. The majority of fans are very knowledgable about the players on their team and how they preform.

[sharpe1027]

Re: OL

We saw the difference last season.

2007/2008 Offense:
Yds per game: 370.7/351.1; Difference = 19.6 yds
Points per game: 27.2/26.2; Difference = 1 pt

2007/2008 Defense:
Opponents total yards: 313.3/334.3 ; Difference = 21 yds
Points per game: 18.2/23.8; Difference = 5.6 pts

[Patler]

Re: OL

A simplistic point of view with more holes in it than swiss cheese. I will again use the baseball analogy of "don't tell me how much you hit, tell me when you hit em".

The offensive ranking means nothing when during 4 of those years, a vet QB who mades quick reads and had a inate ability to avoid a sack was under center. We saw the difference last season.

Many teams seem able to pay their linemen without it hurting the rest of the team. To many examples to list through out history.

The "NFL fans are stupid" comment is ludicrous. Instant replay has been fine tuned enough that if you watch for it, you can see what the O-line is doing and remember that they replay damn near every down. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to notice Moll ending up on his ass in the backfield!

Nor do I have to be brilliant in order to understand a crucial hold or offsides at a key point in a drive or in a game. The majority of fans are very knowledgable about the players on their team and how they preform.

I think there are holes in your analysis as well.

What difference did we see last year regarding sacks? More of them? Sure. BUT, we also saw fewer interceptions from Rodgers than Favre in all but three seasons ('92, '95 and '96) when Favre and Rodgers had the same 13 interceptions, and last year we saw a higher completion percentage than Favre had in all but 4 seasons in GB. So maybe Rodgers was willing to take a few sacks rather than throw an interception or risk an interception.

Besides, if the low sack total was due to Favre's wizardry the last few seasons, then why did Favre have 30 sacks in 2008, just 4 fewer than Rodgers? Where was that "innate ability to avoid a sack" in New York?

You want to blame TT for the decline in performance of the O'line, yet the players who declined in pass protection performance last year were the holdover tackles, guys TT has not yet replaced. Age and injuries started catching up to them.

TT took over a roster with very capable starters in the O-line, but an expiring contract for one and an extreme roster bonus for the other that could not be reasonably accommodated with the cap situation he inherited. That was bad enough, but an even worse factor was the bare cupboard for O-line reserves. Thus, he was given two players he couldn't afford and no one to replace either one.

Spitz and Colledge are just entering their 4th seasons and have played more and better than either Wahle or Rivera at similar stages of their careers. It is now time for them to become the leaders on the O-line as guys like Sitton, Barbre, Lang or Giacomini move in to starting roles. A couple years from now we might be taking about the solid O-line TT put together with these guys, or TT (or someone else in his place) might be starting over. I tend to think it will be the first.

[Waldo]

Re: OL

The "NFL fans are stupid" comment is ludicrous. Instant replay has been fine tuned enough that if you watch for it, you can see what the O-line is doing and remember that they replay damn near every down. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to notice Moll ending up on his ass in the backfield!

Nor do I have to be brilliant in order to understand a crucial hold or offsides at a key point in a drive or in a game. The majority of fans are very knowledgable about the players on their team and how they preform.

How many fans can ID which guys are good technicians? How many fans can recognize guys that are good run blockers on the line? How many can recognize a good puller? How many can recognize a good 2nd level blocker? How many fans know what player types their guys have a hard time pass blocking, and which type they excel against?

Really? Fans are knowledgeable? Then why isn't Wells more highly regarded? How many fans even know who our best run blocking OL is?

Why do fans even want Tausher back? The guy was clearly our worst OL all year. The only reason Tausher>Moll in peoples minds is history, as on the field last year by and large Tausher=Moll. Moll was easier to bench though, he has that working against him.

I would also argue that this isn't a TT issue in the least bit. That in fact we had the talent on our team to field a much better OL last year. It was McCarthy, and his want to have a set lineup and not do "musical chairs" that prevented us from being better. Knowing how they played, I'd take Colledge-Barbre-Wells-Spitz-Sitton over our line last year any day. Might they pass protect a little worse, maybe, but lets call it like it was, "protecting" is a gross exaggeration when describing Clifton and Taushers play last year. They sure as hell would be 10X the run blocking unit though. Moll was even a much better run blocker last year that either Clifton or Tausher. Then again, it's hard to put 15M+ on the bench in favor of 700K.

A simplistic point of view with more holes in it than swiss cheese. I will again use the baseball analogy of "don't tell me how much you hit, tell me when you hit em".

Many teams seem able to pay their linemen without it hurting the rest of the team. To many examples to list through out history.

The fact that you still think the interior is the problem, tells the rest of the world how useful your opinion is.

The Packers had a great OL earlier this decade. And payed for it too, on the other side of the ball. The Chiefs had a great OL earlier this decade. And paid for it on the other side of the ball.

Who has a great OL, pays their OL like a great OL, and can sustain being a good team. Examples please.

[Scott Campbell]

Re: OL

The majority of fans are very knowledgable about the players on their team and how they preform.

I strongly disagree. You may get an overall sense of how players perform, but fans can't come close to professional analysis. And I'm not talking about media hack analysis. That's why the insight of our former college players is so valuable here.

[denverYooper]

Re: OL

How many fans can ID which guys are good technicians? How many fans can recognize guys that are good run blockers on the line? How many can recognize a good puller? How many can recognize a good 2nd level blocker? How many fans know what player types their guys have a hard time pass blocking, and which type they excel against?

How many fans can take a soundbite and run with it because it supports their preconceived notion? Most, I'd say. I will freely admit that I'm not really capable of critical analysis of line play. But I also try to avoid just taking commonly proffered memes and running with them like they were truth. I generally try to stay out of discussions wrt line play because I don't really have any insight into it. In fact, before I started coming to this forum, I didn't really pay any attention to it at all.

That said, I enjoy coming here for some education on how to identify what constitutes "good line play" because it makes me work on paying more attention to it during games to see if I can identify the things discussed. The only question I feel like I might be able to answer above is that I feel like I can sort of recognize a good 2nd level blocker. Thanks to some discussion on here and Colledge :P. I felt like he made some great plays in the second level last year.

[bobblehead]

Re: OL

The "NFL fans are stupid" comment is ludicrous. Instant replay has been fine tuned enough that if you watch for it, you can see what the O-line is doing and remember that they replay damn near every down. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to notice Moll ending up on his ass in the backfield!

Nor do I have to be brilliant in order to understand a crucial hold or offsides at a key point in a drive or in a game. The majority of fans are very knowledgable about the players on their team and how they preform.

How many fans can ID which guys are good technicians? How many fans can recognize guys that are good run blockers on the line? How many can recognize a good puller? How many can recognize a good 2nd level blocker? How many fans know what player types their guys have a hard time pass blocking, and which type they excel against?

Really? Fans are knowledgeable? Then why isn't Wells more highly regarded? How many fans even know who our best run blocking OL is?

Why do fans even want Tausher back? The guy was clearly our worst OL all year. The only reason Tausher>Moll in peoples minds is history, as on the field last year by and large Tausher=Moll. Moll was easier to bench though, he has that working against him.

I would also argue that this isn't a TT issue in the least bit. That in fact we had the talent on our team to field a much better OL last year. It was McCarthy, and his want to have a set lineup and not do "musical chairs" that prevented us from being better. Knowing how they played, I'd take Colledge-Barbre-Wells-Spitz-Sitton over our line last year any day. Might they pass protect a little worse, maybe, but lets call it like it was, "protecting" is a gross exaggeration when describing Clifton and Taushers play last year. They sure as hell would be 10X the run blocking unit though. Moll was even a much better run blocker last year that either Clifton or Tausher. Then again, it's hard to put 15M+ on the bench in favor of 700K.

A simplistic point of view with more holes in it than swiss cheese. I will again use the baseball analogy of "don't tell me how much you hit, tell me when you hit em".

Many teams seem able to pay their linemen without it hurting the rest of the team. To many examples to list through out history.

The fact that you still think the interior is the problem, tells the rest of the world how useful your opinion is.

The Packers had a great OL earlier this decade. And payed for it too, on the other side of the ball. The Chiefs had a great OL earlier this decade. And paid for it on the other side of the ball.

Who has a great OL, pays their OL like a great OL, and can sustain being a good team. Examples please.

This is a great post waldo. I have been a monster cliffy and tausch fan over the years, but they really slipped last season. Tausch was a monster against seattle 2 years ago in the playoffs, but I don't kid myself about his play last season. Same with Cliffy, one game (can't recall which) when they had to pull him due to "injury" and put college in we instantly ripped off several good runs.

Moll, yea, we can bag on him. He sucks right? Except for when he was blowing super mario 4 yards off the LOS on 3 consecutive plays before a phantom holding call cost us that game. Will he make it thru camp...no clue, but like you said, last year he played close to tauschers level when he got the chance.

The problem I had last season is that most of the line played 6 out of 7 good games, but they took turns STINKING up the joint so we seemed to have one weak link a game. It made the unit look worse than it was.

As for average fans judging....no shot. Most fans would see a classic seal off and think the OL didn't do anything cuz he failed to move his man. Most fans don't realize how SPECTACULAR college was on the wynn TD to end the season....maybe 5 guards in the entire LEAGUE have the athleticism to do what he did on that play.

[CaptainKickass]

I might be wrong -

But my gut tells me the Offensive Line is going to be better this year. At the very least, if they can limit/eliminate the stupid penalties - that will be a large improvement.

The line should be a focus and I look to the coaches and practices to drill it into the players until they become outstanding. The talent seems to be there.