Colledge - Worse than Whitticker?

[pbmax]

Then perhaps is was the pulling Guard that occasioned that comment from quite a long time ago that the Rossley/Beightol/Ahman running game resembled a college scheme in some plays. It also marked a departure from previous West Coast incarnations in that Green ran exclusively from an I formation, not split backs.

The year (98) that Holmgren nearly killed Dorsey Levens after his holdout (mostly kidding), he had to deal with a runner (Darick Holmes? Raymont Harris?) who operated better out of the I but Holmgren did not like losing the advantage of split backs. He also never had Favre in the shotgun either. So much has changed. I just see a lot of pro teams running the Power Gap with a pulling guard now. At the beginning, it seemed the Packers were the only ones to run it that way.

But I would suspect that the scrapheap LGs of the Bengals either were mistakes (previous team didn't know what they had) or they were asked to perform very basic work. That coach might be a miracle worker, or it could be that those two guys were able to do the limited amount they were asked to do very well. I could be wrong here. This isn't the first time the Packers have struggled to find a LG. The Bengals offense ran well this season, but it struggled to pass as the year went on. Someone got figured out.

There need not be much mystery about Colledge, other first and second round picks have failed to perform, and Colledge seems to fail mostly in his inability to be consistent. I have seen him play well, I have also seen him be a turnstile. There is not much doubt in my mind that had Lang not had to fill in at tackle, he would have been LG by mid-season.

And that brings me back to player acquisition and your point. If there were more viable bodies at tackle (not projects waiting to be developed - yes, I am sounding like RG here) then the Guard question might not be such a question. Instead its like playing dime defense with Harris hurt. The fifth, sixth and seventh lineman you play off the depth chart aren't as good. Colledge probably deserves to be replaced, but the guy who should have replaced him was busy at tackle.

If Colledge was dumped (unlikely given the CBA) then we might get a better read on him and his coach. As it is, the offense performs well enough with him (especially running) that I am willing to entertain the notion that while he sometimes played like the worst guy on the line, he probably starts for a reasonable number of teams.

[KYPack]

The Bengals Oline had pass pro issues from the tackle spot. The interior line protected Palmer pretty well. Alexander developed another interior guy who started all year. C Kyle Cook was a Viking cut and he was a really capable C. The fact that this goofy organization came up with all these capable OLineman in a year and we haven't done much in 4 still burns my butt.

I'm sure some of this was luck, but Christ, why can't we at least be in position to get lucky? Lang was a savior this season. Another thing that gripes me is the loss of Meredith. Waldo sent me pm with his list of the top ten OT's in last year's draft. He had Meredith in there. We lost a decent kid like that in order to keep the 3 headed FB spot? Why?

[Fritz]

Well, wait a second now. Earlier, much earlier, this season, one of you venerables in this thread suggested I overreacted to Meredith's loss to the Bills. I was unhappy as I saw him as the guy you need to develop and get ready for next year to take over from Clifton. I think I wanted him on the 53 man roster at someone else's expense, but one of you pointed out to me that Meredith was only a fifth rounder and you can get one of those fifth round talented-but-uncertain guys every year.

My argument was that yes, Meredith would be a waste of a valuable roster spot this year, but that this would pay off in the upcoming year. But someone out there suggested that as a fifth round pick made on "potential" those guys were easy come easy go.

Anybody remember that or care to take responsibility and explain? I'd really like to be right on this one. It's been a while.

[KYPack]

Well, wait a second now. Earlier, much earlier, this season, one of you venerables in this thread suggested I overreacted to Meredith's loss to the Bills. I was unhappy as I saw him as the guy you need to develop and get ready for next year to take over from Clifton. I think I wanted him on the 53 man roster at someone else's expense, but one of you pointed out to me that Meredith was only a fifth rounder and you can get one of those fifth round talented-but-uncertain guys every year.

My argument was that yes, Meredith would be a waste of a valuable roster spot this year, but that this would pay off in the upcoming year. But someone out there suggested that as a fifth round pick made on "potential" those guys were easy come easy go.

Anybody remember that or care to take responsibility and explain? I'd really like to be right on this one. It's been a while.

Sure, bud, you can be right. Twasn't me, but I was ragged. We lose the other half of the NE deal. 3 high picks for a 1st and a 5th. Meredith was that fifth rounder. Why did we lose him? to keep the triple FB threat intact? I didn't dig it then and don't like it now.

Thank God the 1 was CMIII. That kid is unreal. 5 Rooks made the pro Bowl this year and he was one of 'em. He's a ruby, the real thing in person.

[Fritz]

Okay, KY, we'll blame someone else then. Wasn't you. And really I don't recall who it was.

In any case, we're starting over and this time TT needs to find the next left tackle in the draft. If he's lucky the kid will have a year to sit behind Clifton and soak it all in. And that's if TT's lucky. So he better pick a good one, and probably better draft another right tackle, too, so Lang can play left guard. The re-up Tauscher, too.

[Patler]

Well, wait a second now. Earlier, much earlier, this season, one of you venerables in this thread suggested I overreacted to Meredith's loss to the Bills. I was unhappy as I saw him as the guy you need to develop and get ready for next year to take over from Clifton. I think I wanted him on the 53 man roster at someone else's expense, but one of you pointed out to me that Meredith was only a fifth rounder and you can get one of those fifth round talented-but-uncertain guys every year.

My argument was that yes, Meredith would be a waste of a valuable roster spot this year, but that this would pay off in the upcoming year. But someone out there suggested that as a fifth round pick made on "potential" those guys were easy come easy go.

Anybody remember that or care to take responsibility and explain? I'd really like to be right on this one. It's been a while.

Sure, bud, you can be right. Twasn't me, but I was ragged. We lose the other half of the NE deal. 3 high picks for a 1st and a 5th. Meredith was that fifth rounder. Why did we lose him? to keep the triple FB threat intact? I didn't dig it then and don't like it now.

Thank God the 1 was CMIII. That kid is unreal. 5 Rooks made the pro Bowl this year and he was one of 'em. He's a ruby, the real thing in person.

They lost Meredith because they decided they didn't want him, not because of the 3 FBs. They also lost Meredith because they decided that Giacomini had more immediate value to them than Meredith.

Hard to know what is fact and what is not, but when Meredith left they Packers were a mess in performance and with injuries in the O-line. Its clear they did little to retain him, and as I recall a day or two earlier said they had no intention to bring him off the PS, even with the injuries.

Basically, they lost him because they saw little potential that he would ever become a player.

[pbmax]

Losing Meredith was symptomatic of the trouble at tackle. He certainly wasn't the answer for this year and as Patler says above, they did not even make him the matching offer they have other PS candidates whom they wish to keep. I checked the Google cache of the JSO blog the day he was signed and it also reiterated that the Packers had indicated he was not a candidate for the roster even when Clifton and Colledge were hurt.

He might have been an interesting prospect to develop, but it was going to take time. He did not show much in preseason.

The question, as Patler put it even earlier, is if his start this year (or his development in the coming year) is a sign that he can play at this level, then Campen comes into further question as they will have lost a player who developed on a faster track that the Packers thought he would. The tricky part is that Buffalo's offense stinks. So we are not exactly comparing apples to apples.

[ThunderDan]

Losing Meredith was symptomatic of the trouble at tackle. He certainly wasn't the answer for this year and as Patler says above, they did not even make him the matching offer they have other PS candidates whom they wish to keep. I checked the Google cache of the JSO blog the day he was signed and it also reiterated that the Packers had indicated he was not a candidate for the roster even when Clifton and Colledge were hurt.

He might have been an interesting prospect to develop, but it was going to take time. He did not show much in preseason.

The question, as Patler put it even earlier, is if his start this year (or his development in the coming year) is a sign that he can play at this level, then Campen comes into further question as they will have lost a player who developed on a faster track that the Packers thought he would. The tricky part is that Buffalo's offense stinks. So we are not exactly comparing apples to apples.

Meredith was horrible in the preseason. He took the same drop in pass protection on every play. The DE just went deeper around him or cut inside to the QB. I was surprised he even made the practice squad. He was a "super" development project. I was even more surprised when he was signed off of the PS.

[KYPack]

Losing Meredith was symptomatic of the trouble at tackle. He certainly wasn't the answer for this year and as Patler says above, they did not even make him the matching offer they have other PS candidates whom they wish to keep. I checked the Google cache of the JSO blog the day he was signed and it also reiterated that the Packers had indicated he was not a candidate for the roster even when Clifton and Colledge were hurt.

He might have been an interesting prospect to develop, but it was going to take time. He did not show much in preseason.

The question, as Patler put it even earlier, is if his start this year (or his development in the coming year) is a sign that he can play at this level, then Campen comes into further question as they will have lost a player who developed on a faster track that the Packers thought he would. The tricky part is that Buffalo's offense stinks. So we are not exactly comparing apples to apples.

Meredith was horrible in the preseason. He took the same drop in pass protection on every play. The DE just went deeper around him or cut inside to the QB. I was surprised he even made the practice squad. He was a "super" development project. I was even more surprised when he was signed off of the PS.

Thanks on that, TD. I didn't see that much of Meredith in pre-season. Sounds like he may have improved by moving to Buff, but who knows. Patler's information makes it sound like a performance issue. Rookie O tackles usually don't do much. Two of the best young OT's I've ever seen was Cliffy and Tausch at the start of the decade.

There has to be some credence that other teams are developing their OLineman better than GB is. That's a performance issue, too. Some signs point to Campens ability to coach-up his young lineman. That bad for us, our philosophy is to go with the young guys in that spot.