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

[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. 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.

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?