OLD ISSUE: REBUILDING?

[Packnut]

Guards

Let me make sure I have the info correct on this:
TT was hired in November of 2004.
Wahle was released from his contract March 2005 or 4 months later.
Wahle reportedly wanted to test FA
Wahle reportedly did not care for Sherman
Wahle reportedly wanted the opportunity to play tackle
One reason this is all TT's fault is that he should have been resigned and upgraded by midseason
Another reason this is all TT's fault is that he couldn't pay the bonus and cut Wahle.
TT has said that not trying SOMETHING more to keep Wahle or Rivera was a mistake.

Are these correct? If so I'd really like to know how TT was supposed to have redone the deal by midseason when he wasn't hired til after that. How were we to pay him if #1 he didn't want to be here, #2 he wanted insane money and #3 he wanted to play a position that we weren't offering him? Why didn't Sherman have his contract redone in October? Could it be that they tried and he refused to redo it? TT didn't get it done, neither did Sherman and they all knew that bonus was coming. How many times do we hang a guy for something he's already admitted was a mistake? It's long over. It's done. There's nothing that can be done about it now and last I heard from the guinea pig standing behind them, the experiment is working and the new guards are playing well (and, frankly that guinea pig gets a little pissed when people outside the organization suggest that they know what's going on inside).

New guards are playing well? We must be watching different games cause our guards don't have a clue what to do when they reach the 2nd level of defenders which is one reason we have had no run game.

[Rastak]

Anyone know if the NFL is moving towards doing something about the ridiculous poison pills in Hutchison and Burleson's contracts?

There was a lot of gripping about them at the time - I wonder if it was just hot air, or if a change will be made.

I think they'll outlaw them, otherwise the transition tag is totally worthless.

Teams best defense against this is to Franchise the players you need to or get a deal done BEFORE they hit free agency.

[Astonishment]

Rastak,

That is an interesting article, but I don't think anyone is arguing how improtant guards are, but rather where they should fit on the pay scale for the Packers. IMO I think Hutchinson was agreat signing for you, and I wanted the Packers to go after him. That said I find it odd that Hutchinson helped Walter Jones, Robbie Tobeck, and Alexander but there is never any thought about how much they helped him. Hutchinson is undoubtable a great player, but an offensive line is always more than one or two players. Thier job is done as a unit and judged as a unit. As great as Hutchinson is I still would take a group of good players who worked well together over a bunch of great players thrown together.

Again I am not downing the Vikings for signing him, because I would like to have some great players in that o-line that works well together, but I am still not convinced that one player ever makes or breaks an o-line - it is the line as a whole.

[Rastak]

Rastak,

That is an interesting article, but I don't think anyone is arguing how improtant guards are, but rather where they should fit on the pay scale for the Packers. IMO I think Hutchinson was agreat signing for you, and I wanted the Packers to go after him. That said I find it odd that Hutchinson helped Walter Jones, Robbie Tobeck, and Alexander but there is never any thought about how much they helped him. Hutchinson is undoubtable a great player, but an offensive line is always more than one or two players. Thier job is done as a unit and judged as a unit. As great as Hutchinson is I still would take a group of good players who worked well together over a bunch of great players thrown together.

Again I am not downing the Vikings for signing him, because I would like to have some great players in that o-line that works well together, but I am still not convinced that one player ever makes or breaks an o-line - it is the line as a whole.

Understood and I agree. Right now they aren't looking all that special but I think they'll be good as they gel. McKinney had a good year last year and Birk is a pretty good center so they'll be fine. We'll find out soon enough if he's worth the cash.

[MJZiggy]

Re: Guards

Let me make sure I have the info correct on this:
TT was hired in November of 2004.
Wahle was released from his contract March 2005 or 4 months later.
Wahle reportedly wanted to test FA
Wahle reportedly did not care for Sherman
Wahle reportedly wanted the opportunity to play tackle
One reason this is all TT's fault is that he should have been resigned and upgraded by midseason
Another reason this is all TT's fault is that he couldn't pay the bonus and cut Wahle.
TT has said that not trying SOMETHING more to keep Wahle or Rivera was a mistake.

Are these correct? If so I'd really like to know how TT was supposed to have redone the deal by midseason when he wasn't hired til after that. How were we to pay him if #1 he didn't want to be here, #2 he wanted insane money and #3 he wanted to play a position that we weren't offering him? Why didn't Sherman have his contract redone in October? Could it be that they tried and he refused to redo it? TT didn't get it done, neither did Sherman and they all knew that bonus was coming. How many times do we hang a guy for something he's already admitted was a mistake? It's long over. It's done. There's nothing that can be done about it now and last I heard from the guinea pig standing behind them, the experiment is working and the new guards are playing well (and, frankly that guinea pig gets a little pissed when people outside the organization suggest that they know what's going on inside).

New guards are playing well? We must be watching different games cause our guards don't have a clue what to do when they reach the 2nd level of defenders which is one reason we have had no run game.

I was referring to protecting the qb which is what the qb said they did well. His opinion is more important than mine.

[Tony Oday]

MAtt Birk he went to Harvard

[TOP HAT]

OL ANALYSIS: PRE GAMEDAY

Packers' offensive line set but not sturdy Growing pains still plague rookies By BOB McGINN Journalsentinel.com Posted: Aug. 31, 2006


Green Bay - The Green Bay Packers' offensive line probably ranks as one of the weakest in the National Football League but at least the club has identified its five starters and No. 2 left tackle entering the regular season.

Left guard Jason Spitz and right guard Tony Moll have been up and down all summer but barring a late trade, the Packers have little alternative other than to start both rookies Sept. 10 against the Chicago Bears.

"Hopefully," offensive coordinator Jeff Jagodzinski said at mid-week, "we can stay that way for many years."

Another rookie, Daryn Colledge, was drafted in the second round and installed immediately as the starter at left guard. That lasted until Aug. 14 when Colledge lost his lineup berth to Moll.

For a few days after his demotion, Colledge continued to back up Spitz. Josh Bourke, a rookie free agent, was behind Chad Clifton at left tackle.

However, when Bourke suffered a strained calf late in the Atlanta game and then aggravated it in practice two days later, the Packers needed someone to play behind Clifton. With Bourke out indefinitely, Colledge played 1½ quarters at left tackle Monday night and looked better than he ever did at guard.

"He did some nice things," offensive line coach Joe Philbin said. "He was solid. He took a step forward, no question about it."

Left tackle is where Colledge played his entire career at Boise State. Two scouts said he appeared much better suited to play left tackle, which is more of a finesse position against lighter opponents, than to play guard, where bulk size and strength is more necessary.

"He did a better job in pass pro at left tackle than guard," one personnel man said. "He didn't get bounced and buckled."

Colledge, who weighs 301 pounds, also came off the ball and sustained well as a run blocker against the backups from Cincinnati.

For now, Colledge is the top left-side backup behind Clifton and Spitz. He probably would find his way into the lineup one way or another if Moll or right tackle Mark Tauscher were injured.

Junius Coston, the No. 2 right tackle, is a converted guard and needs a ton of work if he makes the team. It also remains to be seen if the Packers deem veteran guard Tupe Peko worth keeping. With decent depth in such short supply, it's possible that general manager Ted Thompson will pick up one if not two more offensive linemen by opening day.

"He looked more natural out there," Jagodzinski said, referring to Colledge's play at left tackle. "Now we can create a left-side backup. For now. He's going to be a good player, he really is. It's just going to take some time."

In his second start, Moll probably played adequately. According to one scout, he was effective at times run-blocking at the point of attack and looked good picking up a linebacker on a blitz.

Moll, however, did have a glaring negative. On stretch plays away from him, he did a poor job two or three times getting in position on cut blocks designed to prevent his man from chasing down the runner from behind. Moll kept flopping at the nearest leg of the defensive tackle when his aiming point should have been the man's farthest leg.

"Really, from where he starts to where he ends up cutting the guy is about a 5-yard deal," Jagodzinski said. "That's why you've got to have guys that can move. We practice that every day because it's such a big part of what we do."

Moll should be fast enough to get in better position. What Philbin wants him to do is take another step or two before cutting.

"You've got to take the back half of your body and get it on his play-side half right above his knee," Philbin said. "That's all you've got to do. I don't know if there are any easy blocks but it's a doable block. Certainly it's not like asking them to take a 350-pound Sam Adams and take him seven yards that way."

Spitz had two bad plays. On a third and 1, he played too high and was pushed deep into the backfield by defensive tackle John Thornton on a carry for no gain. Later, when the Bengals rushed only three players, Spitz was in poor position on a twist and the subsequent knockdown of Brett Favre by defensive lineman Bryan Robinson led to an interception.

"They had a three-man rush and you're scratching your head why the hell they got a pressure," Philbin said. "But other than the twist I thought he pass-blocked pretty well. For his third game, this kid has awareness.

"Sometimes he's locked up (with) guys and he's still looking for twists. And he blocked the three-technique pretty well when we ran the ball his way. His put his nose where it had to be."

The first real test for the rookies is forthcoming nine days from now at Lambeau Field.

[TOP HAT]

OL ANALYSIS: REBUILDING ADDENDUM

By packiowa Undrafted Rat in another thread relevant to OL rebuilding analysis:


I know there have been other threads on this topic, but I don't wanna search for it. I spent last night watching each play at least 10 times on Tivo. Here are my impressions.


The guards and wells played better than the tackles. Granted, Moll got pushed around a couple of times by Adams, but he was fairly solid. Wells and Spitz got killed on a double team in pass blocking, but Clifton got pushed back towards Favre a little quicker and forced Favre to throw before the big hit (it was the int).

Wells was okay, but not spectacular. A lot of times he got into space and couldn't find a block. Same with Spitz in space, he couldn't find a lb to block most of the time.

Colledge looked solid at LT.
White didn't do anything at all.
Coston seemed to hold up pretty well and can get into space quickly.

On defense,

Pickett is a starter and played alright.
Williams played a solid game and gets a pretty good push.
Cole got decent push, but did get blown off the ball once abut 5-7 yards.
Allen is the same as Cole, with one terrible play.
Jenkins can rush the passer, but should NEVER play on anything other than a passing down. He gets completely driven off the line. It was really bad.
Jolly played alright, but didn't flash.

Hawk played too much like Barnett. Running down the line and jumping on.
Hodge is the only lb that tries to blow up a hole. He did look really, realy slow running with Hawkins as they tried to catch Mcneal for his td.
Popinga sticks his nose in the hole pretty well but doesn't knife in to make a hit like Hodge. Even so, it's better than Barnett's style imo.

Monday night, I was angry at OL, DL, and Woodson/Hawkins. After re-watching the game to the extreme, I came away with these impressions.

OL--> okay except for the vets, which gives me some hope. I question whether our guards can be effective on runs once they get in space though.

DT--> Played alright. Nobody took up two blockers with any sort of consistency. As good as Jenkins looked against the pass, he was even worse against the run. I'd got with Pickett and Williams as starters based solely off that game.

DE--> NO pash rush. We gotta keep Kamp, KGB, and probably MM in case of injury. Other than that Hunter can play some S.T. so he may be worth keeping. KGB played the run alright against Cinn.

The main difference in our running game and the Bengals was that their guards were consistently getting to the second level and making blocks. We rarely (i'm not kidding either) got any kind of meaningful block on the backers in space. If the tackles can turn it up and the guards and wells can be more effective in space, this offense can work.

As for the defense, I was miffed. The DT's are workable and I thought they got a much better push than the Bengals (excluding 2-3 Adams plays where he threw around Moll to no advantage). The DE's played the run alright, but were not getting nearly enough pressure. Not even close. We did learn than Monty can overpower te's fairly well.

I was hoping (I have been watching Greenway and Hawk at Iowa for a while) that our LB's would start showing some explosion, but I didn't see it. Hodge still tries to blow things up, but he not as effective yet was he was at Iowa. Poppy sticks his nose in better. Hawk seems a little unsure of attacking the los, but i hope that changes.

Okay, done rambling. It's slightly encouraging that the vets (tackles and woody and Kamp for being too quiet) played the worst.

These are my final thoughts. This team is only a consistent pass rush away from contending for the playoffs in a weak division. If Carroll is covering well and Hawkins or Horton prove worthy of the nickel, does Woddy begrudgingly move to safety part time. Probably not until late season or next year, but that may be our best nickel package.

Edit: Forgot one. Leach was not that good at run blocking. Sure he can block, but for some reason the rb's and Leach were not on the same page. I wonder if he has the instincts to block in this scheme. Hopeully, Hendo will make a difference.

[TOP HAT]

ADDENDUM-WINNING MANAGEMENT CULTURE ISSUE

[
Article Last Updated: 08/31/2006 WR Walker glad he's an ex-Packer After watching Cincinnati trounce Green Bay, Denver's new acquisition says he's happier in Denver. By Bill Williamson Denver Post Staff Writer


..."It just made me happy to know I'm here and not dealing with that anymore," Walker said. "This is a winning organization, and I'm better off here."

[ahaha]

I am confused as to why Hutchinson can claim he felt betrayed. He was mad that they didn't franchise him? Most players seem pissed when that happens to them. From what I read, Hutch was designated a transition FA out of good faith. It gave him the opportunity to go out and find his market value. Then the Seahawks could match that offer, if they wanted to. But, his agent put the "poison pill" in the contract, making it virtually impossible for the Seahawks to match. They obviously wanted to match the contract, because they fought the "poison pill" clause in court up until the deadline to match. The Seahawks were generous in giving Hutch a chance to see what he was worth to the rest of the NFL. If anyone betrayed the other, it was Hutchinson.

[Chubbyhubby]

I am too am getting frustrated with the Pack. Its not just the team is rebuilding, its also the coaching staff is extremely young. They too wil have growing pains as well. Like it or not, The packers of the late 90's are no more. Sherman screwed us over big time.

This is ssimilar to the Milwaukee Bucks. The Bucks have a head (I stil act like an assistant) coach in Terry Stotts. He is still learning on the job and last years team had great games and then looked like crap the next game. They are to a young team. Just like the Packers.

Its going to be tough few years. No question, As packer fans we al survied the Forrest Gregg and Lindey Infante years so lets give MM a chance and see how he responds.

For that matter give TT a chance as well. He is no Ron Wolf he is Ted Thompson.

As I tell my 9 year old son "Just be yourself and do the best you can thats all you can do"

Thats good advice, Ted Thompson is going to be Ted Thompson and thats the bottom line. He has to be what he is.

[TOP HAT]

DEJA VU: 2 YRS REBUILDING ISSUES-2 OGS AND 1 IMPACT DE

While the commentaries by packer fans are great about rebuilding and key personnel needs on ol and dl, I see what writers noticed continuing at two major weaknesses: no consistent pass rushing on a soft defense especially on key downs and no serious elite replacements for Wahle and Rivera.

I can wait until after the first 2 games at home to make a serious assessment of the strategic planning by management to win while rebuilding.

[TOP HAT]

WAIVERS SEARCHING??

Brad Zimanek column: Another gory year on horizon before Packers can turn the corner By Brad Zimanek

Ready for another season revisiting Green Bay's gory years of the '70s and '80s? This season certainly won't remind Packers fans of the '60s or '90s.


Next weekend's 10th anniversary celebration of the Super Bowl XXXI champions at Lambeau Field will be the closest this year's team gets to greatness. The last time the Packers began a season with such under whelming expectations must date back to 1987 or 1988. It shows how fast an NFL team can plummet because of injuries, poor draft choices/free agent decisions and disappointing leadership.


The Packers actually headed into the 2005 season eyeing a fourth-straight NFC North Division title and it soon fell apart with losses in seven of the first eight games.


There were plenty of question marks heading into last year, but even the most cynical green and gold followers wouldn't have considered it too big of a stretch, especially in this parity-driven league, for the Packers to at least be in contention for a playoff spot.


Now, with Green Bay welcoming the Bears in the season opener Sept. 10, the word playoffs rolls off your tongue in classic Jim Mora-like refrain: "Playoffs?!"


That's how farfetched and unrealistic the postseason appears at this point.


The Packers completed their less-than-inspiring preseason Friday afternoon with a 35-21 loss to Tennessee at Lambeau Field that included basically one highlight – rookie wide receiver Greg Jenning's 89-yard reception that set up a 7-0 lead.


Obviously exhibition records don't mean anything or Pittsburgh fans would be grilling coach Bill Cowher for the Super Bowl champion Steelers 0-4 performance.


But there's wisdom to be gained from Green Bay's 1-3 record that included last an embarrassing 48-17 loss to Cincinnati on Monday before a national TV audience.


The Packers will be at a disadvantage on both the offensive and defensive lines against nearly every team they play this season.


Think about that. Let it sink in.


Being physical up front is synonymous with the definition of football.


It means you could see a lot in the regular season of what you've seen in the preseason.


Running the ball will be a struggle. That sets up long-yardage situations trying to convert first downs. That puts Brett Favre under the gun to make a play. That leads to some great moments, but can also lead to turnovers or, at the least, plenty of three-and-outs.


"You can't win, if you can't run the ball," Favre said.


That puts pressure on the defense to get off the field.


But it's much harder to get off the field when the opposition can run the ball and is faced with third-and-short conversion situations. That leads to the defense taking chances on making great plays, but that also can backfire into backbreaking touchdowns.


None of the above is recipe for success in the NFL.


Coach Mike McCarthy said his biggest concerns heading into his first season were consistency running the ball, allowing third-down conversions and special teams.


If that weren't enough, McCarthy must deal with things like the stupidity of rookie defensive tackle Johnny Jolly getting a taunting penalty after making a tackle out of bounds (that drew boos from the crowd) and getting acclimated to head coaching duties.


Like when to challenge, considering McCarthy was unsuccessful challenging a run after Aaron Rodgers' dive for the first down marker at Green Bay's own 36-yard line.


There is some intrigue heading into the season.


Jennings could be special. Think what would happen if the special teams could cover some of Jon Ryan's booming punts? The linebacking unit and secondary could be more talented and deeper this year than it has been in the last three or four years.


But a realist sees similarities to the 4-12 team, problems on both lines and a first-year coach getting his feet wet. So it's no wonder expectations are lower than this franchise has faced in decades. Packer fans can only hope it doesn't take too long to go back up.

[MJZiggy]

This is why Favre had to be talked into giving interviews.

[Fritz]

MJZigs...

Thanks for clarifying about the Wahle situation. I get ticked off too when people just start laying blanket blame without studying what actually happened.

As for Hutchinson, that sounds like a few people screwed up. I get miffed when somebody like him acts like he's been jerked around somehow. If he really wanted to play for Seattle, he could have, and he could have been making a boat load of money doing it. Don't cry, Stevie.