Colledge/Bush to stay on bench?

[Harlan Huckleby]

How in the world do we really know if Colledge will be better or worse as a tackle ? Because he's a little quick ?

Colledge has played well at LT when he has filled-in. He looks like an LT to me, he doesn't have a lot of butt on him.

I was only suggesting they try him at RT against Dallas because Tauscher appeared to be in big trouble.

[Fritz]

Kind of an interesting article on him in the JSO. Seemed like a conscious attempt to help the guy shake the "arrogant" label.

It's just that he's always been "The Guy," see? So he's not used to being questioned. In reality he's one humble dude.

Funny how writers can create personas for players. How much is true? Hard to say.

[Bretsky]

Kind of an interesting article on him in the JSO. Seemed like a conscious attempt to help the guy shake the "arrogant" label.

It's just that he's always been "The Guy," see? So he's not used to being questioned. In reality he's one humble dude.

Funny how writers can create personas for players. How much is true? Hard to say.

I think there were implied hints of his arrogance even as a rookie as to why he wasn't starting a few games. If you listened to the interview I did you'd have the same view IMO.

[Fritz]

Actually I think I would, Bretsky. My point was that the article seemed to me to be an attempt to change the guy's image for him. I didn't mean that he wasn't or isn't arrogant. It just looks like he paid a writer to make him sympathetic.

[Fred's Slacks]

I also think Colledge would make a better tackle than guard. I think the Packers viewed him to be similar to Wahle when he was drafted because of his
athleticism. Where they differ is Wahle had a lot more strength to hold up against the big bull rushing DTs. Colledge doesn't have that. He's seems better suited going up against the lighter, faster DE's. Just my opinion.

[KYPack]

I also think Colledge would make a better tackle than guard. I think the Packers viewed him to be similar to Wahle when he was drafted because of his
athleticism. Where they differ is Wahle had a lot more strength to hold up against the big bull rushing DTs. Colledge doesn't have that. He's seems better suited going up against the lighter, faster DE's. Just my opinion.

Yeah, I can see this, too.

He's an athlete, but doesn't have the physical mass to play guard. cliffy might have his last snap at any time, he's that fragile (maybe big mark, too.)

It doesn't jurt to have a guy like Colledge around.

He doesn't have NFL strenrth to play any position right now, but should acquire it in time.

[Patler]

I think Colledges problems have less to do with strength, and more to do with technique. His strength is rarely, if ever, mentioned by anyone anymore, and is is said to have made very good gains in that regard over the summer.

On the other hand, McCarthy, Philbin, Campen and Larry McCarren at various times this year have mentioned how poor his technique is at times this season. Sports writer have said it too. Today's article stated it succinctly:

Philbin said Colledge's technique was bad, as he played with flat feet, and that his problems weren't mental errors but with executing the proper technique and fundamentals.

Personally, I see no reason why he will be any better at tackle, where technique is even more important. A tackle with bad feet becomes a guard, a center or unemployed. Colledge was horrendous in the Miami game last year. I know he was up against one of the very best, but he was awful until MM adjust his play calling to roll Favre away from Taylor, with quick passes and still giving Colledge help on just about every snap.

Colledge was probably the biggest, strongest, baddest guy where ever he was until he came to the NFL, where just about everyone was previously. He probably dominated on size and intensity, without enough emphasis on technique at Boise State. Very few can do that in the NFL. That can be a problem with drafting guys from second tier football programs.

Colledge might still develop into the player the Packers had hoped. He seems to be able to do it at times, even against good players. Consistency is a huge problem with him, which can be attitude, mental preparation, or just experience. Wahle was pretty awful at times too, was a starter his second year, and benched his third year. Part of his problem was, like Coston, he came into the league much younger than most. Colledge doesn't have that excuse, he is two years older than Coston. If he doesn't "get it" by next year, he probably never will.

[Pacopete4]

the thing is.. now we are getting to the point where we havent fixed our inside lineman which is going to be combo'd with tausch and clifton probably not playin very much longer... its been a poor, poor excuse on getting a good line in green bay and it will be this teams downfall no matter how much talent they have at the skilled positions

[Patler]

the thing is.. now we are getting to the point where we havent fixed our inside lineman which is going to be combo'd with tausch and clifton probably not playin very much longer... its been a poor, poor excuse on getting a good line in green bay and it will be this teams downfall no matter how much talent they have at the skilled positions

Well's is fine at center.
Spitz, Coston, Colledge are better than they were last year. However, as inexperienced as they are, I expect at least two to improve still more next year, maybe all three. Throw in Barbre and Moll and I think they might find two decent guards out of the bunch.

Neither Rivera nor Wahle really came into their own until about their fourth year or so, and both were looked at as the weakest links on the line for several years as starters. A lot was expected of Colledge because he is such a good athlete, not unlike Wahle. He hasn't "gotten it yet" about what the NFL requires play after play after play.

Spitz has never relied on athleticism, I suspect; not unlike Rivera. Rivera continued to get better and better until his 6th or 7th year, really. Spitz could do the same, although he may be more suited to the Packers line under Sherman than under MM.

I'm not that down on our young linemen, although I think next year is an important one for all of them.

I also don't think Clifton and Tauscher are as close to retirement as some of you might. Each is only in his eighth season. Tackles playing 12 or more seasons is not that uncommon, but I do hope the Packers start drafting some tackles in the next several drafts.

[Pacopete4]

tausch is always hurt.. and clifton has those bad knees that will prevent them from keeping on keeping on

[Patler]

tausch is always hurt.. and clifton has those bad knees that will prevent them from keeping on keeping on

That is what happens with many O-line men the last halves of their careers. How many years did Rivera play with one injury after another, but rarely missed anything. Dotson did for years until Tauscher finally arrived. Clifton has been pretty healthy this year, so far, but a couple capable backups are needed. Tauscher might have benefited this year from sitting a week when he first was injured.

Its funny, we think of them as being injured, but since Tauscher went down with the knee injury in 2002, he has played every game except the five he missed last year. That's 71 of 76 possible games since the knee surgery.

Since the Sapp hit ended his 2002 season, Clifton has missed just one game, not because of his knees, not because of any other injury. It was due to the flu. 75 of 76 games since some thought he might not ever play again.