You are not logged in. Join Free! | Log In Thank you!    

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

6 Pages«<23456>
Share
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline buckeyepackfan  
#46 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 1:04:33 AM(UTC)
buckeyepackfan

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,196
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)
Location: Lima, Ohio

Applause Given: 214
Applause Received: 332

Just set the line, AND KEEP THE SAME 5 GUYS AT THE SAME 5 POSITIONS!!!

I'm fine with the moves as long as they don't decide midway through the pre-seaon that it's not working and start flipping guys around.

Know who your starters are, know who your backups are.

If and when an injury occurs, plug in the backup guy, don't start flipping your starters all over.

"The Jeff Saturday" experiment last year was one of the worst moves Ted has made.

“"The preparation week is where you make your hay,You have to win the week first. That’s where a lot of the wins and losses come. It’s how you approach the week leading up to the game."
Offline Dulak  
#47 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 2:46:35 AM(UTC)
Dulak

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

Posts: 2,549
Joined: 1/19/2009(UTC)
Location: London, UK (from kenosha)

Applause Given: 122
Applause Received: 80

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
1 out of 12 drafted isn't bad I guess.. but then of course looking just at one single player does not make a unit either.

So lets look at those stats.. (now some of that is also related to play calling as well)

2012 51 sacks allowed, 31st in the league. - Bear 44 25th
2011 41 sacks allowed 21st in the league - Bears 49 27th
2010 38 sacks allowed 19th in the league - Bears 56 32nd
2009 51 sacks allowed 32nd in the league - Bears 35 19th

I am pretty damn sure that is failing to develop a good unit ... about par with the Bears and I am pretty damn sure they shit canned a coach or two in that tenure.

13 lineman drafted in his tenure.. 1 Pro Bowl appearance.. I will stick by my statement. That goodness Rodgers is durable and can throw on the run... unlike Cutler.


nice post there -

as far as our players - ... lang appears to be a decent guard; but didn't do so well at tackle ... Im really not sure how well bulaga is at tackle - I thought he wasn't that great but I cant quite remember. Its like we have a bunch of guys that make decent or great guards/center - but are not that great at tackle. Need the str/speed/arm length and quickness off the line to stop those speed/power rushers ...

I remember those years with Rodgers getting sacked so many times; I didn't realize he got sacked again 51 sacks last year.

His weakness as we pointed out in these forums is Rodgers holding onto that ball for too long ... but why is this? ... his main option is only to pass and Mike McCarthy appeared to have difficulty creating short passing plays; or screens ... and to top it off all of those years we have never had a running game that was to be respected ... ok we got a few yards but nothing that really got defences worried ... so that usually meant Rodgers had to throw into more coverage.

So as a keyboard coach - If we can implement better blocking (both in the pass and run) and be able to utilize our potential 2 top RB picks and to utilize short passes and screens more ... this may bring Rodgers sack total down; even with subpar Oline just for the fact that we will have options and keep the opposing defences guessing ...


So same Oline guys - but options to short pass or run and Rodgers gets sacked less ...
If only right? ...

Offline QCHuskerFan  
#48 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 5:23:54 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 203
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 60
Applause Received: 93

Originally Posted by: Pack93z Go to Quoted Post
1 out of 12 drafted isn't bad I guess.. but then of course looking just at one single player does not make a unit either.

So lets look at those stats.. (now some of that is also related to play calling as well)

2012 51 sacks allowed, 31st in the league. - Bear 44 25th
2011 41 sacks allowed 21st in the league - Bears 49 27th
2010 38 sacks allowed 19th in the league - Bears 56 32nd
2009 51 sacks allowed 32nd in the league - Bears 35 19th

I am pretty damn sure that is failing to develop a good unit ... about par with the Bears and I am pretty damn sure they shit canned a coach or two in that tenure.

13 lineman drafted in his tenure.. 1 Pro Bowl appearance.. I will stick by my statement. That goodness Rodgers is durable and can throw on the run... unlike Cutler.


Cherry picking stats can prove any argument.

The OL makes up 5/11 of the starters on offense. Has our offense been bad? If half of the offense is coached this poorly, how can it possibly perform? Because our OL is decent.

Can it be better? Absolutely.

Packers had the #9 Passing team last year. Bears were 29th. Rodgers isn't that much better than Cutler.
blank
Offline wpr  
#49 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 5:46:36 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Posts: 11,901
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,425
Applause Received: 1,204

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
No head coach is going to give you exact injuries. You should watch other head coaches post game conferences some time. It's not a Mike McCarthy thing, it's a coach thing.


exactly. I am not saying Mike is bad or evil for not disclosing all the minuet details of injuries but since no coach (or GM for that matter) "is going to give you exact injuries" to use your phrase, what Mike has told us thus far is not the whole story.

As to whether or not they drafted an OT in the 1st 3 rounds or not that too is inconclusive of any proof as to the seriousness of Sherrod's injury.
There is plenty of reasons to speculate as to why they made the moves they did or did not make. AS mentioned one of them is that Sherrod may weel come back this year. But it is not the only one.

Ted and Mike might feel that one of the remaining OTs will do an average or adequate job at RT and they did not have a real need.
They might have felt the need at DE and RB was greater than the need at RT.
They may have felt that the players taken represented the BPA and didn't want to pick a OT when there was better value on the board to be had.
Sherrod may in deed recover, next year. And they did not want to invest a high draft pick in 3 OT.
They may have felt the young bucks they picked up in the 4th would be available and fit their needs and they were willing to wait and see before going for an OT.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Offline play2win  
#50 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:26:16 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,256
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 855
Applause Received: 552

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
I'm trying to think positive about it ... and the only positive I can come up with is ... perhaps Coach Mike is settling on a OL very early ... which I feel would be freaking swell.


It is kind of funny, but, yeah. Seems like he's looking to change what clearly was not working, and decisively acting to establish his change on our OL, before TC.

That is a positive.

Having had a couple of days to think about it, it does make sense. If Sherrod is indeed able to return, it will be better for him to be at RT in transitioning back into the starting lineup. That is one scenario.

Another scenario involves Bakhtiari eventually starting at RT. Tauscher did it as a 7th Round rookie in 2000. Who knows? Maybe Datko has developed enough to legitimately contend for the starting position.

No matter what, if we are not adding any more personnel but what we've drafted or signed UDFA these past 3 seasons, this shift on the line makes sense. Old guard, proven talent on the Left, new blood on the Right.

A third scenario at RT is that Marshall Newhouse puts it all together and wins the job. That would be fine. Maybe he makes that jump in his level of play year 3.

As for Center, I still think Tretter or Patrick Lewis contend there for the starting spot. Ted knew exactly what he was bringing in with Lewis, a 3-time All Big 12 selection at both G and C. He did make a pre-draft visit to GB.

So, given all of this, the line is changing. GOOD! Something had to give there, and maybe these changes and new players challenging to start will help. Regardless, this line is way better without Jeff Saturday. it is already improved.

One other thing of note: this is where Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy can really make their draft & develop philosophy shine. I can see it. We've got some good talent that has been with us now on our OL for the last 2 or 3 seasons. Maybe this is the moment when one or two more (besides Bulaga, Sitton and Lang) of those guys breaks through:

2008 Sitton R4
2009 Lang R4
2010 Bulaga R1 and Newhouse R5
2011 Sherrod R1
2012 Datko R7
2013 Bakhtiari R4 and Tretter R4
Offline DakotaT  
#51 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:34:32 AM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 6,972
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 570
Applause Received: 1,191

I just hope we don't piss away any more years of a future hall of fame first ballot quarterback dicking around with the positions of inadequate offensive lineman. I don't believe Marshall Newhouse and EDS have starting talent for NFL standards and they need to be replaced. I also question Lang's talent level as well, so switching him around constantly cannot be a good thing. We can get buy with Barclay at RT because he is very good at run blocking, but he may need a little help on the field in pass blocking. As for Sherrod, Tretter, and Bacteria - I hope they have the stuff it takes to get into the starting lineup very soon.
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
nerdmann on 5/4/2013(UTC)
Offline play2win  
#52 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:40:09 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,256
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 855
Applause Received: 552

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Rodgers isn't that much better than Cutler.



Whoooaaaah!

Take THAT BACK! Laughing Laughing Laughing

A ballsy, stupidly ballsy (no harm intended my friend) statement by The QC to start our Saturday...
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 5/4/2013(UTC)
Offline Pack93z  
#53 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:51:54 AM(UTC)
Pack93z

Rank: Hall of Famer

U.S. Minor Islands
Posts: 12,605
Joined: 3/16/2007(UTC)
Location: North Central Wisconsin

Applause Given: 353
Applause Received: 937

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Cherry picking stats can prove any argument.

The OL makes up 5/11 of the starters on offense. Has our offense been bad? If half of the offense is coached this poorly, how can it possibly perform? Because our OL is decent.

Can it be better? Absolutely.

Packers had the #9 Passing team last year. Bears were 29th. Rodgers isn't that much better than Cutler.


Didn't cherry pick.. just grabbed the stats at the heart of the argument. We will just agree to disagree, no I don't think they were a pathetic line.. but they also didn't play up to their talents and year after year struggle in protection reads.

To me, that fall on coaching. You seem to think that isn't the root of the problem. Great.

And yes Rodgers is that much better than Cutler. And the difference isn't in physical talent.. it is in poise, patience and confidence. Cutler's biggest issues exist between the ears and behind the eyes. And it is a vast difference between them. And search my statements on Cutler over the years, this is not a new statement for this thread. Big Grin
The wolves will never lose sleep over the feelings of the sheep.

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower on 5/4/2013(UTC)
Offline Zero2Cool  
#54 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 6:52:08 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

United States
Posts: 25,229
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,744
Applause Received: 1,792

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan Go to Quoted Post
Just set the line, AND KEEP THE SAME 5 GUYS AT THE SAME 5 POSITIONS!!!

I'm fine with the moves as long as they don't decide midway through the pre-seaon that it's not working and start flipping guys around.

Know who your starters are, know who your backups are.

If and when an injury occurs, plug in the backup guy, don't start flipping your starters all over.

"The Jeff Saturday" experiment last year was one of the worst moves Ted has made.



Maybe in hindsight, sure, but the Jeff Saturday signing seemed to perk up most Packers fans - link.

UserPostedImage
Click here and find the LATEST Packers News!
Offline Tezzy  
#55 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 7:41:02 AM(UTC)
Tezzy

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 979
Joined: 8/21/2008(UTC)
Location: Wayne's Basement

Applause Given: 16
Applause Received: 53

Easy to just say get better talent for the line to replace the left side. The Packers reality right now is the best talent was on the right side. I have no problem with seeing how this change goes. If you are going to do it, Bulaga and Sitton are about the best combo to try it. Bulaga obviously has plenty of years playing on the left side, and Sitton has good feet and a good enough athlete I won't be surprised if he maintains his level of play. No prediction that it will succeed or fail, but I like the chances for improved line play with this move.
... not gay, but like a Viking. Same difference.
Offline wpr  
#56 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 8:39:03 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

United States
Posts: 11,901
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,425
Applause Received: 1,204

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
Maybe in hindsight, sure, but the Jeff Saturday signing seemed to perk up most Packers fans - link.


I called it a "nice pickup". I did so because I assumed that Ted and Mike checked him out and knew that Saturday still had a lot left in the tank. Face. Palm.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Offline PackerTraxx  
#57 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 8:54:50 AM(UTC)
PackerTraxx

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,783
Joined: 8/13/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 18
Applause Received: 127

More times than not, when there are problems across a position, it starts and possibly ends with the position coach.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
Offline warhawk  
#58 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 9:04:14 AM(UTC)
warhawk

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,406
Joined: 8/7/2008(UTC)

Applause Received: 164

Originally Posted by: Gaycandybacon Go to Quoted Post
I was not expecting this. I wanted to see what they had at LT with Bulaga, but now Sitton. I hope they think this will make the team better. My opinion on this is they want to run to the left more.. Best run blockers on the team. And of course want to protect dat franchise. Time to see if Bulaga has what it takes.

I think the Guard change makes sense as well. Bulaga and Sitton have been playing next to each other for a couple of years now. Newhouse has been playing next to Lang.
What I see is the moves allowing the OL to become cohesive quicker than having to get used to the guy next to you. I think moving Bulaga to LT and leaving Lane next to him and having Sitton next to Newhouse or Sherrod would be more radical than what they are doing. Knowing the guy next to you and how you communicate is a huge part of a successful OL and I see these moves allowing that aspect to come along much faster.
I agree Bulaga is the key. If he can perform at a high level and these new RB's make a difference the overall OL play will be much improved and this is obviously the plan moving forward.


"The train is leaving the station."
Offline steveishere  
#59 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 10:32:21 AM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,244
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 27
Applause Received: 601

Originally Posted by: wpr Go to Quoted Post
I called it a "nice pickup". I did so because I assumed that Ted and Mike checked him out and knew that Saturday still had a lot left in the tank. Face. Palm.


I'm sure they did check him out. He had a nice year prior and stayed pretty healthy. That's the risk with signing those older vets though. They can just go from a great season to over the cliff in 1 year.
Offline sschind  
#60 Posted : Saturday, May 4, 2013 3:59:29 PM(UTC)
sschind

Rank: 4th Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 757
Joined: 3/5/2013(UTC)
Location: SE WISCONSIN

Applause Given: 78
Applause Received: 313

Originally Posted by: doddpower Go to Quoted Post
Yeah, better late than never. Sure, it could have been attempted earlier, but it wasn't. They have got to do what they can from here, regardless of what has happened in the past. It's not ideal, but reality hardly ever is. At least now they have an entire off season and season to grow. I don't think Bulaga will be any worse than Newhouse at LT, and very likely much better. I also think Newhouse has the potential to be a very solid RT and will be much more valuable there than at LT. This move could definitely pay off, but there will be some growing pains.



The only reason it is not ideal is because you are basically admitting that the right side of you line sucks and you are being forced into a drastic move. In reality this might be the ideal thing to do. Of course it might backfire big time as well. Time will tell.

What I don't get all the "should have done it from the beginning" type talk from some people. The beginning of what? As far as I am concerned this is the beginning. The draft is over and we pretty much know who we have to work with so the change was made. It would have been foolish to make the move prior to the draft because, playing the what if game, what if a stud left tackle would have fallen to use or the opportunity to move up to get one would have presented itself. If we had made the move we would have had to unmake it. It could have been done earlier but to me earlier would have been this time last year. It's not a move you make midseason or after training camp starts. You have to give your players the maximum amount of time to adjust and doing it now does that.

The more I think about it the more I like the move. If you are convinced that Sitton and Bulaga are our best linemen, and why wouldn't you be, and you know the players we have to work with why wouldn't you want to have your best guys in the most important positions. Looking at it another way, if you have to have one side of your line be weaker than the other wouldn't you prefer that to be the right side. The only argument I could see against it is if you don't think Bulaga and Sitton on the right side will be better than who we had to begin with.

Maybe some people are having issues because it is a drastic move that reeks of desperation. Its like a double reverse flea flicker. It's a trick play and it makes it seem like we are desperate. Well, according to some people, when it comes to our offensive line we are desperate. I just don't see it like that. I see it as a coaching staff trying to make the best with the players they have to work with.
I fully respect your right to have your opinion but that doesn't mean I agree with it or respect you for having it.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages«<23456>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by YAF 2.1.0 | YAF © 2003-2014, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.875 seconds.