O-line Depth· Page 3 · PACKERSHOME

Rockmolder
Honored Member

13 years ago

One of the few free agents I would've liked to have signed was Robert Gallery. The talent is there. He could easily be one of the best guards in the league. Cable got a lot out of him and I reckon he'll do that again in Seattle.

As for our O-line now... I reckon it'll look like Clifton - Lang/McDonald - Wells - Sitton - Bulaga. The only real question is that LG spot... But I don't see Sherrod making it. He just doesn't look like a guard to me. Especially if we want to be able to run the ball up the middle.

Clifton will go down for stretches in some games... Those are the times that Sherrod should come in, gain some experience and when we can see whether he'll step up in his rookie year or not.

nerdmann
Premier Member

13 years ago

#22

Can McDonald also play C?

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

Tezzy
Senior Member

13 years ago

#23

Can McDonald also play C?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I think he could be gameday backup center. McDonald has a little more size than Wells or Dietrich-Smith. So don't know how good of a center he would be as a starter.

On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."

beast
Select Member

13 years ago

#24

Can McDonald also play C?

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

He's been listed as a C since day one and playing as the #3 C in practice last year and playing as the #2 Center in the first camp day this year so I assume so...

I think he could be gameday backup center. McDonald has a little more size than Wells or Dietrich-Smith. So don't know how good of a center he would be as a starter.

Originally Posted by: Tezzy

Honestly I don't understand that logic at all... more size = not as good at Center? Doesn't make sense to me... if you can snap it well, make the calls well and play well you should be able to play center well...

being bigger has nothing to do with making the calls, being bigger can help at playing well so it can be a plus there... so as long as it doesn't effect the snaps I don't understand how bigger = worse center...

I'd argue the other way and say Mike McCarthy and the OL coaches have been trying to get a bigger Center for a while... but they keep getting hurt... Packers have been getting bigger C or taking OG and trying to make them C for a while now... Palmer, Coston, Spitz and I think there is one or two more...

nerdmann
Premier Member

13 years ago

#25

Wells is actually undersized. That's why they tried to replace him with Spitz a couple years ago. Mike McCarthy finally decided to get off his "smaller, quicker" fetish.

“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”

beast
Select Member

13 years ago

#26

Wells is actually undersized. That's why they tried to replace him with Spitz a couple years ago. Mike McCarthy finally decided to get off his "smaller, quicker" fetish.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I disagree... Wells is undersized but the Packers have been trying to replace Wells (with a couple of big centers) to improve the run blocking, and so that all 3 inside guys can have power. Problem is none of them could beat out Wells until Spitz (Wells was pissed he lost the starting role)... when Spitz got hurt, Wells showed much more effort and improvement in the run game... still not the best at it but he's stepped it up.

Also I'm not sold on the Packers OL were smaller... they were all over 300 pounds... no they weren't the 320 pounds but most of the teams with those are run first teams, not pass first teams. Of the pass first teams I think the Packers OL were about average size. Sitton, Breno, Barbre weren't the lightest guys and nether was Spitz for a C (the position he played in college SR year, I think).

I think the smaller bit might be made up for those that didn't like zone blocking... and the Packers still look for quick...

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

13 years ago

#27

Originally Posted by: beast

In '08 and '09, I am pretty sure that the line was within a couple pounds of the line Sherman had in '04.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

Greg C.
Registered

13 years ago

#28

So maybe there wasn't a big size difference, but the coaches were looking for agility rather than power. I'm glad that they seem to have abandoned that approach.

blank

Dexter_Sinister
Registered

13 years ago

#29

So maybe there wasn't a big size difference, but the coaches were looking for agility rather than power. I'm glad that they seem to have abandoned that approach.

Originally Posted by: Greg C.

They have not abandoned ZBS. They have incorporated ZBS elements into a greater scheme that uses the elements of many different schemes. Like the I and Inverted Bone power schemes and the Spread 5 and 4 wideout schemes.

I want to go out like my Grandpa did. Peacefully in his sleep.
Not screaming in terror like his passengers.

Greg C.
Registered

13 years ago

#30

Originally Posted by: Dexter_Sinister

I didn't mean to imply that they had abandoned the zone blocking scheme. I was just referring to the physical qualities that they are looking for in O-linemen.

blank

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (6h) : The Seattle Seahawks defeat the Chicago Bears 6-3. Jason Myers had 6 RBIs for Seattle while Cairo Santos had 3 RBI for Chicago

beast (7h) : Not nessarily, he might of been injured either way. He's playing about 50% of the games the last 4 years

Zero2Cool (13h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.

packerfanoutwest (13h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it

beast (14h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done

Zero2Cool (21h) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.

Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore

packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!

Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!

beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS