JC Tretter suffers "significant knee injury"· Page 2

earthquake
Member

10 years ago

If this keeps him out for an extended period of time I think this is even worse news than Raji's injury. At least there is some depth on the dline, but with Barclays injury the oline is seriously thin.

blank

steveishere
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#12

Supposedly Tretter was looking good; They said Linsley as doing OK too. I think that's in part because the Packers don't ask very much of their Centers. I think Gerhart is still around. Anybody know if he is any good?

This injury is unfortunate and a LOT worse for the team than the previous day news. Just the same, things could be a lot worse. We really haven't been hit too hard yet by injuries. Hopefully things won't get worse.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker

Well blocking wise we've got one of the best G combos in the league so they don't usually need much help from the C so he can freelance a bit where he's needed I guess. Tretter is physically about perfect for a C strong, quick, agile, good length, and very smart he just hasn't proven to be a football player yet. Linsley is a little less physically impressive but he's probably the strongest guy on the team and supposedly understands the offense. He has also played well so far this preseason but against lesser competition than Tretter had faced. Gerhart is just a tryhard like EDS but not as good though he probably knows the offense pretty well by now at least. It's still a bummer but yeah it's probably better than losing one of our other starting lineman.

DarkaneRules
Veteran Member Topic Starter

10 years ago

#13

Absolutely agree Steve. That's why if Corey goes down I worry about the musical chairs starting back up again. The coaches have faith, so I will reserve judgement until a few games into the season. If he struggles in Seattle, I will understand. That is a tough place for anyone to play, much less a rookie center. he's got two weeks inside the Hudson Center with ARod where they have been working the Seattle gameplan.

Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance

beast
Select Member

10 years ago

#14

I think Gerhart is still around. Anybody know if he is any good?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker

Linsley pasted Gerhart on the depth chart in like less than a week of showing up...

Okay I don't know if that's true or not but it felt like it... so I'm thinking he's not that good.

I remember reading Jordan McCray was working at the 4th Center with the 4th QB. Sound like he hasn't played the position before but was taking to it quickly. Wonder if he might be good enough for back-up Center... or not.

Anyways I've been rooting for him, he's from Sitton's college... and about Sitton's size... that's about all I know about him [grin1]

He has a twin brother... who's with the Titans and the Packers were also looking at.

Gilligan
Member

10 years ago

#15

Agree with steveishere & DarkaneRules

Linsley is the guy. He was drafted specifically for this purpose.

If Tretter gets IR'd (for return or otherwise), I'd expect Gerhard to get promoted to backup.
If Tretter is not IR'd, then we go with 7 OL and if Linsley is hurt mid-game, we move Lang to C and cross our fingers.

For Linsley, he'll have an All Pro guard to his left and a legit Pro Bowl caliber guard to his right.
Lang & Sitton are as good of a guard tandem in the league when healthy, should make playing center easier.

I am chosen by many but taken by no one.

earthquake
Member

10 years ago

#16

Early reports are 5-6 weeks

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2014/8/24/6063423/packers-jc-tretter-injury-update-no-ligament-damage-5-6-weeks

blank

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#17

Reports are no ligament damage for Tretter...back in 4-6 weeks. He may miss only 2-3 games if this is accurate.

Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde · 15m
#NFL source says @JCTretter did not suffer ligament damage in the knee, which would have made it 6-10 week injury. Instead, 5-6 weeks.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

beast
Select Member

10 years ago

#18

Yeaaa.. we might have the #1 OL unit for part of the season after all [boxing]

Just need to make it to the playoffs, and then a hot run in the playoffs.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#19

I'm going to spin this one positively...

What if Linsley plays extremely well for the first few weeks of the season? Do you dare go back to Tretter if the team is 3-0?

This could work out extremely well IF Linsley can play. I'd leave Linsley at C and make Tretter, with his versatility, the top backup on the line... the Don Barclay role, if you will.

The counter argument is...you can't have a guy lose his job to injury. I think you can IF the guy who replaces you is a stud. Hoping Linsley is a stud and we backdoor a great situation on the line with Tretter becoming our Barclay.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

earthquake
Member

10 years ago

#20

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

If Linsley comes in and plays lights out I think you leave him in there, its not like Tretter is an established starter, and it might take a bit for Tretter to get back in playing shape after he has recovered from the injury.

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

Zero2Cool (31m) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (31m) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (31m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (39m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (39m) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (3h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (3h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (3h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (17h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

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

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS