Isaiah Battle: Packers Put in Bid for LT in Supplemental Draft?· Page 2

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

9 years ago

My depth chart at LT would be:

Bakhtiari-->Bulaga-->Tretter-->Lang-->Barclay

We do have that one developmental guy, I forget his name, so he might slide in after Bulaga if he makes the team. I know Lang can play there, as he has gotten it done in the past, Tretter I'm not sure about, I'd like to see some reps in the preseason.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I think you are thinking about Vujnovich. Not sure if he is still in play I guess so if he lasted the season on the PS.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

9 years ago

#12

Rams always missing on late round picks.

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#13

Rams always missing on late round picks.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Ted signed UDFA Vince Kawalski this year.
Betting he will be on PS in 2015, make the final 53 in 2016 and Will be a starter in 2017.
Didn't cost a draft pick and no "baggage".
Kawalski will be a much better player and last longer.

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan

What? Do you know anything about this guy...either one?

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."

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#15

[quote=uffda udfa;316274]What? Do you know anything about this guy...either one?

[/quote

You are a numbers guy.

Kawalski out performed Battle in every drill.

You of all people should have known this and be applauding Ted for finding another gem!

Kawalski ---- Battle
40yd 5.26 ---- 5 29
Verticle 29 --- 24.5
Broad 9.0 --- 8.5
225 reps. 28 --- 12

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

beast
Select Member

9 years ago

#16

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan

I think Kawalski is like Barclay, both might be able to play RT but they might not have the top athletic pass protection potential you want as a long term starter at OT but they both have physicaliness and nastiness to their game that they could be future starters on the inside OL

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#17

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan

What's a verticle?

You do realize there is a very good chance your new favorite OL could be released any day, yet, you've got him penciled in as an eventual starter?

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."

buckeyepackfan
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#18

What's a verticle?

You do realize there is a very good chance your new favorite OL could be released any day, yet, you've got him penciled in as an eventual starter?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

Here we go.
YOU asked me what I knew about him.

I simply pointed out that Kawalski had a better showing at the combines then Battle.

Please,
Spend the next week and 19 pages explaining why Ted should have used a future pick on the guy.

I gave my opinion and am now done with this.

I do like how you point out typos when it's the only argument you have.

I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!

uffda udfa
Veteran Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#19

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan

No, I'm bemused you think a street FA signed to the PS is going to be starting for us soon. I wanted to know what basis you were using for that belief?

I don't care that Ted didn't use a pick on this guy. I said 6th or 7th would make me okay with it. He went in the 5th.

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."

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 (now) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (20m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (29m) : 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 (41m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (1h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (1h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (1h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (1h) : Yeah baby!

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

Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (4h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (4h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (4h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (4h) : 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 (4h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (4h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (4h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (4h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (5h) : Packers will get in

beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (9h) : 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 (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (18h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

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