uffda udfa
7 years ago
Strike one... Sitton gone.

Strike two... Lang gone.

Strike three... Bulaga gone?

Hard to believe that 60% of our OL could be different just a year later. Throw in the fact that JC was our starting C not long ago and that's a potential 80% turnover.

Plus, our main backup, Barclay, isn't healthy. Some lean times on the OL could help keep our high octane offense in check this season.
UserPostedImage
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."


Zero2Cool
7 years ago

Strike one... Sitton gone.

Strike two... Lang gone.

Strike three... Bulaga gone?

Hard to believe that 60% of our OL could be different just a year later. Throw in the fact that JC was our starting C not long ago and that's a potential 80% turnover.

Plus, our main backup, Barclay, isn't healthy. Some lean times on the OL could help keep our high octane offense in check this season.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You should be happy. You hated the OL and said it needed to be overhauled. (I'm not really sure if you said that, but no one else seems to add facts to their statements so I'm throwing noodles at the wall to see what sticks!)
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago
sounds like what people were saying when we lost our two starting tackles and had to start two rookies.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
DarkaneRules
7 years ago
Meanwhile, there are 8 players in what I believe is the important 3rd year, and there's one player I can't see us keeping around based on his play as of late. I believe it's time to say goodbye to Gunter.

I also wouldn't complain if Kerridge edged out Ripkowski for the FB job, unless they're able to keep 2 somehow.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
7 years ago
Actually Sitton's final year was 2015. Lang 2016. If Bulaga can't make it this is 2017. That's more than 1 yr. Times change. Every year the roster has new players.

JC was beaten out by a better player. Are you complaining about that too.

I thought you complained about Bulaga being a wasted 1st round pick.
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
7 years ago

Actually Sitton's final year was 2015. Lang 2016. If Bulaga can't make it this is 2017. That's more than 1 yr. Times change. Every year the roster has new players.

JC was beaten out by a better player. Are you complaining about that too.

I thought you complained about Bulaga being a wasted 1st round pick.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Lane Taylor has been so awesome I forgot Sitton had been gone that long. 🙂 (EDIT: Sitton was released 9/3/2016...so he's been gone less than a year. So, a year ago we had Sitton, Lang and Bulaga. Now, no Sitton, Lang and who knows on Bulaga with his injury history? That is a ton of turnover for a team with SB aspirations. Both guards are gone and RT is hurt. That's a lot to overcome. Thank goodness we used FA for Evans. I guess we have no problem using it when we end up paying less as in Evans and Bennett's case. Cook and Lang got more elsewhere. We just don't ever want to pay more. )

I think maybe it's time to admit Sitton wasn't as great as fans thought? Another case of overrating our own.

Yes. Bulaga definitely a wasted 1st round pick. Was drafted to be LT of future and wasn't and never should've been thought of to be one. You don't draft RT's in Round 1. That was the Dez Bryant pass draft for Bulaga.

Oh...Tretter? Loved him. Thought he was a better more athletic C than Linsley. I'm disappointed JC is gone. What we end up paying Linsley next year will really determine how much more I hate that we lost JC.
UserPostedImage
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
7 years ago
Bulaga clearly was a good pick... best pass protection at his position and yes Rodgers has great movement skills but he also holds the ball longer than almost anyone else... and Rodgers and Bulaga play tricks on the DEs to get them to bite to the inside which allows Rodgers to the outside.

Taylor pass protection is almost as good as Sitton's, but his run blocking isn't close... and I'm wondering if they might be said about Evans as well... either way, so far the Packers have struggled to run the ball... and I haven't seen many holes for the RB to go through.
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
7 years ago
I think Bulaga is a good player but a terrible pick. He fell down the board because rest of NFL knew he wasn't a LT. It has to be remembered he was our 1st round selection because he was going to be our LT. He failed there. Remember 1st half of fail Mary game? Guy never could handle speed rushers. So, if you were a 1st rounder who was supposed to be our LT and failed is that a good pick? No. He is a good RT which is so much better of a result than all the other high picks we've position switched because they sucked at the position they were drafted for like Datone Jones.
UserPostedImage
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."


Zero2Cool
7 years ago
I'm not really smart when it comes to OL (keep the wise comments to yourself) and I'm more so of the believe that it's the sum of the pieces, rather than the pieces that make the difference. If you have the same 5 OL game after game, they will become very solid and do a good job. If you are plugging piece here, piece there, I think regardless of the talent you will suffer.
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
7 years ago

I'm not really smart when it comes to OL (keep the wise comments to yourself) and I'm more so of the believe that it's the sum of the pieces, rather than the pieces that make the difference. If you have the same 5 OL game after game, they will become very solid and do a good job. If you are plugging piece here, piece there, I think regardless of the talent you will suffer.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



I agree...not with you're not smart. :)

If you have little talent and a lack of continuity that spells bigger disaster.

Hoping 12 sits at Denver due to RT situation. I see it's Wilde's poll question today and rightly so. Huge issue.


UserPostedImage
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."


Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : Merry Christmas!
beast (9h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (17h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (22h) : 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
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.