PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago

You know Bakhtiari can't play RT how? How did the staff know Bulaga could play RT before he did? What we can surmise is Bulaga at LT and Bakh at RT is not preferable due to Bulaga's ineptness at LT not anything to do with how Bakhtiari would do at RT.

Give me one example in the history of the NFL where the less talented guy played a position over another guy where it wasn't about money or experience. Bulaga made way more than Bakh until his extension and he had more experience. The Packers would be FOOLS to play Bakh there if Bulaga was better. You don't go...oh, well this combo is better than this guy who can protect the blindside better so let's not put the best guy protecting our franchise's blindside out there.

If Aaron Rodgers had turned out to be an above average TE instead of a HOF QB, he would've been a wasted 1st round pick as he was selected in Round 1 because of his QB ability. Bulaga was selected in Round 1 because he was to be our starting LT. He FAILED. He ain't better than Bakh...isn't even close. Now, all of a sudden Bulaga is just playing RT because it's in the best interests of the team? LOL. Yes, but..No. He plays there because he's not even close to being our best LT. It is in the best interest of this team that Bulaga is not our LT because he's not very good at it.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Please learn to comprehend what is written before posting idiotic responses.

I never said Bulaga was BETTER, I never said Bahktiari CAN'T play RT. I said we DON'T KNOW.

Could bulaga be better, yes. Could Bahktiari play RT also yes possibly. but we are lucky and don't need to try and find out. We KNOW Bahktiari can play LT and we KNOW Bulaga can play RT, there was no need to experiment. Perhaps we could have looked and said, well bulaga was drafted high so we need to put him at LT or some idiots will think he is a wasted pick. thankfully our coaches are smart enough to know that it is the sum of the parts that matters.


The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
uffda udfa
7 years ago

Please learn to comprehend what is written before posting idiotic responses.

I never said Bulaga was BETTER, I never said Bahktiari CAN'T play RT. I said we DON'T KNOW.

Could bulaga be better, yes. Could Bahktiari play RT also yes possibly. but we are lucky and don't need to try and find out. We KNOW Bahktiari can play LT and we KNOW Bulaga can play RT, there was no need to experiment. Perhaps we could have looked and said, well bulaga was drafted high so we need to put him at LT or some idiots will think he is a wasted pick. thankfully our coaches are smart enough to know that it is the sum of the parts that matters.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



We also KNOW Bulaga isn't an effective LT and Bakh is. Thank you.

You've been beating a losing argument to death. Bulaga is not a quality LT. Bakh is.

Don't ever get off the point that Bakh plays LT because he's so much better than Bulaga. There is no reason to test Bakh at RT because you don't take your best LT and have him play RT. Things are as they should be to best protect 12s blindside PERIOD. No other reason. Man!
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."


PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago

We also KNOW Bulaga isn't an effective LT and Bakh is. Thank you.

You've been beating a losing argument to death. Bulaga is not a quality LT. Bakh is.

Don't ever get off the point that Bakh plays LT because he's so much better than Bulaga. There is no reason to test Bakh at RT because you don't take your best LT and have him play RT. Things are as the should be to best protect 12s blindside PERIOD. No other reason. Man!

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You don't know Bulaga isn't or wouldn't be effective, you only know Bahktiari is.

Real coaches and people with intelligence know you play your players where the team benefits the most. Perfect example, Clay was our best OLB, but we played him inside because it made the defense better. Bahktiari proved enough that he can play LT, allowing us to have a better RT by moving Bulaga back after he returned from injury.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
uffda udfa
7 years ago

You don't know Bulaga isn't or wouldn't be effective, you only know Bahktiari is.

Real coaches and people with intelligence know you play your players where the team benefits the most. Perfect example, Clay was our best OLB, but we played him inside because it made the defense better. Bahktiari proved enough that he can play LT, allowing us to have a better RT by moving Bulaga back after he returned from injury.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



Huh??? To the highlighted portion. Yes. Yes. Yes, I do know...Bulaga tried playing LT for us. BRUTAL. When he got injured there was no reason to try and rush him back because Bakh was better. Had Bakh been worse, Bryan would've gone right back out to LT, but...he didn't. Why? He's not a very good LT...never was. He was like Richard Rodgers starting at TE. You could go on and on about how RR is a starting TE for us and scream it like some proof that he's good, but he's a very very average TE to below. His status as a starting TE was due to NOBODY else on the roster. Same for LT...Bulaga was there because we had nobody. Bulaga was no more a quality starting LT than Richard Rodgers was a starting quality TE but they did both start the positions they were drafted to play. Just couldn't play them very well.

Yes. You keep beating this "best for the team" drum. What is BEST FOR THE TEAM is having the BEST LT play LT...that is David Bakhtiari NOT Bryan Bulaga who has FAILED there in the past.

Comparing Clay Matthews move inside to protecting your franchise's blindside rings hollow. There is ONE thing you don't fool with. That is protecting Aaron Rodgers. That is why Jamaal Williams is leading the stable of rookies because he protects the franchise better. Aaron Jones is the better runner and receiver but he can't protect as well as Williams.

The Packers coaches know they have to protect 12. If putting Bulaga at LT was the best way to do that they would do that. When Bakhtiari went out to try his hand at LT he wasn't all world like he is getting to be. He was just okay but he was still better than Bulaga so Bulaga didn't go back. If Bulaga was ready to go and better at LT that is where he would've been. Period. I'm not sure why you continue fighting this very rudimentary concept that the best player at LT is going to play LT. Show me an example EVER in NFL history where they best LT went to play RT because it was best for the team? It's insanity.

David Bakhtiari...4th round out of Colorado is so much better than 1st Rounder Bryan Bulaga out of Iowa.

If Jason Spriggs was better than Bulaga or Bakhtiari he would be playing their position. He isn't so he doesn't.

In Clay's case, he's not the old Clay...we all know it. If he was the guy from years ago there's no way he gets moved inside regardless of need.
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."


PackFanWithTwins
7 years ago

Huh??? To the highlighted portion. Yes. Yes. Yes, I do know...Bulaga tried playing LT for us. BRUTAL. When he got injured there was no reason to try and rush him back because Bakh was better. Had Bakh been worse, Bryan would've gone right back out to LT, but...he didn't. Why? He's not a very good LT...never was. He was like Richard Rodgers starting at TE. You could go on and on about how RR is a starting TE for us and scream it like some proof that he's good, but he's a very very average TE to below. His status as a starting TE was due to NOBODY else on the roster. Same for LT...Bulaga was there because we had nobody. Bulaga was no more a quality starting LT than Richard Rodgers was a starting quality TE but they did both start the positions they were drafted to play. Just couldn't play them very well.

Yes. You keep beating this "best for the team" drum. What is BEST FOR THE TEAM is having the BEST LT play LT...that is David Bakhtiari NOT Bryan Bulaga who has FAILED there in the past.

Comparing Clay Matthews move inside to protecting your franchise's blindside rings hollow. There is ONE thing you don't fool with. That is protecting Aaron Rodgers. That is why Jamaal Williams is leading the stable of rookies because he protects the franchise better. Aaron Jones is the better runner and receiver but he can't protect as well as Williams.

The Packers coaches know they have to protect 12. If putting Bulaga at LT was the best way to do that they would do that. When Bakhtiari went out to try his hand at LT he wasn't all world like he is getting to be. He was just okay but he was still better than Bulaga so Bulaga didn't go back. If Bulaga was ready to go and better at LT that is where he would've been. Period. I'm not sure why you continue fighting this very rudimentary concept that the best player at LT is going to play LT. Show me an example EVER in NFL history where they best LT went to play RT because it was best for the team? It's insanity.

David Bakhtiari...4th round out of Colorado is so much better than 1st Rounder Bryan Bulaga out of Iowa.

If Jason Spriggs was better than Bulaga or Bakhtiari he would be playing their position. He isn't so he doesn't.

In Clay's case, he's not the old Clay...we all know it. If he was the guy from years ago there's no way he gets moved inside regardless of need.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



If it wasn't for your insistence on how Bulaga failed at LT, you would almost be right. But seeing how you keep insisting that based on ZERO evidence your posts continue to be ignorant.

I'm just glad a good LT appeared when needed, so we can now have a good pair of bookends.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
uffda udfa
7 years ago

If it wasn't for your insistence on how Bulaga failed at LT, you would almost be right. But seeing how you keep insisting that based on ZERO evidence your posts continue to be ignorant.

I'm just glad a good LT appeared when needed, so we can now have a good pair of bookends.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



:) I will live with an almost.

Put the tape of the fail Mary game on...1st half. There's plenty of evidence right there. He couldn't handle speed. That is a big part of why he failed and doesn't play there anymore.

Like you, I'm happy we have capable players on both sides.

Here's some more evidence. Shouldn't need more than this:. Marsha freaking Newhouse played LT so poorly we actually contemplated putting Bulaga there. Think about it. A brutal Newhouse started at LT over our 1st rounder who was drafted to play there.

I rest my case.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000145660/article/bryan-bulaga-to-play-left-tackle-for-green-bay-packers%3fnetworkId=4595&site=.news&zone=story&zoneUrl=url%253Dstory&zoneKeys=s1%253Dstory&env=&pageKeyValues=prtnr%253Daround-the-league%253Bteam%253Dgb%253Bconf%253Dnfc%253Bdvsn%253Dncn%253Bplyr%253Dmarshall_newhouse%253Bplyr%253Ddonald_barclay&p.ct=Around+the+NFL&p.adsm=false&p.tcm=%2523fff&p.bgc1m=%25230964bf&p.bgc2m=%2523053a74&sr=amp 
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."


DoddPower
7 years ago

:) I will live with an almost.

Put the tape of the fail Mary game on...1st half. There's plenty of evidence right there. He couldn't handle speed. That is a big part of why he failed and doesn't play there anymore.

Like you, I'm happy we have capable players on both sides.



Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



If Ted Thompson "failed" with more players the caliber of Bryan Bulaga, the Packers would be a much better team, undoubtedly. We could only hope for such failures more often, especially in the first round.
uffda udfa
7 years ago

If Ted Thompson "failed" with more players the caliber of Bryan Bulaga, the Packers would be a much better team, undoubtedly. We could only hope for such failures more often, especially in the first round.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



Hilarious and true.

From NFL.com:
Time for this refashioned line to build chemistry, and time for Bulaga to adjust to a role he has never mastered in the NFL. Along with the sunnier snaps above, Bulaga too often was victimized by more athletic edge rushers. At right, he's handled by Seattle Seahawks end Bruce Irvin in the "Fail Mary" affair, a game in which Bulaga give up two of the eight sacks on Rodgers that night.

--- Bulaga FAILED at the position he was drafted to play. He's not an NFL left tackle. I am thankful he can handle the other side.
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 FAILED at the position he was drafted to play. He's not an NFL left tackle. I am thankful he can handle the other side.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



Only thing that's failing here is your poor logic. As you're suggesting if a player doesn't play one specific position, that they're a failure... which is clearly labeling crap.

That would mean T.J. Lang was a failure too, since he played OG instead of OT. If Ty Montgomery were to become a Hall of Fame RB, that he'd be a failure since he's playing RB instead of WR.

The fact that remains is the labels means crap, what matters is the substance that they add to the team and Bulaga has clearly added a lot of value to the OL, no matter if it's at LT, LG, C, RG or RT, it is still a lot of positive value to the team... and it's the team that matters, not the position label.
UserPostedImage
uffda udfa
7 years ago

Only thing that's failing here is your poor logic. As you're suggesting if a player doesn't play one specific position, that they're a failure... which is clearly labeling crap.

That would mean T.J. Lang was a failure too, since he played OG instead of OT. If Ty Montgomery were to become a Hall of Fame RB, that he'd be a failure since he's playing RB instead of WR.

The fact that remains is the labels means crap, what matters is the substance that they add to the team and Bulaga has clearly added a lot of value to the OL, no matter if it's at LT, LG, C, RG or RT, it is still a lot of positive value to the team... and it's the team that matters, not the position label.

Originally Posted by: beast 



I understand your view. It's tough to see this as I do. What you're saying I agree with, however you're arguing something I'm not. Bulaga was SPECIFICALLY drafted in Round 1 to be our LT. It's a matter of how this affects our franchise. We got no Dez Bryant to get a RT thinking we got a steal of a LT. I define that specific moment as...FAILURE and bad for our franchise. I also define him as FAILURE of a LT because...HE WAS. Those two specific things are failures. I understand he's a very good RT but we shouldn't have used a1st rounder on a RT.

It amazes me how those on your side would say a guy like Sherrod wasn't a waste because he was just cursed with bad injury luck. Where is how it actually worked out considered in that scenario? It ain't. It always comes back to trying to praise the org regardless and that is zero objectivity. It's fine as long as you're aware of where we're both coming from.

EDIT: Oh, there is an even bigger picture. Why did we draft Sherrod in the 1st round? TO PLAY LT...Why? Bulaga wasn't the answer there! So, you now have TWO BURNED 1st ROUND PICKS FOR ?????? NO LEFT TACKLE. If you don't see that as an issue I'm not sure what else to type? This is similar to Randall and Rollins...FAILURES...causing us to BURN ANOTHER 1st ROUNDER on ANOTHER CB. That's 3 high picks on the position...if King can't play either???? Yikes. These fail moments have a cumulative effect and really affect our franchise a great deal. It's always NEED DRAFTING because we can't draft what we NEED so we keep NEEDING it and DRAFTING it with HIGH PICKS. It's been a vicious cycle.

I like to see a team do smart things. It is not smart to draft Bulaga watch him fail...use another 1st...watch him fail and then brag about how great it is we got a very good RT out of 2 burned 1st rounders. It's kind of sad, actually.
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 (4h) : Thomas Davis Jr is OLB, not WR. Oops.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Larry Fitzgeral and Thomas Davis sons too. WR's as well.
Mucky Tundra (19h) : Kaydon Finley, son of Jermichael Finley, commits to Notre Dame
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup
dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw
dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.
Zero2Cool (11-Jun) : He's been sporting a ring for a while now. It's probably Madonna.
Martha Careful (10-Jun) : We only do the tea before whoopee, it relaxes me.
wpr (10-Jun) : That's awesome Martha.
Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : How's the ayahuasca tea he makes, Martha?
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
8h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Jun / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

16-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

15-Jun / Random Babble / Martha Careful

14-Jun / Around The NFL / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.