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 (51m) : The menu you expanded to log in, it's the first icon under "PackersHome" .. maybe i should add text to it
dfosterf (57m) : Feelin' pfowish can't find the sun. No big deal, will drag a laptop out when the time comes
Zero2Cool (1h) : if you're on mobile, open the menu and its the "sun" icon
dfosterf (1h) : Can't find the toggle, lol
dfosterf (1h) : I can find that the Microsoft lady rep for Titletown Tech is the philanthropy boss for the entire Microsoft corporation, but. .
Zero2Cool (1h) : There's a toggle for light/dark theme. Super easy.
dfosterf (1h) : The white background beta was hard to read, especially the quotes
dfosterf (2h) : Hopefully the color scheme remains the same
dfosterf (2h) : *Friday*
dfosterf (2h) : 100 million would be 539 million as of Fridsy
dfosterf (2h) : Heck, they could have taken a hundred milliion and invested in DAVE inc. last year (semi random, humor, but real)
dfosterf (2h) : Beer brat and ticket is where the money comes from
dfosterf (2h) : The 40th is Titletown Tech itself. This is a pet project of both Ed Policy and Mark Murphy
Zero2Cool (2h) : New site coming along nicely. The editor is better than what we have here. Oh yeah!
dfosterf (2h) : No profit that I know of. 0 for 40
dfosterf (2h) : The woke reference has to do with the makeup and oftentimes objectives of the companies they invested in
packerfanoutwest (2h) : beer and brats woke? say whom?
beast (2h) : I don't want to get into politics, but how is, beers and brats considered to be "woke"? Food is food...
beast (2h) : That being said, I'm not saying all 100% should be that way, but not surprised if majority are Wisconsin based
beast (2h) : And if everyone has heard of them, then it it probably has less growth potential and less community based
beast (2h) : Well isn't the investing person supposed to invest the money?
dfosterf (3h) : I swear if I were to discover that one of them has invented a virtue signalling transmitter I will not be surprised, lol
dfosterf (3h) : 39 companies so far that I bet no one has ever heard of.
dfosterf (3h) : -Not saying woke, but should- borderline philanthopist venture capital excercise
dfosterf (3h) : Well for one, they are pouring resources into Title Town Tech. Investing beer, brat, hot dog, ticket money into what is pretty much...
beast (9h) : Wow, 95% drop in investment revenue? Would be interesting to hear the details of why...
dfosterf (25-Jul) : It's my one day deal complaint dept. on shareholder meeting day
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Probably a homer access credential intimidation kinda thing
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Meathead "journalists" skip this, concentrating on operational revenue when convenient. They switch when net revenue is more favorable.
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Resulting in an actual drop of net revenue of 12.5%. She is from Minnesota. Just sayin'
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Any plans to hold Maureen Smith (CFO) accountable for a 95% drop in investment revenue?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : In your face, HBO!
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @ByRyanWood Mark Murphy: “A great source of pride of mine is that we were never on Hard Knocks.”
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : *years
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @mattschneidman Mark Murphy says he anticipates “many Packers games” being played in Germany, Ireland and/or the U.K. over the next 5-10 yea
dfosterf (25-Jul) : *cafeteria* I have hit my head also, so I sympathize
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Possibly hit his head leaning into the glass protecting the food in the cafateria
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Maybe a low flying drone
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Did Savion Williams run into a goalpost or something?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : also, no bueno when a guy starts getting concussions right off the bat in his career
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Concussion is worse. Banks probably vet off day via back booboo claim
Mucky Tundra (25-Jul) : @AndyHermanNFL Jordy Nelson out at camp today. No word if he’s in play for one of the two open roster spots ; )
dfosterf (25-Jul) : Is that better or worse than Banks bad back?
Zero2Cool (25-Jul) : Savion concussion ... not good.
packerfanoutwest (24-Jul) : Aaron Rodgers’s first pass of first team period was picked off
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : tbh I didn't hear of his passing
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : Cosby Show. Malcom Jamal Warner I think is real name
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : I was thinking of Ozzy and Hulk
Mucky Tundra (24-Jul) : Who's Theo?
Zero2Cool (24-Jul) : How is Theo alliteration?
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
1h / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jul / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

25-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

25-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

24-Jul / Around The NFL / beast

24-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

23-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

22-Jul / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

22-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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