PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
Is Campen really the problem?

If I give my mechanic 4 busted spark plugs and tell him to put them in, at best my car is going to run like shit. If I give him all good plugs for a busted motor, it isn't going to run.

He may be part of the problem, but I blame the scheme, changing schemes, and drafting players for the wrong scheme. Campen has been bailing a leaky boat with a leaky bucket.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago
I guess I'm just a lot more pessimistic than the rest of you.

Because I don't want an OK line. I want a dominant, kick-the-other-team-into-next-year OL. Forty-plus years later I can name the people who started for the line under Lombardi. Nearly 40 years later I remember Gale Gillingham. I wish I could forget this OL forever.

Ok, juries still out on Lang and Sitton. Okay, fine, that's two that might develop into something more than servicable.

Spitz, Colledge? Give me a break. Ok, they're better than Scott Wells, Junius Coston, Tony Moll, Will Whitticker, David Klemm, Matt O'Dwyer, and assorted others. Big effing deal. Neither of them would make the Lombardi OL squad, much less starting.

Barbre? Giacomoni (sp?). Give me a bigger break.

Clifton? In his prime, was just fine. Really good, even. But he's not in his prime. His future is ...well, maybe he can eke out another year or two as a serviceable journeyman. But his days of being an all-pro-level anchor -- they're past.

Tauscher? At one point he was my favorite player on the offense. Maybe he can make it back, maybe not. If he can, that makes three players worth keeping.

On the entire squad.

Unless Ted Thompson breaks pattern and goes out and both drafts OL high (as in both 1st and 2nd round picks) AND goes after FA OL bigtime -- which I have zero hope of happening, I think we're dreaming that this OL squad is going to be where it needs to be before 2011 at the earliest.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
zombieslayer
15 years ago
Wade - The problem I have is we have Aaron starting to become an elite QB NOW, not in 2011. We have Driver in his prime NOW, and may be our #3 WR in 2011.

OL should have been a bigger priority in the offseason. I had no idea it would be this bad. The higher ups should have known though.

EDIT - not very well written. I'm saying I agree with you. Should have been fixed by now.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
DakotaT
15 years ago

Wade - The problem I have is we have Aaron starting to become an elite QB NOW, not in 2011. We have Driver in his prime NOW, and may be our #3 WR in 2011.

OL should have been a bigger priority in the offseason. I had no idea it would be this bad. The higher ups should have known though.

EDIT - not very well written. I'm saying I agree with you. Should have been fixed by now.

"zombieslayer" wrote:




Yes, but when Raji fell to us in the draft, Uncle Ted rolled the dice, trying to squeeze one more year out of Clifton's knees. I think he would have traded back a few spots and taken Oher had Raji not fallen. Then when the opportunity to get Matthews arose, he took it; and now we have some nice pieces for the defense. To say he didn't address OT in the draft isn't fair because he took two of them on day two. The question to ask is do you think he would have taken Eugene Monroe if the Jags had taken Raji. Oakland did everyone a favor but Crabtree.
UserPostedImage
coltonja
15 years ago

Bear in mind: I'm not saying Lang can't handle LT - and I do think he should get a fair shake at doing just that. But since we're playing at some fantasy land scenarios, here, I'll take a shot.

For the remainder of 09 - LT: Lang - let him learn the ropes, and as long as he doesn't fall apart, he's there. Cliffy's in the wings if they need him. LG: College gets a chance to prove he's either The Guy here, or we finally cut bait on that endeavor. C: I really want Spitz to get healthy, stay healthy, and rack up some serious starts, here - again, it's a matter of seeing if he can be The Guy in the middle, as physically I like him more than Wells. RG: Sitton's probably the only real lock on this line, IMO. RT: Personally, I think Barbre is a bust at this spot. He may have improved incrementally over his disasterous start, but he just made Edwards look like a player - I'd like to see Tausch back in there.

So for the rest of this season it's Lang, College, Spitz, Sitton, Tauscher.

Next year, I want - no, need - to see a commitment to the offensive line that's comparable to the commitment they showed to the defense this year.

1. Campen - fired. Possibly Philben as well, if he's had anything to do with the current scheme. A new OL coach is brought in - a proven guy with a scheme that will A) PROTECT RODGERS (this has to be priority #1) and 😎 provide the option to run the ball consistently - I want 3 yards at a minimum if a run is called on 1st down. Now, I'm not going to fret overly about what kind of scheme - if the coach has proven he can implement it and make it work, that's fine. The Broncos proved that the ZBS can work very well - just make sure the coach knows the scheme. Honestly, this change is the biggest one, IMO.

2. Even if Lang looks great the rest of this year, they had better take a long, hard look at LT. Draft a blue-chip LT? If one's out there, see what it would take to get it done. FA - look into it, Ted. Seriously. Turn over every rock and expend whatever effort is necessary to determine if a legitimate left bookend can be brought in. If it's possible, DO IT. Protect the investment you have in Aaron Rodgers - JOB NUMBER ONE.

3. From LG to RG: If College is getting the job done, re-sign his ass and let him own LG. If not, see step 2 above and apply it here. Same goes for C - if Spitz can stay healthy and do his job, give it to him. I expect Sitton is our RG, but if he needs to be replaced, fine.

4. My sense is that Lang can and should own RT for years to come - if he doesn't manage to lock LT down the remainder of the season, put him here and enjoy years of a secure right side and a great place to send your running backs.

IMO, if you get a good coach and a solid scheme (none of which has any effect on salary cap), you're 60% there. Beyond that, this line is as little as one good LT from being a dependable foundation for years. I flatly refuse to believe that this team can't get that one guy, somehow.

It's totally do-able, I think.

"ILikeThePackers39" wrote:




+1 from em as well. I think we need to fire Campen and get a fresh start with our hopefully some what new line.And obviously if we still have McCarthy and the ZBS we are going to need to sign one that has the experience and knowledge of that scheme.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to pack93z for the sig!!!
Pack93z
15 years ago


Yes, but when Raji fell to us in the draft, Uncle Ted rolled the dice, trying to squeeze one more year out of Clifton's knees. I think he would have traded back a few spots and taken Oher had Raji not fallen. Then when the opportunity to get Matthews arose, he took it; and now we have some nice pieces for the defense. To say he didn't address OT in the draft isn't fair because he took two of them on day two. The question to ask is do you think he would have taken Eugene Monroe if the Jags had taken Raji. Oakland did everyone a favor but Crabtree.

"DakotaT" wrote:



This I agree with.. as much as I wanted one of the top four Tackles in the draft, I really can't fault anyone for picking Raji.

Harrell washed out on us a couple of times and without Raji we are awfully thin along the defensive line.. so the pick had merits.

Plus there was a chance that a guy like Britton may have fell to us in round two..

Rolling the dice on Matthews looks like a good call.. albeit I still think we gave up to much to move into the position to nap him. But that is water over the damn as well.

Simple truth is that we have done a poor job of developing players along the offensive line as a whole, and that speaks to coaching overall.

A good offensive line coach can make a line out of players with lesser pedigrees.. we have seen it time and time again here in Green Bay.. with the Winters, Timmerman, Rivera, Flanigan, Tauschers of the world.. we just plain flat out lack that today.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Rockmolder
15 years ago


Yes, but when Raji fell to us in the draft, Uncle Ted rolled the dice, trying to squeeze one more year out of Clifton's knees. I think he would have traded back a few spots and taken Oher had Raji not fallen. Then when the opportunity to get Matthews arose, he took it; and now we have some nice pieces for the defense. To say he didn't address OT in the draft isn't fair because he took two of them on day two. The question to ask is do you think he would have taken Eugene Monroe if the Jags had taken Raji. Oakland did everyone a favor but Crabtree.

"pack93z" wrote:



This I agree with.. as much as I wanted one of the top four Tackles in the draft, I really can't fault anyone for picking Raji.

Harrell washed out on us a couple of times and without Raji we are awfully thin along the defensive line.. so the pick had merits.

Plus there was a chance that a guy like Britton may have fell to us in round two..

Rolling the dice on Matthews looks like a good call.. albeit I still think we gave up to much to move into the position to nap him. But that is water over the damn as well.

Simple truth is that we have done a poor job of developing players along the offensive line as a whole, and that speaks to coaching overall.

A good offensive line coach can make a line out of players with lesser pedigrees.. we have seen it time and time again here in Green Bay.. with the Winters, Timmerman, Rivera, Flanigan, Tauschers of the world.. we just plain flat out lack that today.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Three fricken' picks earlier... 

New England traded its first-round selection (23rd overall, used to select Michael Oher) to Baltimore for first- and fifth-round selections (26th overall, traded to Green Bay, who selected Clay Matthews; and 162nd overall, traded to Green Bay, who selected Jamon Meredith)



No, I won't let it go.

I was overjoyed when Monroe fell in the draft. After the Raiders selected Heyward-Bey, I had my money on the Jaguars finally getting their QB a receiver in Crabtree. Or even do something about their horrible D-line by picking Raji. But alas, it was not to be.

Raji was just the guy that lined up perfectly with our needs and was arguably the bpa.

As for our O-line. For next year, I'm hoping for 1st RD PK - Colledge - Spitz - Sitton - Lang. Maybe even give Dietrich-Smith a look. He has to be doing something right, still being on the regular roster and all.

If Ted thinks that the emergence of Lang will solve a lot of the O-line problems, I see us going with Lang - Colledge - Spitz - Sitton - 3rd Rd/Tauscher. Depends on whether they can squeeze one more year out of the man or not.

I don't think that Barbre will be starting next year.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
15 years ago
I don't blame Ted Thompson for taking Raji either.

My problem is that he's been here, what, 5 years?

And the OL is, clearly, and has been since his arrival, substantially and consistently worse than it was before his arrival.

It's not one decision that bothers me. It's not this one player who hasn't developed or that one who was not acquired or the other one who was let go. It's the fact that we are five years in (four if you're counting McCarthy years and not Thompson years) and WE STILL HAVE A FUCKING LINE THAT IS BARELY SERVICABLE ON ITS GOOD DAYS. And its that, IMO, we are STILL, assuming that TT, MM, and company do everything right this offseason in the draft, looking to AT LEAST 2011 before we have a line that is more than serviceable.

AND THAT PISSES ME OFF.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
Not sure what to say about Ted and the line. I count 4 years, because that is how long McCarthy has been telling him, what he likes and needs for lineman.

So Ted has drafted the ZBS lineman that Mike McCarthy wanted, We were running strictly ZBS, after a couple years of that, Mike McCarthy decides he wants to run less ZBS and start moving back to power running, so now Ted has to find players of a different build and style.

I find it hard to blame Ted for the Oline. He tried to get what was requested only to have the request changed.

Lang continues to pan out, Ted has gotten 4 starters in 4 years for the Oline. That isn't the easiest thing to accomplish. Especially when the coach changes his mind half way through.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
dfosterf
15 years ago

I don't blame Ted Thompson for taking Raji either.

My problem is that he's been here, what, 5 years?

And the OL is, clearly, and has been since his arrival, substantially and consistently worse than it was before his arrival.

It's not one decision that bothers me. It's not this one player who hasn't developed or that one who was not acquired or the other one who was let go. It's the fact that we are five years in (four if you're counting McCarthy years and not Thompson years) and WE STILL HAVE A FUCKING LINE THAT IS BARELY SERVICABLE ON ITS GOOD DAYS. And its that, IMO, we are STILL, assuming that Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and company do everything right this offseason in the draft, looking to AT LEAST 2011 before we have a line that is more than serviceable.

AND THAT PISSES ME OFF.

"Wade" wrote:



You can't be two places at once, Wade...What the fuck is he gonna do?

Listen, FA sucked last year...

Whaddya want, a Hayensworth? A Peppers?

I wanted a Faneca-- Packer world was busy with a Moss.


I don't know who was right on that one.


Retirement sucks for a Packer zealot.
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (4h) : If they'd been more patient with him, he'd be back already. Putting him out there vs Bears caused him to tweak it and here we are.
    packerfanoutwest (5h) : well this is his last season with the PAck, book it
    beast (6h) : Sounds like no Alexander (again), I'm wondering if his time with the Packers is done
    Zero2Cool (12h) : Could ban beast and I still don't think anyone catches him.
    Mucky Tundra (26-Dec) : Houston getting dog walked by Baltimore
    packerfanoutwest (25-Dec) : Feliz Navidad!
    Zero2Cool (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas!
    beast (25-Dec) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
    beast (24-Dec) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : 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.
    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
    22m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    25-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Dec / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    24-Dec / 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

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