Porforis
7 years ago

Cut Spriggs. I don't care what year it is. He's an embarrassment to his position.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 



Good thing he was a second round pick, wouldn't want to waste a first rounder.
uffda udfa
7 years ago

Which means you never have a true debate ... because you only never take lessons despite this entire form proving your logic is clearly faulty to everyone else. It's simple, you can't be objective.

And now you're write your shit all over again... and people will continue to tell you it's clearly wrong... and you're continue to ignore anyone else opinion, because you never have a true debate...

Originally Posted by: beast 



You must not have read this closely as I've said I agree in here more than once.

It doesn't matter how many agree that BB wasn't drafted to play LT because I know he was. It's not an opinion. So, the fault lies with your inability to acknowledge the truth.


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."


Porforis
7 years ago

It doesn't matter how many agree that BB wasn't drafted to play LT because I know he was. It's not an opinion. So, the fault lies with your inability to acknowledge the truth.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I mostly agree with you but need to disagree with the concept that he could be drafted specifically to play LT and have that be the primary factor involved with selecting him, or even the primary reason involved with selecting him for the first round versus second - but not also drafted with his ability to play other positions in mind.

Your links are also... I guess I don't understand why you think they're proof. One's just an article talking about Bulaga and contains zero statements from any Packers personnel - apart from basic softball interview questions to Bulaga.

Your second link basically says they intended him to start at LT. Which in no way, shape, or form gives any insight into whether they drafted him with his ability to play other positions on the line in mind. Just that they intended to start him at LT. That's it.

“He’ll line up right there behind Chad Clifton, with Allen Barbre, and he will take those reps,” McCarthy said of Bulaga, the Iowa lineman taken Thursday night. “It’s very important for him to train and be a left tackle.”



I mean hell, by that incredibly low standard here's two other articles that contradict yours. Is that just fact that he was drafted with the idea of being able to play RT as well in mind?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/383956-green-bay-2010-draft-overall-thoughts-and-grades 

Bryan Bulaga OT Iowa 1st Round (23rd overall)

I'm amazed Bulaga was able to slip so far after being projected to go into the top ten. I believe Bulaga may have been as high as the number 2 top left tackle on the Packers' big board. Bulaga provides instant depth at the left and right tackle positions and is ready to start immediately if Chad Clifton or Mark Tausher go down next season



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/384366-the-reason-behind-the-pick-an-analysis-of-the-2010-packers-draft-class 

I’m curious to what Thompson would have done in hindsight if he had known that Charles Brown from USC would be available in the 2nd round. I doubt Thompson could have drafted both, since Brown is projected only to be a left tackle



Side note - It's 75% bullshit, but you've heard time and time again that the Packers draft for talent, not position. Best player on the board. I say it's bullshit because you don't take say, a killer QB in the first round if he's the best player available when you're already loaded at the position and it's a position where having a ton of talent spread amongst 5 people doesn't get you far. However, as someone that's followed the drafts closely, I'd hope you would have noticed Ted Thompson repeatedly taking players at skill positions (minus QB of course) even in early rounds. Positions that are completely and utterly stocked at the time.

My overall point being, you're hyper fixated on this idea that because he was drafted with the idea of playing LT in mind, they ONLY drafted him with the intention of him playing LT. Unless you have some inside knowledge you aren't sharing - Well, you're not stating facts. You're stating opinion.
nerdmann
7 years ago
He could have played LT. Sherrod had longer arms, so they moved Bulaga to the right side.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
beast
7 years ago

I mostly agree with you but need to disagree with the concept that he could be drafted specifically to play LT and have that be the primary factor involved with selecting him, or even the primary reason involved with selecting him for the first round versus second - but not also drafted with his ability to play other positions in mind.

Your links are also... I guess I don't understand why you think they're proof. One's just an article talking about Bulaga and contains zero statements from any Packers personnel - apart from basic softball interview questions to Bulaga.

Your second link basically says they intended him to start at LT. Which in no way, shape, or form gives any insight into whether they drafted him with his ability to play other positions on the line in mind. Just that they intended to start him at LT. That's it.



I mean hell, by that incredibly low standard here's two other articles that contradict yours. Is that just fact that he was drafted with the idea of being able to play RT as well in mind?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/383956-green-bay-2010-draft-overall-thoughts-and-grades 



http://bleacherreport.com/articles/384366-the-reason-behind-the-pick-an-analysis-of-the-2010-packers-draft-class 


Side note - It's 75% bullshit, but you've heard time and time again that the Packers draft for talent, not position. Best player on the board. I say it's bullshit because you don't take say, a killer QB in the first round if he's the best player available when you're already loaded at the position and it's a position where having a ton of talent spread amongst 5 people doesn't get you far. However, as someone that's followed the drafts closely, I'd hope you would have noticed Ted Thompson repeatedly taking players at skill positions (minus QB of course) even in early rounds. Positions that are completely and utterly stocked at the time.

My overall point being, you're hyper fixated on this idea that because he was drafted with the idea of playing LT in mind, they ONLY drafted him with the intention of him playing LT. Unless you have some inside knowledge you aren't sharing - Well, you're not stating facts. You're stating opinion.

Originally Posted by: Porforis 



Very well said.

The reason he seems to see that incredibly low standard as 100% proof is because it backs his preconceived notion... as he's starting with the conclusion (that they would never ever purposely use a 1st round pick on a RT) and working ass backwards to find evidence that supports this preconceived notion without testing it for validity.

But because others check for validity first, before the conclusion, is the reason why no one else can come to that same conclusion.
UserPostedImage
Porforis
7 years ago

Very well said.

The reason he seems to see that incredibly low standard as 100% proof is because it backs his preconceived notion... as he's starting with the conclusion (that they would never ever purposely use a 1st round pick on a RT) and working ass backwards to find evidence that supports this preconceived notion without testing it for validity.

But because others check for validity first, before the conclusion, is the reason why no one else can come to that same conclusion.

Originally Posted by: beast 



I mean to be fair, based on everything we know they did draft him primarily because they wanted a LT. Ability to play other positions on the line/raw talent also factored into it too. So it's less that I disagree that they drafted him to be a LT, which is true. It's that I disagree that it was the only motivation and if he had been drafted as an RT instead of LT and played RT his entire Packers career, nobody would be talking about this except maybe a quick "We spent a first round pick on a RT?" which is hardly unprecedented.
uffda udfa
7 years ago
BR is being cited as proof? LOL. It's a quote from a guy in his mom's basement, almost, that is being used as proof over what Mike McCarthy said about him after he was selected. Mike McCarthy said nothing about him playing RT. They wanted him to be a LT. He couldn't play that position and he spent his career where he could. The org wanted Sherrod to be a LT...he couldn't play it either. He ended his career with a broken leg playing GUARD. He was not drafted to be a G nor was that thought in their heads when they took him. It is no different than Datone Jones failing on the DL and being moved to LB. The exact same thinking. Had Datone been a very good OLB it would've mitigated his failure and more acceptable even.

Nobody seems to understand that the org didn't want a RT in Round 1. Clifton was nearing his end. Bulaga played LT in college. Was a first round pick. PFWT said earlier in this thread that is so very hard to flip flop a guy because LT and RT are so different. Why would we draft him even thinking of making that kind of move? We didn't. It was done out of necessity just like he was moved to LT out of necessity when Newhouse failed. This is basic simple logic that refuses to be followed for the sake of winning an argument.

I've said over and over Bulaga turned out to be a fine player. He, however, will always and forever be a terrible PICK. I guess you're unable to separate those two things without even going through all his failure at LT caused this org in the following years.

It's absolutely crazy how little people know/remember about why we drafted Bulaga and are trying to use the drafting of Spriggs to fit the Bulaga narrative. This is from one of the articles I posted:

And going into the draft last week, there was no player on the Packers' roster who clearly looked capable of eventually taking over for Clifton or even backing him up. Daryn Colledge struggled when asked to move from guard to tackle in the wake of Clifton's injury; T.J. Lang fared slightly better, but still is seen as a long-term right tackle or guard.

That's where Bulaga comes in.


and then this from the other article:

Two days later, the Green Bay Packers made it clear where first-round draft pick Bryan Bulaga will begin his career — at left tackle.

Coach Mike McCarthy made that announcement — most expected it to be the case — late Saturday afternoon following the conclusion of the NFL draft.

“He’ll line up right there behind Chad Clifton, with Allen Barbre, and he will take those reps,” McCarthy said of Bulaga, the Iowa lineman taken Thursday night. “It’s very important for him to train and be a left tackle.”


It was VERY IMPORTANT for him to be a LT...that's why they drafted him to be one. He couldn't do it and failed into being a fine RT. I know to the crowd here that's just not how it happened. The org didn't care what position he played as long as he was a good player? Umm, no. No. No. No. A million times no. Drafted in Round 1 to play LT...no other reason, period. Geesh.

Continue arguing against the truth. We are in the era of fake news.
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
beast (49m) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
beast (6h) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
Zero2Cool (8h) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...
beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered
wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.
wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.
wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.
Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting
Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet
beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury
beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State
beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State
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
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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