Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Don Barclay
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
British


Joined: 11 Sep 2010
Posts: 596
Location: England
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't see Lang as the 6th OL. He's been paid to be a starting guard and done well at it. If Sherrod comes back Newhouse drops to swing tackle (and a good one) with Bulaga at RT.

It's interior depth and C where I see replacements coming. If we draft a C then EDS drops down to utility interior backup.

A guy like Barrett Jones offers nice versatility too, something the Packers like. Only problem is I'm not sure Jones would be a huge upgrade as a starter over EDS and then you've spent a premium pick on a backup interior lineman. EDS is also cheap.

Saying all that I'd be happy with this OL group next year.

Sherrod, Lang, Jones, Sitton, Bulaga; Newhouse, EDS, Barclay, Datko.

A potentially great starting 5 plus versatility in reserve. Newhouse and Datko at OT, EDS at C/G and Barclay at G/T.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheGreatZepp


Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 2844
Location: Brookfield, WI
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

British wrote:
I don't see Lang as the 6th OL. He's been paid to be a starting guard and done well at it. If Sherrod comes back Newhouse drops to swing tackle (and a good one) with Bulaga at RT.

It's interior depth and C where I see replacements coming. If we draft a C then EDS drops down to utility interior backup.

A guy like Barrett Jones offers nice versatility too, something the Packers like. Only problem is I'm not sure Jones would be a huge upgrade as a starter over EDS and then you've spent a premium pick on a backup interior lineman. EDS is also cheap.

Saying all that I'd be happy with this OL group next year.

Sherrod, Lang, Jones, Sitton, Bulaga; Newhouse, EDS, Barclay, Datko.

A potentially great starting 5 plus versatility in reserve. Newhouse and Datko at OT, EDS at C/G and Barclay at G/T.
No, I think Lang is a good LG, in certain situations I could him get pressed. Few can play center but a couple tackles could in theory bump inside and Sitton isn't going anywhere. So in that sense, out of LG, RG and RT Lang seems the most vulnerable.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Kuhn


Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 369
Location: UWM
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MNPackfan32 wrote:
Packerraymond wrote:
I feel very good about our OL once we get a LT, Newhouse and Barclay are great swing lineman that can get you through a game. I think Datko and Allard on the PS also have that potential. Just need the LT, hopefully that will be Sherrod.
No kidding. I have a daily debate with myself, half of me wants to get Eric Fisher from CMU and just be set at LT and the other half says that Sherrod is the answer and we don't need to spend another 1st on an OT. I guess thats why Ted gets the big bucks.


How is Fisher any more of a proven entity than Sherrod? By no means does drafting a LT in the first round automaticaly fix any problem, especially a LT out of the Mid-American Conference.

This is the same guy who kept Justin Harrell for 4 years! To TT our LT of the future is already on this roster and his name is Derek Sherrod. Ted knows value and knows there is no value in adding another Offensive Tackle this draft (barring a pretty dramatic drop by a top prospect). Ted will be comfortable going forward and Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Barclay (and Datko and Allard) and we all should be comfortable too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HyponGrey


Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Posts: 3736
Location: Down the road from NFL Films
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Kuhn wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Packerraymond wrote:
I feel very good about our OL once we get a LT, Newhouse and Barclay are great swing lineman that can get you through a game. I think Datko and Allard on the PS also have that potential. Just need the LT, hopefully that will be Sherrod.
No kidding. I have a daily debate with myself, half of me wants to get Eric Fisher from CMU and just be set at LT and the other half says that Sherrod is the answer and we don't need to spend another 1st on an OT. I guess thats why Ted gets the big bucks.


How is Fisher any more of a proven entity than Sherrod? By no means does drafting a LT in the first round automaticaly fix any problem, especially a LT out of the Mid-American Conference.

This is the same guy who kept Justin Harrell for 4 years! To TT our LT of the future is already on this roster and his name is Derek Sherrod. Ted knows value and knows there is no value in adding another Offensive Tackle this draft (barring a pretty dramatic drop by a top prospect). Ted will be comfortable going forward and Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Barclay (and Datko and Allard) and we all should be comfortable too.
^This. FTW.
_________________
justo wrote:
Bostick drove a guy 12 yards and finished off with a pancake and I'm not sure where my pants went.


Last edited by HyponGrey on Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:12 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As others have said here, if Sherrod turns out to be a player at left tackle this line looks about as sound as any on paper moving forward. Depth should be a plus at that point also if they keep Newhouse under contract. As crazy as it sounds right now the depth looks far better outside than in moving forward. Might need to bring a body or two in there pending on how Datko develops at tackle and what they end up doing with Barclay.

Barclay could go either way(guard/RT) at this point. Much better guard prospect IMO though. It will be easy to see how they view him long term by how they mold that body in the offseason. His movement skills and bend are not good enough for him to get much bigger than he is right now if they plan on keeping him at tackle. Much of the tackle value will be lost if ya start molding him into a guard(see Lang). You don't want to walk the line with their body's though either because that can also add up to value lost(see Colledge). They need to come up with a long term plan for Barclay and run with it.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheGreatZepp


Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 2844
Location: Brookfield, WI
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
As others have said here, if Sherrod turns out to be a player at left tackle this line looks about as sound as any on paper moving forward. Depth should be a plus at that point also if they keep Newhouse under contract. As crazy as it sounds right now the depth looks far better outside than in moving forward. Might need to bring a body or two in there pending on how Datko develops at tackle and what they end up doing with Barclay.

Barclay could go either way(guard/RT) at this point. Much better guard prospect IMO though. It will be easy to see how they view him long term by how they mold that body in the offseason. His movement skills and bend are not good enough for him to get much bigger than he is right now if they plan on keeping him at tackle. Much of the tackle value will be lost if ya start molding him into a guard(see Lang). You don't want to walk the line with their body's though either because that can also add up to value lost(see Colledge). They need to come up with a long term plan for Barclay and run with it.


I hope so. I really like the guy on the inside but knowing he can fill in at RT, I wouldn't bet on them moving him inside until they are confident Sherrod and/or Datko are going to be ready to go. It just seems to be the direction they've taken before like you mentioned in Colledge and Lang early in his career walking the line.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TheGreatZepp wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
As others have said here, if Sherrod turns out to be a player at left tackle this line looks about as sound as any on paper moving forward. Depth should be a plus at that point also if they keep Newhouse under contract. As crazy as it sounds right now the depth looks far better outside than in moving forward. Might need to bring a body or two in there pending on how Datko develops at tackle and what they end up doing with Barclay.

Barclay could go either way(guard/RT) at this point. Much better guard prospect IMO though. It will be easy to see how they view him long term by how they mold that body in the offseason. His movement skills and bend are not good enough for him to get much bigger than he is right now if they plan on keeping him at tackle. Much of the tackle value will be lost if ya start molding him into a guard(see Lang). You don't want to walk the line with their body's though either because that can also add up to value lost(see Colledge). They need to come up with a long term plan for Barclay and run with it.


I hope so. I really like the guy on the inside but knowing he can fill in at RT, I wouldn't bet on them moving him inside until they are confident Sherrod and/or Datko are going to be ready to go. It just seems to be the direction they've taken before like you mentioned in Colledge and Lang early in his career walking the line.


Sadly, odds are VERY high that's how it will play out for Barclay. I just feel this Packers team has missed out on some good line play because of this line of thinking. Colledge is a prime example! Zone takes him, packs on 15lbs, and he is now by far the best lineman on that roster. Just think what could have been had this Packers staff done so from day1.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Terranimal


Joined: 31 Oct 2011
Posts: 256
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
TheGreatZepp wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
As others have said here, if Sherrod turns out to be a player at left tackle this line looks about as sound as any on paper moving forward. Depth should be a plus at that point also if they keep Newhouse under contract. As crazy as it sounds right now the depth looks far better outside than in moving forward. Might need to bring a body or two in there pending on how Datko develops at tackle and what they end up doing with Barclay.

Barclay could go either way(guard/RT) at this point. Much better guard prospect IMO though. It will be easy to see how they view him long term by how they mold that body in the offseason. His movement skills and bend are not good enough for him to get much bigger than he is right now if they plan on keeping him at tackle. Much of the tackle value will be lost if ya start molding him into a guard(see Lang). You don't want to walk the line with their body's though either because that can also add up to value lost(see Colledge). They need to come up with a long term plan for Barclay and run with it.


I hope so. I really like the guy on the inside but knowing he can fill in at RT, I wouldn't bet on them moving him inside until they are confident Sherrod and/or Datko are going to be ready to go. It just seems to be the direction they've taken before like you mentioned in Colledge and Lang early in his career walking the line.


Sadly, odds are VERY high that's how it will play out for Barclay. I just feel this Packers team has missed out on some good line play because of this line of thinking. Colledge is a prime example! Zone takes him, packs on 15lbs, and he is now by far the best lineman on that roster. Just think what could have been had this Packers staff done so from day1.


This going a bit off-topic, but on another board there has been big time discussions over O-Line.

It's always the same question- Is it the players or is it the O-line coaching that's the problem?

Thompson has spent a lot of picks on the OL and cut many of them as well, who didn't make it here and they gave up on, only to see them as starters on other teams later.

Colledge though was a money/cap issue, as more then likely was Wells.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Terranimal wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
TheGreatZepp wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
As others have said here, if Sherrod turns out to be a player at left tackle this line looks about as sound as any on paper moving forward. Depth should be a plus at that point also if they keep Newhouse under contract. As crazy as it sounds right now the depth looks far better outside than in moving forward. Might need to bring a body or two in there pending on how Datko develops at tackle and what they end up doing with Barclay.

Barclay could go either way(guard/RT) at this point. Much better guard prospect IMO though. It will be easy to see how they view him long term by how they mold that body in the offseason. His movement skills and bend are not good enough for him to get much bigger than he is right now if they plan on keeping him at tackle. Much of the tackle value will be lost if ya start molding him into a guard(see Lang). You don't want to walk the line with their body's though either because that can also add up to value lost(see Colledge). They need to come up with a long term plan for Barclay and run with it.


I hope so. I really like the guy on the inside but knowing he can fill in at RT, I wouldn't bet on them moving him inside until they are confident Sherrod and/or Datko are going to be ready to go. It just seems to be the direction they've taken before like you mentioned in Colledge and Lang early in his career walking the line.


Sadly, odds are VERY high that's how it will play out for Barclay. I just feel this Packers team has missed out on some good line play because of this line of thinking. Colledge is a prime example! Zone takes him, packs on 15lbs, and he is now by far the best lineman on that roster. Just think what could have been had this Packers staff done so from day1.


This going a bit off-topic, but on another board there has been big time discussions over O-Line.

It's always the same question- Is it the players or is it the O-line coaching that's the problem?

Thompson has spent a lot of picks on the OL and cut many of them as well, who didn't make it here and they gave up on, only to see them as starters on other teams later.

Colledge though was a money/cap issue, as more then likely was Wells.


Tell them to watch the games and look to see if it's a talent or tech issue. There have been a ton of very young lineman that have played for the Packers over the years that were all things in tech sound. This staff should get it's strokes for this IMO. Sadly, talent and the level of development at the time of play has been a issue over the years as well.

Every team has a few get away because of money. That's just life of todays NFL. Only one that got away because they just gave up too soon was Big Breno IMO. I sure as hell don't blame TT for that one though. You can only mold that RTO for so long and Bulaga came along. At least they were smart enough to bring back EDS when they had the chance.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 8628
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

justo wrote:
pmikep wrote:
Thoughts: Packers draft Jonathan Cooper or Barrett Jones (both can play guard and center) and move Bryan Bulaga to LOT.
And Lang plays RT? Doesn't seem like Bulaga is the LT type TBH. I might have Newhouse over him there


Gee, I think Bulaga is a good RT and he is sorely missed. Barclay is serviceable in the run game but not so much in pass pro.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dubyajay


Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1713
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 4:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
Terranimal wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
TheGreatZepp wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
As others have said here, if Sherrod turns out to be a player at left tackle this line looks about as sound as any on paper moving forward. Depth should be a plus at that point also if they keep Newhouse under contract. As crazy as it sounds right now the depth looks far better outside than in moving forward. Might need to bring a body or two in there pending on how Datko develops at tackle and what they end up doing with Barclay.

Barclay could go either way(guard/RT) at this point. Much better guard prospect IMO though. It will be easy to see how they view him long term by how they mold that body in the offseason. His movement skills and bend are not good enough for him to get much bigger than he is right now if they plan on keeping him at tackle. Much of the tackle value will be lost if ya start molding him into a guard(see Lang). You don't want to walk the line with their body's though either because that can also add up to value lost(see Colledge). They need to come up with a long term plan for Barclay and run with it.


I hope so. I really like the guy on the inside but knowing he can fill in at RT, I wouldn't bet on them moving him inside until they are confident Sherrod and/or Datko are going to be ready to go. It just seems to be the direction they've taken before like you mentioned in Colledge and Lang early in his career walking the line.


Sadly, odds are VERY high that's how it will play out for Barclay. I just feel this Packers team has missed out on some good line play because of this line of thinking. Colledge is a prime example! Zone takes him, packs on 15lbs, and he is now by far the best lineman on that roster. Just think what could have been had this Packers staff done so from day1.


This going a bit off-topic, but on another board there has been big time discussions over O-Line.

It's always the same question- Is it the players or is it the O-line coaching that's the problem?

Thompson has spent a lot of picks on the OL and cut many of them as well, who didn't make it here and they gave up on, only to see them as starters on other teams later.

Colledge though was a money/cap issue, as more then likely was Wells.


Tell them to watch the games and look to see if it's a talent or tech issue. There have been a ton of very young lineman that have played for the Packers over the years that were all things in tech sound. This staff should get it's strokes for this IMO. Sadly, talent and the level of development at the time of play has been a issue over the years as well.

Every team has a few get away because of money. That's just life of todays NFL. Only one that got away because they just gave up too soon was Big Breno IMO. I sure as hell don't blame TT for that one though. You can only mold that RTO for so long and Bulaga came along. At least they were smart enough to bring back EDS when they had the chance.


How has Breno been in Seattle Palmy? I haven't seen him play. I know he sucked out loud when he was here, but was always optimistic he would turn out- now he seems to be starting.

Same sort of plan for Datko I assume? Hopefully it won't take as long?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would say Breno is a middle of the road starter at this point. Has started every game this year for penny's on the dollar though. A true RTO all day long right there. Has his share of flaws but he makes up for many of them as a tone setter. Can be had by speed, but that's one big nasty SOB right there. Smart guy that knows his game. Just the type of lineman that club is looking for, I'm sure.

Hard to say what the future holds for Datko. I have said from day1 that Datko might be two years away from a strength POV. Hard sitting on that money but they might be more willing with Datko because of the movement skills/frame combo. Then again, one needs to keep Datko's injury history in mind when they think about the investment needed in him. There is a reason why he fell on draft day and did not get picked off the PS. Risk there!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
justo


Joined: 05 Aug 2012
Posts: 13384
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

question: Datko is paid like a normal UDFA on PS, right? his rookie salary isn't what he's getting
_________________
Webmaster wrote:
The difference is that this is a FOOTBALL forum. Heated debates about FOOTBALL are expected and encouraged. If you want to discuss your cure for Ebola, try ebolasfuture.com or any other appropriate forum.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13893
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

justo wrote:
question: Datko is paid like a normal UDFA on PS, right? his rookie salary isn't what he's getting


YUP, getting PS bank.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gizmo2012


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 2800
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 9:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CalhounLambeau wrote:
I'm sure there are quite a few teams out there that would like Don Barclay on their squad at guard. What a find he's been for us. It will be interesting to see where/how he fits in the rotation next year with Sherrod/Bulaga back. I'm assuming he'll be working on RT/OG in various scenarios in camp.


I think you hit the nail on the head - a nice find to back up either guard or tackle.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group