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

2013 Free Agency General Discussion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 87, 88, 89  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
2Bigby0


Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 626
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HyponGrey wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
Reading over this one I just want to say that Newhouse is NOT an average NFL starting LT. That's just crazy talk. Man would make any 53 and I agree that odds are high he will at the very least start off next season as the starter again. No real upside there though. Man is very tech sound at this point and still getting beat. This or that has been said about the number of sacks this team gave up this year. Fix the left tackle position and you fix that problem IMO. It's not the number of sacks Newhouse has given up. It's the number of pressures than man has given up. How many dead plays did they have this year because of Rodgers feeling heat from his blindside?

Don't take this the wrong way. The Packers have been blessed to have Newhouse. LIS, man could make any roster in the NFL. Just not the type of left tackle I would want in a pass heavy system like Mac's.


So why not move Bulaga to LT? Seems reasonable enough to me. I've been a supporter of Newhouse. He's played well in my opinion. Sacks given up are an overrated stat. Especially given the fact that the Packers pass more than the average NFL team. I'd say the same thing about pressures. Give me pressures or sacks per pass or something like that. An efficiency rating.

But, back to Bulaga at LT. I don't see why the Packers wouldn't consider making this move or at least entertain it. Who is to say Bulaga isn't the best LT on the team? We certainly won't know until we see it.


This Packers team gave up a hair over 50 sacks this year. Newhouse gave up damn near the same number of pressures himself this year. That is NOT playing well if ya ask me.

I doubt they move Bulaga unless Sherrod falls flat on his face and I highly doubt that will happen. Sherrod is going to get his look though. At times it's about the greater good. Know what I mean.


The line was in shambles all season. In particular, Saturday, Lang and Newhouse all had their struggles through the season. Sacks and pressures are going to be skewed as the Packers pass the ball far more than the average NFL team. Also, out of those 50 sacks, 14 of them were indeed charged to A-Rod for hanging on to the ball. Newhouse isn't that bad. He's just not that good either. He is what he is, probably more of a 'swing' tackle than anything.

You 'doubt' they move Bulaga unless Sherrod falls flat on his face. Sure, I'd agree with that. But I view Sherrod almost like a rookie. At this very moment, it's very hard to disagree that Bulaga is the best tackle and possibly best option at LT. That's at this very moment. A lot can change after OTA's and TC, but it's pure speculation to say that Sherrod will be out LT next year.

Also, Newhouse finished amongst the top 20 starting NFL tackles in pass blocking efficiency. What's so bad about that?


I would be the first to tell ya Newhouse is a good football player. LIS, I just don't want "that guy" as the starting LT on "this" team. Nothing more than that really.

In many ways I agree with you about Bulaga. I'm one that wants my best tackle playing the blindside also. LIS though, good chance they are keeping him at RT for now because of Sherrod's set. In short, Bulaga might be a hair better LT than Sherrod is today but he is a MUCH better RT than Sherrod would be. LIS, that one comes down to the greater good. Sherrod is going to get his look. In that, are you willing to mess with Bulaga's feet for the short term gains?


I never said Newhouse was a 'good' football player. He is what he is. He is very average and it shows across the board for him. He has his struggles against premier pass rushers, however I will point out his success in week 17 and the wildcard against Jared Allen. Guy held his own.

You pretty much hit my point with Bulaga. The guy is the best tackle on the team, and it makes a lot of sense to move him to LT. As for Bulaga 'might' be a hair better than Sherrod today, that's just not true. On this very day, Bulaga is a lot better than Sherrod. We don't really know what Sherrod is. That's a big part of the problem. It's easy to project and say he is going to be our LT, but there is no evidence of it. While I certainly agree Sherrod needs to get a long look at LT, and there is also not much evidence to suggest Sherrod wouldn't be a quality RT. We just don't know because he hasn't been on the field.

I would have no problem 'messing' with Bulaga's feet and such because what is the flip side of this? After week 3 or 4 we find that Sherrod is a mess or uncapable of playing LT right now. So, we either plug Newhouse in or move Bulaga over. There are just too many variables involved in 'counting' on Sherrod to be our LT.

You move Bulaga over to LT. We know the guy can play at a high level in the NFL and he's the best player we have at the position. It's almost a relative no brainer. You give Sherrod an opportunity to work behind Bulaga and get reps in a competition at RT with Newhouse. I get that the 'mechanics' of playing positions is awfully important. But this offensive line boils down to getting the best 5 guys out there. It's cliche and we've heard it a million times, but it's ultimately true. If Sherrod is one of the 5 best, I'd be really happy. But if not, the backup plan is to have Newhouse back at LT?
So wait. We move Bulaga to LT, where he struggles because he's not used to the side (messing with his feet) and move Newhouse to RT effectively downgrading 2 positions at once? Then suppose Sherrod hits, do we switch them again because Sherrod isn't suited to play RT, still screwing with feet? I'm leaving well enough alone for now, we can always move Bulaga later.


We know Bulaga can play in this league at a high level. I think people are overrating the change between RT and LT. Bulaga played LT at Iowa at a high level and I have far more confidence in him, than any other player on the roster at LT.

Like I said, Sherrod is a wilcard in this. I hope he pans out. But right now, I'm all for having our best tackle at LT.

Palmy is right, it's not our choice. This is the coaching staff's decision and it's a big one at that. Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Datko will all get looks at both RT and LT during OTA's. Why not? It's up to the coaching staff to figure out the best two players at LT and RT. If Sherrod isn't able to beat out Newhouse, wouldn't that be a huge red flag? Who knows what's going to happen, but speculating sure is fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 4180
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
We know Bulaga can play in this league at a high level. I think people are overrating the change between RT and LT. Bulaga played LT at Iowa at a high level and I have far more confidence in him, than any other player on the roster at LT.

Like I said, Sherrod is a wilcard in this. I hope he pans out. But right now, I'm all for having our best tackle at LT.

Palmy is right, it's not our choice. This is the coaching staff's decision and it's a big one at that. Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Datko will all get looks at both RT and LT during OTA's. Why not? It's up to the coaching staff to figure out the best two players at LT and RT. If Sherrod isn't able to beat out Newhouse, wouldn't that be a huge red flag? Who knows what's going to happen, but speculating sure is fun.


Playing LT at Iowa is a bit different than playing LT in the NFL.

Switching from RT back to LT in an offseason is also incredibly difficult. The footwork isn't easy to pick up on. You can't just go into "LT mode" and call it good.
_________________
Simian07:
Quote:
I'd argue Jordy is probably around the 30th-40th best receiver in the NFL, maybe 50th.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
2Bigby0


Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 626
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
Quote:
We know Bulaga can play in this league at a high level. I think people are overrating the change between RT and LT. Bulaga played LT at Iowa at a high level and I have far more confidence in him, than any other player on the roster at LT.

Like I said, Sherrod is a wilcard in this. I hope he pans out. But right now, I'm all for having our best tackle at LT.

Palmy is right, it's not our choice. This is the coaching staff's decision and it's a big one at that. Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Datko will all get looks at both RT and LT during OTA's. Why not? It's up to the coaching staff to figure out the best two players at LT and RT. If Sherrod isn't able to beat out Newhouse, wouldn't that be a huge red flag? Who knows what's going to happen, but speculating sure is fun.


Playing LT at Iowa is a bit different than playing LT in the NFL.

Switching from RT back to LT in an offseason is also incredibly difficult. The footwork isn't easy to pick up on. You can't just go into "LT mode" and call it good.


I'm sure it's not easy, but these guys are professionals. Bulaga has been playing football his entire life. It's not like playing LT would be detrimental at all. Technique is going to be a bit different. But look at the alternative. It's either Newhouse, a guy that likely should not be playing LT and Sherrod, a guy that we know absolutely nothing about. The Packers are built to win right now. I want the 5 best guys out there period. Nothing in my mind tells me that right now, Sherrod is one of our 5 best. Sorry, but that's a fact. We don't know enough about him. Never said anything about your so called "LT Mode" either. That's what OTA's and TC is for.

I still think everyone is overrating the difference. Our O-Line is predicated on flexibility and ability to play multiple positions. That's been proved time and time again. We've had guys move from guard to tackle and vice versa in the same season! I'm rather certain Bulaga can figure out the 'footwork' in being a LT, and if need be I'm certain that he'd be able to slide back to RT and do a find job there. That's the nice thing about this. Bulaga is CLEARLY the best tackle we have on the roster period. I see this thing being a complete open competition between all the guys at tackle. The best two start. It's as easy as that. Bulaga will certainly be one of the best two, and what if Barclay beats out Sherrod and Newhouse? Do we put Barclay at LT then? The Packers like competition at every position, think about. Be open minded and calm down buddy, I know plenty about this stuff and I don't know anything about this "LT Mode" you speak of.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Dubyajay


Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 1701
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

2Bigby0 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
Quote:
We know Bulaga can play in this league at a high level. I think people are overrating the change between RT and LT. Bulaga played LT at Iowa at a high level and I have far more confidence in him, than any other player on the roster at LT.

Like I said, Sherrod is a wilcard in this. I hope he pans out. But right now, I'm all for having our best tackle at LT.

Palmy is right, it's not our choice. This is the coaching staff's decision and it's a big one at that. Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Datko will all get looks at both RT and LT during OTA's. Why not? It's up to the coaching staff to figure out the best two players at LT and RT. If Sherrod isn't able to beat out Newhouse, wouldn't that be a huge red flag? Who knows what's going to happen, but speculating sure is fun.


Playing LT at Iowa is a bit different than playing LT in the NFL.

Switching from RT back to LT in an offseason is also incredibly difficult. The footwork isn't easy to pick up on. You can't just go into "LT mode" and call it good.


I'm sure it's not easy, but these guys are professionals. Bulaga has been playing football his entire life. It's not like playing LT would be detrimental at all. Technique is going to be a bit different. But look at the alternative. It's either Newhouse, a guy that likely should not be playing LT and Sherrod, a guy that we know absolutely nothing about. The Packers are built to win right now. I want the 5 best guys out there period. Nothing in my mind tells me that right now, Sherrod is one of our 5 best. Sorry, but that's a fact. We don't know enough about him. Never said anything about your so called "LT Mode" either. That's what OTA's and TC is for.

I still think everyone is overrating the difference. Our O-Line is predicated on flexibility and ability to play multiple positions. That's been proved time and time again. We've had guys move from guard to tackle and vice versa in the same season! I'm rather certain Bulaga can figure out the 'footwork' in being a LT, and if need be I'm certain that he'd be able to slide back to RT and do a find job there. That's the nice thing about this. Bulaga is CLEARLY the best tackle we have on the roster period. I see this thing being a complete open competition between all the guys at tackle. The best two start. It's as easy as that. Bulaga will certainly be one of the best two, and what if Barclay beats out Sherrod and Newhouse? Do we put Barclay at LT then? The Packers like competition at every position, think about. Be open minded and calm down buddy, I know plenty about this stuff and I don't know anything about this "LT Mode" you speak of.


It has been "proven" that when we do move guys around, that they tend to take a dip in play. It was also "proven" that when we stayed pat and let them have some continuity, that they actually played better. That is a fact. (Not really, but since we are doing that..)

I get what you are saying about putting the best out there, etc. I just feel that the staff probably have more confidence and idea in what Sherrod is/was/can be than you do. I get that you are sceptical, and that is fair, I just feel that when you draft a first round talent, you give him a shot at the gig before we start scrambling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
2Bigby0


Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 626
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2013 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dubyajay wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
Quote:
We know Bulaga can play in this league at a high level. I think people are overrating the change between RT and LT. Bulaga played LT at Iowa at a high level and I have far more confidence in him, than any other player on the roster at LT.

Like I said, Sherrod is a wilcard in this. I hope he pans out. But right now, I'm all for having our best tackle at LT.

Palmy is right, it's not our choice. This is the coaching staff's decision and it's a big one at that. Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Datko will all get looks at both RT and LT during OTA's. Why not? It's up to the coaching staff to figure out the best two players at LT and RT. If Sherrod isn't able to beat out Newhouse, wouldn't that be a huge red flag? Who knows what's going to happen, but speculating sure is fun.


Playing LT at Iowa is a bit different than playing LT in the NFL.

Switching from RT back to LT in an offseason is also incredibly difficult. The footwork isn't easy to pick up on. You can't just go into "LT mode" and call it good.


I'm sure it's not easy, but these guys are professionals. Bulaga has been playing football his entire life. It's not like playing LT would be detrimental at all. Technique is going to be a bit different. But look at the alternative. It's either Newhouse, a guy that likely should not be playing LT and Sherrod, a guy that we know absolutely nothing about. The Packers are built to win right now. I want the 5 best guys out there period. Nothing in my mind tells me that right now, Sherrod is one of our 5 best. Sorry, but that's a fact. We don't know enough about him. Never said anything about your so called "LT Mode" either. That's what OTA's and TC is for.

I still think everyone is overrating the difference. Our O-Line is predicated on flexibility and ability to play multiple positions. That's been proved time and time again. We've had guys move from guard to tackle and vice versa in the same season! I'm rather certain Bulaga can figure out the 'footwork' in being a LT, and if need be I'm certain that he'd be able to slide back to RT and do a find job there. That's the nice thing about this. Bulaga is CLEARLY the best tackle we have on the roster period. I see this thing being a complete open competition between all the guys at tackle. The best two start. It's as easy as that. Bulaga will certainly be one of the best two, and what if Barclay beats out Sherrod and Newhouse? Do we put Barclay at LT then? The Packers like competition at every position, think about. Be open minded and calm down buddy, I know plenty about this stuff and I don't know anything about this "LT Mode" you speak of.


It has been "proven" that when we do move guys around, that they tend to take a dip in play. It was also "proven" that when we stayed pat and let them have some continuity, that they actually played better. That is a fact. (Not really, but since we are doing that..)

I get what you are saying about putting the best out there, etc. I just feel that the staff probably have more confidence and idea in what Sherrod is/was/can be than you do. I get that you are sceptical, and that is fair, I just feel that when you draft a first round talent, you give him a shot at the gig before we start scrambling.


Quality point about giving Sherrod a shot. I don't want people to think I'm down of Sherrod because I am not. I really, really want him to be the LT of the future. I was excited about his potential when he was drafted and envisioned book ends of him and Bulaga for years. There is still a really good chance of that happening.

When guys have moved around, it has severely hindered our performance along the offensive line. You're correct about that. But really, tackle is the only position where I see any shuffling. It's because we have a lot of quality guys. While everyone has been clamoring about Sherrod coming back, we've forgotten about the development of Andrew Datko and Don Barclay. The Pack have a nice mix of youngsters to compete for playing time. I like it a lot. All I want is for the best combination of tackles to be out there. If that's Sherrod at LT, I would be ecstatic. But I don't want the backup plan to be Newhouse. We've seen that movie already. I think we can do better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
General_Bean


Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 1274
Location: Crossroads of CT
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not to interrupt this fantastic discussion about our offensive line, but how would the Packer nation feel if James Harrison came cheap? He's probably not going to resign there (and they won't give him a contract). Ok yes, he's nursing some injuries last season, but maybe he's a Woodson or Pickett type of signing for cheap value and he may play with that chip for a season or 2.

What do ya think?
_________________
Packers fan since 93.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CWood21


Moderator
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 35288
Location: 'Merica
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

General_Bean wrote:
What do ya think?


If we're going after aging veterans, I'd rather target Richard Seymour. Harrison has gotten progressively worse the last few years. I'd rather not take practice reps from guys like Nick Perry for him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
cpnesdude41


Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 1555
PostPosted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

General_Bean wrote:
Not to interrupt this fantastic discussion about our offensive line, but how would the Packer nation feel if James Harrison came cheap? He's probably not going to resign there (and they won't give him a contract). Ok yes, he's nursing some injuries last season, but maybe he's a Woodson or Pickett type of signing for cheap value and he may play with that chip for a season or 2.

What do ya think?


Best back-up ever. But would he start over perry or just come in on third downs? And how much you think i takes to sign him? It's gonna b 5 or more a year, and if hes just playin third downs... cap un-friendly.
_________________
clown
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GoPackGo


Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 3679
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why has no one seen Freeney at a GB gas station yet?
_________________

God, family, and the Green Bay Packers; in that order.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
svp


Joined: 11 Sep 2011
Posts: 1025
Location: I took a football shaped pill and felt better.
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What happened with one of last years FA pickup?

Jeff Saturday
_________________
svp wrote:
Who cares?


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wgbeethree


Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 3009
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


: PAT SIMS 6'2" 335 LBS :
Arguably the best run stuffer on a pretty good Bengals' team that includes Atkins and Peko. At 28 he still has plenty of life left. An upgrade to Wilson IMO in both run and rush. Better rusher than Pickett. Think he would be a nice piece on the line and not cost much more than about a million per. Pickett only has one year left on his contract and at about 6 million Sims could be a younger much cheaper version of him if we want to go full youth movement mode.
_________________

TytybearsFan21 wrote:
Justo knows nothing about sportz

justo wrote:
I would be a terrible coach/anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CornOnDaCobb


Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 517
Location: Tampa, FL
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
Quote:
We know Bulaga can play in this league at a high level. I think people are overrating the change between RT and LT. Bulaga played LT at Iowa at a high level and I have far more confidence in him, than any other player on the roster at LT.

Like I said, Sherrod is a wilcard in this. I hope he pans out. But right now, I'm all for having our best tackle at LT.

Palmy is right, it's not our choice. This is the coaching staff's decision and it's a big one at that. Bulaga, Sherrod, Newhouse and Datko will all get looks at both RT and LT during OTA's. Why not? It's up to the coaching staff to figure out the best two players at LT and RT. If Sherrod isn't able to beat out Newhouse, wouldn't that be a huge red flag? Who knows what's going to happen, but speculating sure is fun.


Playing LT at Iowa is a bit different than playing LT in the NFL.

Switching from RT back to LT in an offseason is also incredibly difficult. The footwork isn't easy to pick up on. You can't just go into "LT mode" and call it good.


Exactly, Bulaga is a very good right tackle, dont break one position to try to fix another.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nfldraftguru1


Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 10032
Location: Whitewater, WI
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wgbeethree wrote:

: PAT SIMS 6'2" 335 LBS :
Arguably the best run stuffer on a pretty good Bengals' team that includes Atkins and Peko. At 28 he still has plenty of life left. An upgrade to Wilson IMO in both run and rush. Better rusher than Pickett. Think he would be a nice piece on the line and not cost much more than about a million per. Pickett only has one year left on his contract and at about 6 million Sims could be a younger much cheaper version of him if we want to go full youth movement mode.

Hmmm.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 4180
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nfldraftguru1 wrote:
wgbeethree wrote:

: PAT SIMS 6'2" 335 LBS :
Arguably the best run stuffer on a pretty good Bengals' team that includes Atkins and Peko. At 28 he still has plenty of life left. An upgrade to Wilson IMO in both run and rush. Better rusher than Pickett. Think he would be a nice piece on the line and not cost much more than about a million per. Pickett only has one year left on his contract and at about 6 million Sims could be a younger much cheaper version of him if we want to go full youth movement mode.

Hmmm.


Think
_________________
Simian07:
Quote:
I'd argue Jordy is probably around the 30th-40th best receiver in the NFL, maybe 50th.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nfldraftguru1


Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 10032
Location: Whitewater, WI
PostPosted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
nfldraftguru1 wrote:
wgbeethree wrote:

: PAT SIMS 6'2" 335 LBS :
Arguably the best run stuffer on a pretty good Bengals' team that includes Atkins and Peko. At 28 he still has plenty of life left. An upgrade to Wilson IMO in both run and rush. Better rusher than Pickett. Think he would be a nice piece on the line and not cost much more than about a million per. Pickett only has one year left on his contract and at about 6 million Sims could be a younger much cheaper version of him if we want to go full youth movement mode.

Hmmm.


Think

Interesting indeed.
_________________
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 ... 19, 20, 21 ... 87, 88, 89  Next
Page 20 of 89

 
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