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 ... 21, 22, 23 ... 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
General_Bean


Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 1298
Location: Crossroads of CT
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
cooters22 wrote:
byzr wrote:
ditto with 2bigby0. our offensive line, WHEN HEALTHY, is good. they're not a running offensive line but they're a good passing offensive line. as long as the coaching staff is comfortable with the health of the offensive line i would draft for depth.
the two deep Safeties takes away the big play but we don't adjust well for it. the last couple games we did start adjusting and throwing screens and underneath passes but it was to little to late.


How can you guys say that? Our unit gave up a league high in sacks? I just think you guys are delusional.


Well, it's actually second highest if you're going to throw stats around. And again, 14 of those sacks are on Aaron Rodgers. That's also a fact.

So, consider this... Our unit gave up 37 sacks with multiple backups all season. There needs to be improvement from our QB in getting rid of the ball. A large portion of the blame needs to go to playcalling. We faced 2-High Safety's all season, and during the early portion of the season we kept running vertical routes. How long do you expect an offensive line to block people? I've stated it numerous times but on average, Rodgers had 2.7 seconds to throw the football. That's a pretty solid number considering the Packers preach to their QB's to have the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I just think you aren't really sure what you're talking about.


If Rodgers is getting enough time to throw maybe we have to take a hard look at our WRs here. Are they not getting open? I'm beginning to suspect we aren't getting separation. I have no proof here, just speculating...


I've been thinking/saying that for a while. I feel Rodgers tend to hold onto the ball for a little longer because there's alot of very very tight windows to throw in and no receiver is getting any separation. I think one of the cores issues is they aren't very physical, so Corners tend to abuse them more often than not.

Or Rodgers just looks at 1 person (Cobb) and holds the ball too long -_-
_________________
Packers fan since 93.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 9081
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mr Green wrote:
If newhouse is not expected to be a starter next season then he would make excellent trade bait. We can always draft another OT if we wanted.

The OL needs an upgrade somewhere. The number of sacks conceded was unacceptable and it needs to be better.


I think if we address the O line we should look for a center and a guard for depth if nothing else.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 9081
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
gizmo2012 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
Yup, the two things I did not love about Sherrod on draft day(mindset/high hips) would hold him back a great deal at guard. Much like Newhouse, Sherrod just sees himself as a LT. Just flat out not tough enough to excel in there. Not a nasty bone in Sherrod's body and that's a mans game in there. Can't change the mindset either. Same deal with the high hips. Leverage would never be on his side in there!

I mean, Chad Clifton made for one hell of a left tackle but would have made for a terrible guard. Not a chance Sherrod would out grade Lang in there. But then again, Lang is a much better player than some feel on this site. Not sure why?


Nobody knows if Sherrod will make a good NFL left tackle or even right tackle for that matter. Nobody knows if Sherrod is tough enough. Sherrod has not played enough to know what kind of an NFL left or right tackle he may be. I think serious consideration should be given to possibly move Bulaga to LT. He is a proven competent RT so why not LT. I think we do know Sherrod was not NFL ready as a rookie but this will be his 3rd year, even with missing a year he has had time to build his body and work on those areas of weakness so maybe he will pleasantly surprise us all.


The NFL draft is all about projection at the end of the day. When I broke down Sherrod that year I felt you had a very fine pass pro LT that would bring little else to the table. That's Chad Clifton! They do it in different ways but the results are the same. Clifton had VERY heavy hands and great feet. Sherrod is very long/big with well above average movement at set, a true dancing bear!


This made me Laughing Very Happy

Palmy, more than once you said something about Sherrod's mindset. Could you elaborate? I don't think I was here when you spoke of him back then.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
2Bigby0


Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 627
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

General_Bean wrote:
Pugger wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
cooters22 wrote:
byzr wrote:
ditto with 2bigby0. our offensive line, WHEN HEALTHY, is good. they're not a running offensive line but they're a good passing offensive line. as long as the coaching staff is comfortable with the health of the offensive line i would draft for depth.
the two deep Safeties takes away the big play but we don't adjust well for it. the last couple games we did start adjusting and throwing screens and underneath passes but it was to little to late.


How can you guys say that? Our unit gave up a league high in sacks? I just think you guys are delusional.


Well, it's actually second highest if you're going to throw stats around. And again, 14 of those sacks are on Aaron Rodgers. That's also a fact.

So, consider this... Our unit gave up 37 sacks with multiple backups all season. There needs to be improvement from our QB in getting rid of the ball. A large portion of the blame needs to go to playcalling. We faced 2-High Safety's all season, and during the early portion of the season we kept running vertical routes. How long do you expect an offensive line to block people? I've stated it numerous times but on average, Rodgers had 2.7 seconds to throw the football. That's a pretty solid number considering the Packers preach to their QB's to have the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I just think you aren't really sure what you're talking about.


If Rodgers is getting enough time to throw maybe we have to take a hard look at our WRs here. Are they not getting open? I'm beginning to suspect we aren't getting separation. I have no proof here, just speculating...


I've been thinking/saying that for a while. I feel Rodgers tend to hold onto the ball for a little longer because there's alot of very very tight windows to throw in and no receiver is getting any separation. I think one of the cores issues is they aren't very physical, so Corners tend to abuse them more often than not.

Or Rodgers just looks at 1 person (Cobb) and holds the ball too long -_-


I think a lot of this has to do with playcalling to tell you the truth. Our inability to run the ball effectively on a consistent basis really hindered us. Teams 'dared' us to run the ball and we couldn't do that. They sat in a two high shell all day long while we still attempted a vertical attack. I think there are some adjustments we need to make offensively, starting with our ground game. Any team in the league would be happy with our receiving corps. We just need to learn that we can't just 'sling the pill' downfield on every single play.

Teams didn't play 'honest' defense against us. An effective ground game would do wonders for our offense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Pugger


Joined: 01 May 2010
Posts: 9081
Location: N. Fort Myers, FL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
I just want to say that IMO Pickett's best year as a Packer was this past season. I have no issue with that cap number and feel the Packers are blessed to have him. Very good at what they ask him to do out there. As stout as any DL in the league right now also. Better hook a GMC up to that boy if ya want to move him..... Laughing

Going with youth always looks like a good idea on paper. Just sayin. You would be given away a good one still playing high grade football right there.


Laughing
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
I Am Rodgers


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 7326
Location: New Jersey
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

2Bigby0 wrote:
General_Bean wrote:
Pugger wrote:
2Bigby0 wrote:
cooters22 wrote:
byzr wrote:
ditto with 2bigby0. our offensive line, WHEN HEALTHY, is good. they're not a running offensive line but they're a good passing offensive line. as long as the coaching staff is comfortable with the health of the offensive line i would draft for depth.
the two deep Safeties takes away the big play but we don't adjust well for it. the last couple games we did start adjusting and throwing screens and underneath passes but it was to little to late.


How can you guys say that? Our unit gave up a league high in sacks? I just think you guys are delusional.


Well, it's actually second highest if you're going to throw stats around. And again, 14 of those sacks are on Aaron Rodgers. That's also a fact.

So, consider this... Our unit gave up 37 sacks with multiple backups all season. There needs to be improvement from our QB in getting rid of the ball. A large portion of the blame needs to go to playcalling. We faced 2-High Safety's all season, and during the early portion of the season we kept running vertical routes. How long do you expect an offensive line to block people? I've stated it numerous times but on average, Rodgers had 2.7 seconds to throw the football. That's a pretty solid number considering the Packers preach to their QB's to have the ball out in 2.5 seconds.

I just think you aren't really sure what you're talking about.


If Rodgers is getting enough time to throw maybe we have to take a hard look at our WRs here. Are they not getting open? I'm beginning to suspect we aren't getting separation. I have no proof here, just speculating...


I've been thinking/saying that for a while. I feel Rodgers tend to hold onto the ball for a little longer because there's alot of very very tight windows to throw in and no receiver is getting any separation. I think one of the cores issues is they aren't very physical, so Corners tend to abuse them more often than not.

Or Rodgers just looks at 1 person (Cobb) and holds the ball too long -_-


I think a lot of this has to do with playcalling to tell you the truth. Our inability to run the ball effectively on a consistent basis really hindered us. Teams 'dared' us to run the ball and we couldn't do that. They sat in a two high shell all day long while we still attempted a vertical attack. I think there are some adjustments we need to make offensively, starting with our ground game. Any team in the league would be happy with our receiving corps. We just need to learn that we can't just 'sling the pill' downfield on every single play.

Teams didn't play 'honest' defense against us. An effective ground game would do wonders for our offense.


Reminds me of the moment I was most proud of Mac and the team in general. It was the Lions game where we took the ball off kickoff and called 8 straight runs. We ran the ball right down their throat. I love passing and the big play, but when you can run at will on a team, that's a level of dominance we rarely get to see.
_________________


stallyns wrote:
Good thing for talky-talk Harbaugh he has an outstanding citizen/player like Aldon Smith on his team and not a classless hooligan like Clay Matthews.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13926
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pugger wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
gizmo2012 wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
Yup, the two things I did not love about Sherrod on draft day(mindset/high hips) would hold him back a great deal at guard. Much like Newhouse, Sherrod just sees himself as a LT. Just flat out not tough enough to excel in there. Not a nasty bone in Sherrod's body and that's a mans game in there. Can't change the mindset either. Same deal with the high hips. Leverage would never be on his side in there!

I mean, Chad Clifton made for one hell of a left tackle but would have made for a terrible guard. Not a chance Sherrod would out grade Lang in there. But then again, Lang is a much better player than some feel on this site. Not sure why?


Nobody knows if Sherrod will make a good NFL left tackle or even right tackle for that matter. Nobody knows if Sherrod is tough enough. Sherrod has not played enough to know what kind of an NFL left or right tackle he may be. I think serious consideration should be given to possibly move Bulaga to LT. He is a proven competent RT so why not LT. I think we do know Sherrod was not NFL ready as a rookie but this will be his 3rd year, even with missing a year he has had time to build his body and work on those areas of weakness so maybe he will pleasantly surprise us all.


The NFL draft is all about projection at the end of the day. When I broke down Sherrod that year I felt you had a very fine pass pro LT that would bring little else to the table. That's Chad Clifton! They do it in different ways but the results are the same. Clifton had VERY heavy hands and great feet. Sherrod is very long/big with well above average movement at set, a true dancing bear!


This made me Laughing Very Happy

Palmy, more than once you said something about Sherrod's mindset. Could you elaborate? I don't think I was here when you spoke of him back then.


Tough kid, but there is not a nasty bone in his body and that's not something you can fake or coach. Ya got it, or ya don't. LIS, that's Clifton all over again from that POV. Many like that calm mindset at LT but it will never play well inside at the pro level and it's less than ideal at RT as well.

In short, he will not go to the fight. He will let the fight come to him!
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dcerb44


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 3058
Location: Schofield, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:


Tough kid, but there is not a nasty bone in his body and that's not something you can fake or coach. Ya got it, or ya don't. LIS, that's Clifton all over again from that POV. Many like that calm mindset at LT but it will never play well inside at the pro level and it's less than ideal at RT as well.

In short, he will not go to the fight. He will let the fight come to him!


I'm one that doesn't mind it when it comes to the LT and may actually prefer it. You are right though that type of mindset wouldn't work in the interior.

Also hate, and I can't stress that enough when I see that in a runningback. You're either the hammer or the nail and I'll drop a guy completely off my board who fits the type of a 'nail'. Was the biggest gripe I ever had with Grant.
_________________


pf9 wrote:
This should definitely be McCarthy's swan song. If we're lucky Bret Bielema will come back to this state and coach the Pack next year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
nfldraftguru1


Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 10256
Location: Whitewater, WI
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Talk to me about Terrance Knighton.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 5016
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wish we had ourselves a Joe Staley. Probably the only LT I look forward to watching in the league. Absolute mauler in every respect.
_________________
Bolstrikes wrote:
Ben makes his receivers a lot better then Rodgers does. I think Rodgers gets way more to work with and don't feel he's better then Ben. Rodgers gets better surrounding talent and a better system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13926
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
Wish we had ourselves a Joe Staley. Probably the only LT I look forward to watching in the league. Absolute mauler in every respect.


Joe Staley is one hell of a football player. Very complete LT right there that comes to play week in and week out. That said, not real sure I would call him a "mauler". Staley was my comparison for Bulaga on draft day and I'm sure most can remember my love for Bulaga that year. Staley is a hair more athletic but very much so a style/body match. Just like Bulaga, Staley can be had by good power if the tech gets out of line. Plays speed a little better than Bulaga though.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CentralFC


Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 5016
Location: Evanston, IL
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
Wish we had ourselves a Joe Staley. Probably the only LT I look forward to watching in the league. Absolute mauler in every respect.


Joe Staley is one hell of a football player. Very complete LT right there that comes to play week in and week out. That said, not real sure I would call him a "mauler". Staley was my comparison for Bulaga on draft day and I'm sure most can remember my love for Bulaga that year. Staley is a hair more athletic but very much so a style/body match. Just like Bulaga, Staley can be had by good power if the tech gets out of line. Plays speed a little better than Bulaga though.


What LT would you consider a mauler then?
_________________
Bolstrikes wrote:
Ben makes his receivers a lot better then Rodgers does. I think Rodgers gets way more to work with and don't feel he's better then Ben. Rodgers gets better surrounding talent and a better system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13926
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CentralFC wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
Wish we had ourselves a Joe Staley. Probably the only LT I look forward to watching in the league. Absolute mauler in every respect.


Joe Staley is one hell of a football player. Very complete LT right there that comes to play week in and week out. That said, not real sure I would call him a "mauler". Staley was my comparison for Bulaga on draft day and I'm sure most can remember my love for Bulaga that year. Staley is a hair more athletic but very much so a style/body match. Just like Bulaga, Staley can be had by good power if the tech gets out of line. Plays speed a little better than Bulaga though.


What LT would you consider a mauler then?


A player that can put NFL level comp on his back without all the stars needing to be in line OR any player that can put a "power-play" on his back. Ya just about never see a "mauler" playing LT in the NFL these days. Jake Long is/was a "mauler" but he is/was a elite RT playing good LT.

EDIT: If ya want to see the best that ever was a LT in this area. Get on Youtube and look up Tony Boselli. In a round about way, Boselli might be the reason why I do what I do for a living these day as well.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GoPackGo


Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 5200
Location: Sconnie boy
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

palmy50 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
Wish we had ourselves a Joe Staley. Probably the only LT I look forward to watching in the league. Absolute mauler in every respect.


Joe Staley is one hell of a football player. Very complete LT right there that comes to play week in and week out. That said, not real sure I would call him a "mauler". Staley was my comparison for Bulaga on draft day and I'm sure most can remember my love for Bulaga that year. Staley is a hair more athletic but very much so a style/body match. Just like Bulaga, Staley can be had by good power if the tech gets out of line. Plays speed a little better than Bulaga though.


What LT would you consider a mauler then?


A player that can put NFL level comp on his back without all the stars needing to be in line OR any player that can put a "power-play" on his back. Ya just about never see a "mauler" playing LT in the NFL these days. Jake Long is/was a "mauler" but he is/was a elite RT playing good LT.

EDIT: If ya want to see the best that ever was a LT in this area. Get on Youtube and look up Tony Boselli. In a round about way, Boselli might be the reason why I do what I do for a living these day as well.


I remember a day when he threw around Bruce Smith like a rag doll. Shocked
_________________

R-E-L-A-X
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
palmy50


Joined: 26 Nov 2006
Posts: 13926
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GoPackGo wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
palmy50 wrote:
CentralFC wrote:
Wish we had ourselves a Joe Staley. Probably the only LT I look forward to watching in the league. Absolute mauler in every respect.


Joe Staley is one hell of a football player. Very complete LT right there that comes to play week in and week out. That said, not real sure I would call him a "mauler". Staley was my comparison for Bulaga on draft day and I'm sure most can remember my love for Bulaga that year. Staley is a hair more athletic but very much so a style/body match. Just like Bulaga, Staley can be had by good power if the tech gets out of line. Plays speed a little better than Bulaga though.


What LT would you consider a mauler then?


A player that can put NFL level comp on his back without all the stars needing to be in line OR any player that can put a "power-play" on his back. Ya just about never see a "mauler" playing LT in the NFL these days. Jake Long is/was a "mauler" but he is/was a elite RT playing good LT.

EDIT: If ya want to see the best that ever was a LT in this area. Get on Youtube and look up Tony Boselli. In a round about way, Boselli might be the reason why I do what I do for a living these day as well.


I remember a day when he threw around Bruce Smith like a rag doll. Shocked


I'm sure. Boselli was a true monster on the field. Damn shame he got hurt. IMO, at his peak Boselli was the best LT that ever played the game. There was a short time there when he was the best run blocker in the league as well as the best pass blocker. I highly doubt I will ever see that again.

I'm sure I have probably told this story on here before. But Boselli is a big reason why I now do what I do. Back when I was a young lad I was hanging out at pops crib with a close friend of mine and nothing to do. Dad gave us a coach feed of a USC VS ND football game and told us there was an All-American on there that we should find. We both went in and watch the film and came out and told dad that the LT was really something. Dad got a huge smile and said "good job, but the AA was the SR DE over him. That LT is a true FR and goes by the name Boselli. Remember that name. Kids going to be special".

Years later, pops is still looking for the next Boselli and if you walk into his house he still has that VHS tape sitting up above his fire place.
_________________
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 - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 21, 22, 23 ... 87, 88, 89  Next
Page 22 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