Start looking for a new coach...

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 2:10 am

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Good God almighty... Now the Shrekker has moved into desperation mode--deciding to--get this--blow it up and CHANGE THE POSITION OF EVERY FUCKING PLAYER ON THE O-LINE. That's right. Bulaga from RT to LT, Sitton from RG to LG, Lang from LG to RG and whatever scrub they can dredge up to play RT. That's gonna be good for continuity, huh? All because they failed to go after and pick up a legit LT when any were available... Rodgers rolls to his right out of the pocket probably 75% of the time--right into whomever the weak link of the line at RT whiffs on. Move the shit around and maybe it will stink less, eh?

I'm convinced these idiots didn't think this through at all until now...and are left scrambling on how to not look like incompetent assholes for not protecting the $130M man... Rolling Eyes

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by ffaralli Fri May 03, 2013 9:24 am

I just heard this, I'm stunned.
I always had a problem with them moving lineman around..... I think it hurt Sherrod as a rookie and it delayed Lang's development by a couple of years.
Sherrod is a tackle and Lang is a guard. That's it. A lot of times the body type will dictate a lot of that. Sherrod is longer, hence a tackle. Lang is thicker, the body of a guard or center.
Probably because they are trying to get by with one less lineman is why they do this.
These guys never had a clue to the O-line from the beginning. They came in here with that piece of crap zone blocking bullshit. O-line play to me is mano-e-mano. Power against power.
Not this sneaky shit cutting people off at the knees when they are not looking.
And they inherited Clifton, Wells, and Tauscher when they got here (not to mention Flanigan, Wahle, and Rivera).
And I'm no big fan of James Campen, either. Where is Larry Bechtel these days?

FF

by RingoCStarrQB Fri May 03, 2013 9:48 am

There was, and ever shall be........only ONE Forrest Gregg. GO PACKERs

by duck Fri May 03, 2013 11:44 am

HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 12:00 pm

Packers shuffling line, putting Bulaga, Sitton on
left side

Posted by Darin Gantt on May 3, 2013, 8:50 AM EDT
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
AP
After making a major
investment in their quarterback, the Packers are making a minor-looking
change in how they protect him.

But if it keeps [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
upright, it will be quite significant.

According to Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the
Packers plan to flip right tackle [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] to
left tackle, and swap left guard [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and right
guard [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

That will leave former left tackle Marshall
Newhouse, last year’s undrafted rookie [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and
2011 first-rounder [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
competing for the right tackle job.

“I sat down with Bryan and Josh on Monday and I told them I wanted to make
the move to where they’re on the left side,” McCarthy said. “Those
two are our most accomplished and experienced players. I told them about the
responsibilities and my expectations about playing the left side.

“Some of the things we’ll want to get into schematically as we move forward.
They were excited about it.”

Bulaga played left tackle in college, but had settled in on the right side.
But Newhouse was a disappointment and Sherrod hasn’t returned from a broken leg,
so they chose to go with more of a sure thing after giving Rodgers a $110
million contract extension.

That the Packers have been as successful as they have been without stability
up front speaks to Rodgers’ skill, but they hope by putting a more stable group
on his blind side, he’ll be better able to shine.

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 12:03 pm

duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

by duck Fri May 03, 2013 12:24 pm

_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 12:59 pm

ffaralli wrote:I just heard this, I'm stunned.
I always had a problem with them moving lineman around..... I think it hurt Sherrod as a rookie and it delayed Lang's development by a couple of years.
Sherrod is a tackle and Lang is a guard. That's it. A lot of times the body type will dictate a lot of that. Sherrod is longer, hence a tackle. Lang is thicker, the body of a guard or center.
Probably because they are trying to get by with one less lineman is why they do this.
These guys never had a clue to the O-line from the beginning. They came in here with that piece of crap zone blocking bullshit. O-line play to me is mano-e-mano. Power against power.
Not this sneaky shit cutting people off at the knees when they are not looking.
And they inherited Clifton, Wells, and Tauscher when they got here (not to mention Flanigan, Wahle, and Rivera).
And I'm no big fan of James Campen, either. Where is Larry Bechtel these days?

FF

I agree, FF... A typical O-lineman takes 2-3 years at the pro level to ingest the mechanics/footwork to make those processes instinctive enough to free up the mindshare beyond that to concentrate on exactly what is unfolding in front of them. Now you take players who have evolved beyond that--and you ask them to DO EVERYTHING IN TERMS OF FOOTWORK AND MECHANICS IN THE MIRROR FUCKING OPPOSITE to what has been burned into their skulls... ...and not just one player--mind you...but EVERY FUCKING PLAYER ON THE LINE and AT THE SAME TIME!

Beyond that--CONTINUITY is vital to an elite O-Line. Lineman don't operate as individual parts--but as UNITS WITHIN AN ASSEMBLY. One unit fails--and the domino's fall...

Both TT and McCarthy have always placed a premium on versatility in O-lineman. Generally speaking--I'm the first one to stand up in championing versatility--but in certain situations it's a drawback...and O-lineman is one of them. They miss the fucking boat here to be able to go with one less lineman on the roster at the expense of dedicated maulers who eat, breathe and sweat the depth of instinct that comes along with knowing/doing one thing--and one thing only...

As they say--the pudding holds the proof. As you correctly point out, FF--the Pack's O-line has been on balance--unacceptable throughout the TT/McCarthy era. Take away Wolf's picks (Clifton/Taucher) and it's hard to know how bad it would have really gotten...and a big part of it is the apparent lack of insight with these fuckclowns that you don't mix whiskey with wine if, in the end, it's your goal to splash a good bourbon across your tongue... The dumb asses are making bastard children out of every one of them... Cool

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 1:28 pm

duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

That sounds dandy across my ears, Duck...but the reality is that TT/MM have always operated in tandem. If McCarthy would have been banging the table for a legit LT--he would have gotten one...

by JnC4GB Fri May 03, 2013 1:33 pm

The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal.

Both Bulaga and Sherrod were 1st round draft picks. Certainly that's counts as some type of an effort...

Will this work or is it a bad plan? I have know idea, however, I do know that our QB has been sacked FAR more than any other QB in the NFL over the last two seasons. To simply plug along doing the same ol' same ol' would be idiotic.
Bulaga played LT in college but wasn't ready for that role as a rookie. He is not a rookie anymore. Just like with Mike Neal, it's time for the man to show his stuff. How it plays out...who the fuck knows?

Finally, we are still a long way from September. A veteran Offensive Tackle could still be in our future.

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 1:58 pm

JnC4GB wrote:The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal.

Both Bulaga and Sherrod were 1st round draft picks. Certainly that's counts as some type of an effort...

I'm talking about the present--THIS offseason, JnC... Bulaga and Sherrod are what they are and obviously what they are-has NOT proven to be the answer at LT. A wholesale fucking line shift at this point in McCarthy's tenure reaks of one thing and one thing only--DESPERATION... With all those first rounders and 7 years into the program--it should be a well-oiled machine by now--yet what is it? Something that McCarthy found the need to blow up--that's what it is...

by duck Fri May 03, 2013 2:01 pm

_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

That sounds dandy across my ears, Duck...but the reality is that TT/MM have always operated in tandem. If McCarthy would have been banging the table for a legit LT--he would have gotten one...

You can't have it both ways, HD. One of your signature opinions is that football organizations should follow their proper hierarchy. You've scolded other teams when their people step out of ranks.

Of course there is some symbiosis between any GM and coach; perhaps more than usual between MM and TT. However, player procurement is TT's job... not MM's... and that's where your venting should appropriately go.

And you know I'm right on this one.

by duck Fri May 03, 2013 2:04 pm

JnC4GB wrote:The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal.

Both Bulaga and Sherrod were 1st round draft picks. Certainly that's counts as some type of an effort...

Will this work or is it a bad plan? I have know idea, however, I do know that our QB has been sacked FAR more than any other QB in the NFL over the last two seasons. To simply plug along doing the same ol' same ol' would be idiotic.
Bulaga played LT in college but wasn't ready for that role as a rookie. He is not a rookie anymore. Just like with Mike Neal, it's time for the man to show his stuff. How it plays out...who the fuck knows?

Finally, we are still a long way from September. A veteran Offensive Tackle could still be in our future.

Ah, at last another calm voice.

HD is getting a little screechy lately. Perhaps, like the albino, he's in need of a little below-the-shorts attitude adjustment? Very Happy

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 2:11 pm

duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

That sounds dandy across my ears, Duck...but the reality is that TT/MM have always operated in tandem. If McCarthy would have been banging the table for a legit LT--he would have gotten one...

You can't have it both ways, HD. One of your signature opinions is that football organizations should follow their proper hierarchy. You've scolded other teams when their people step out of ranks.

Of course there is some symbiosis between any GM and coach; perhaps more than usual between MM and TT. However, player procurement is TT's job... not MM's... and that's where your venting should appropriately go.

And you know I'm right on this one.

If you're asking where the buck stops on this--yes--absolutely...this is on TT. Have I not been banging the table over TT's lack of insight in properly securing a free agent LT--and draft/develop is NOT the answer for a team evolved to where the Pack presently stands? However--my scorn is aplenty to cover both of these dickwads--as it has become clear over time that neither one of them truly understand the offensive line and what makes a great offensive lineman. It may be because the typical O-lineman is smarter than either of them--and it takes a whole lot more to be an elite O lineman than meets the eye...

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 2:38 pm

duck wrote:
JnC4GB wrote:The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal.

Both Bulaga and Sherrod were 1st round draft picks. Certainly that's counts as some type of an effort...

Will this work or is it a bad plan? I have know idea, however, I do know that our QB has been sacked FAR more than any other QB in the NFL over the last two seasons. To simply plug along doing the same ol' same ol' would be idiotic.
Bulaga played LT in college but wasn't ready for that role as a rookie. He is not a rookie anymore. Just like with Mike Neal, it's time for the man to show his stuff. How it plays out...who the fuck knows?

Finally, we are still a long way from September. A veteran Offensive Tackle could still be in our future.

Ah, at last another calm voice.

HD is getting a little screechy lately. Perhaps, like the albino, he's in need of a little below-the-shorts attitude adjustment?

LOL! You have no idea, silly man... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

However--I'll admit--the weather is taking it's toll. Woke up to yet another fucking blanket of white out there this morning. Is it not May? Oh well--if I can just make it another week--it's off to my Caribb happy place--ya mon... [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by duck Fri May 03, 2013 2:58 pm

_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:
JnC4GB wrote:The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal.

Both Bulaga and Sherrod were 1st round draft picks. Certainly that's counts as some type of an effort...

Will this work or is it a bad plan? I have know idea, however, I do know that our QB has been sacked FAR more than any other QB in the NFL over the last two seasons. To simply plug along doing the same ol' same ol' would be idiotic.
Bulaga played LT in college but wasn't ready for that role as a rookie. He is not a rookie anymore. Just like with Mike Neal, it's time for the man to show his stuff. How it plays out...who the fuck knows?

Finally, we are still a long way from September. A veteran Offensive Tackle could still be in our future.

Ah, at last another calm voice.

HD is getting a little screechy lately. Perhaps, like the albino, he's in need of a little below-the-shorts attitude adjustment?

LOL! You have no idea, silly man... [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

However--I'll admit--the weather is taking it's toll. Woke up to yet another fucking blanket of white out there this morning. Is it not May? Oh well--if I can just make it another week--it's off to my Caribb happy place--ya mon... [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Snow? in May? Ugh.

It's a perfect 75 degrees here in Oakland now. Our issue, however, is a lack of rain. It's been a month with hardly a drop... and we usually get some showers in April. Methinks we're in full-on drought mode. Sad

by milani Fri May 03, 2013 5:05 pm

I'm all for musical chairs..What's on first.

Look at it this way: The defenses won't have any 2012 film of these players at those positions. They could be in for quite a surprise.

Remember the parable of the mustard seed.

" Oh, ye of little faith."

IN TT WE TRUST

by Guest Fri May 03, 2013 5:20 pm

milani wrote:I'm all for musical chairs..What's on first.

IN TT WE TRUST

Any further questions, Duck?

Case? Consider yourself rested, bitch... Razz

by duck Fri May 03, 2013 5:38 pm

_HD_ wrote:
milani wrote:I'm all for musical chairs..What's on first.

IN TT WE TRUST

Any further questions, Duck?

Case? Consider yourself rested, bitch...

Here's a thought to ponder. If Mike Fucking Sherman could transform his team from a passing team to a formidable running team in a couple of short weeks in the wake of Favre's thumb injury, who says Mike McCarthy can't reassemble and reinvent his offense in several months?

Like I said, I wish we had a quality LT so this would be a moot point, but I have to admit I'm honestly intrigued by this line shake up. It could very well turn to shit but then again, maybe it will work better. Bottom line is I'm happier with Bulaga on the left than I am with Newhouse.

by RingoCStarrQB Fri May 03, 2013 6:40 pm

Sex and sex and sex........look at me.........I've been shattered.......(The Stones' 50 year anniversary tour) LOL LOL LOL.

Back to the offensive line discussion. Between all of the sacks and the lack of a decent running game......and Bulaga's and Sherrod's injuries I have to agree that the shift on the offensive line is a desperation move on McM's part. But then again what the hell can McM do other than try. Maybe this experiment will work. Maybe Lacy will rush for 1500 yards.......maybe Finley will play Pro Bowl type TE. Maybe maybe maybe. GO PACK

by ~Sheila~ Fri May 03, 2013 11:14 pm

RingoCStarrQB wrote:Sex and sex and sex........look at me.........I've been shattered.......(The Stones' 50 year anniversary tour) LOL LOL LOL.

Back to the offensive line discussion. Between all of the sacks and the lack of a decent running game......and Bulaga's and Sherrod's injuries I have to agree that the shift on the offensive line is a desperation move on McM's part. But then again what the hell can McM do other than try. Maybe this experiment will work. Maybe Lacy will rush for 1500 yards.......maybe Finley will play Pro Bowl type TE. Maybe maybe maybe. GO PACK

Lots of maybe's there, but one thing is for sure...The Stones will continue to rock on! lol [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

by MB20 Fri May 03, 2013 11:40 pm

duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

I guess the reasoning is that if one side of the line must absolutely suck, it might as well be the side that Rodgers can see.

Aside from Sitton, the TT/MM regime hasn't produced a truly good offensive lineman. I don't know if it's because TT isn't getting good talent, or MM/Campen and their stupid zone blocking scheme (can they please just ditch that bullshit already- it doesn't work) failing to develop talent, but this whole thing is just absurd.

by RingoCStarrQB Sat May 04, 2013 7:59 am

~Sheila~ wrote:
RingoCStarrQB wrote:Sex and sex and sex........look at me.........I've been shattered.......(The Stones' 50 year anniversary tour) LOL LOL LOL.

Back to the offensive line discussion. Between all of the sacks and the lack of a decent running game......and Bulaga's and Sherrod's injuries I have to agree that the shift on the offensive line is a desperation move on McM's part. But then again what the hell can McM do other than try. Maybe this experiment will work. Maybe Lacy will rush for 1500 yards.......maybe Finley will play Pro Bowl type TE. Maybe maybe maybe. GO PACK

Lots of maybe's there, but one thing is for sure...The Stones will continue to rock on! lol [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Shattered, shattered
Love and hope and sex and dreams are still surviving on the streets
And look at me, I'm in tatters
I'm shattered
Shattered

Friends are so alarming, my lover's never charming
Life's just a cocktail party on the street, Big Apple
People dressed in plastic bags (Shadoobie, shattered)
Directing traffic, some kind of fashion
Shattered

Laughter, joy, and loneliness and sex and sex and sex and sex
And look at me, I'm in tatters
I'm shattered
Shattered

All this chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter, chitter-chatter 'bout
Shmatta, shmatta, shmatta, I can't give it away on 7th Avenue (Shadoobie, shattered)
This town's been wearing tatters, uh-huh
Shadoobie, shattered

Work and work for love and sex
And ain't you hungry for success, success, success, success
Does it matter?
Shattered, does it matter?
Shattered

Ahh look at me, I'm shattered
I'm shattered
Look at me, I'm shattered
Shattered

Pride and joy and greed and sex, that's what makes our town the best
Pride and joy and dirty dreams and still surviving on the street (Tatters)
And look at me, I'm in tatters
I've been battered (Shattered)
What does it matter? (Shattered)
Does it matter? (Shattered)
Uh-huh, does it matter?
Uh-huh, I'm shattered
Mmm, shattered

Shadoobie, shattered
Shadoobie, shattered
Shadoobie, shattered, shattered

Don't you know the crime rate's going up, up, up, up, up (Shadoobie, shattered)
To live in this town, you must be tough, tough, tough, tough, tough, tough, tough (Shadoobie, shattered, shadoobie, shattered, shattered)
You got rats on the west side, bed bugs uptown (Shadoobie, shattered)
What a mess, this town's in tatters, I've been shattered (Shadoobie, shattered)
My brain's been battered, splattered all over Manhattan (Shadoobie, shattered)
Shadoobie, shattered, shattered
Shadoobie, shattered
Shadoobie, shattered
Shadoobie, shattered

Uh-huh, this town's full of money grabbers (Shadoobie, shattered, shattered)
Go ahead, bite the Big Apple, don't mind the maggots, uh-huh (Shadoobie, shattered, shadoobie, shattered)
Shadoobie, my brain's been battered (Shadoobie, shattered, shattered)
My friends they come around they (Shadoobie, shattered)
Flatter, flatter, flatter, flatter, flatter, flatter, flatter (Shadoobie, shattered)
Pile it up, pile it up, pile it high on the platter (Shadoobie, shattered, shattered)

by milani Sat May 04, 2013 10:16 am

MB20 wrote:
duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

I guess the reasoning is that if one side of the line must absolutely suck, it might as well be the side that Rodgers can see.

Aside from Sitton, the TT/MM regime hasn't produced a truly good offensive lineman. I don't know if it's because TT isn't getting good talent, or MM/Campen and their stupid zone blocking scheme (can they please just ditch that bullshit already- it doesn't work) failing to develop talent, but this whole thing is just absurd.

I thought we were moving in a good direction with DeJuan Harris. When you bust one for 20 yards and a TD against the 9ers you've done something right. But we have been a passing team for the last 5 years. We stop running the ball even when we do run it with some success. Rodgers even asked last season if we really need to run the ball well. Our line has not been much of a run blocking group for many years. Pass protection has been their no.1 motivation.

Lombardi ran, ran, ran in Starr's early years. He built a line to do just that. But in Starr's later years as Hornung and Taylor were not as swift he moved the offense to just as much passing and play action. Teams had to pick their poison. We need to move our offense into that blend mode just like teams that were in the last SB.

by duck Sat May 04, 2013 12:53 pm

milani wrote:
MB20 wrote:
duck wrote:
_HD_ wrote:
duck wrote:HD and FF, it's not that outrageous; in fact I think it's a reasonable and perhaps even sensible coaching move.

First, I'm on record for being appalled at the fact that we didn't get a stud LT somewhere and were seemingly planning to go forward with Newhouse protecting the franchise. However, that's on TT not MM.

MM has no choice now but to utilize his existing players most advantageously. Clearly LT is the most important position and clearly Bulaga (if healthy) is his best tackle. It makes sense to try him out there. I even suggested yesterday that that's what they might do.

As far as the other moving parts, it's not that shocking. Offensive linemen frequently flip sides; we've seen it many times on the Packers when starters went down with injuries. I'm not saying I would propose such wholesale changes, but I'm not appalled or shocked by it either.

Put down the torches and pitchforks, guys. These guys have months to work out the new arrangement. It might even be an improvement.

One thing is for sure... it's better than having Marshall Newhouse protecting Rodgers blind side.

You're missing the point, Duck... The whole reason the Shrekker finds a yes--radical--wholesale disruption of this line necessary is because of the failure to, by all accounts, even make the effort to properly secure a legit LT through any means at their disposal. Instead--they're busy throwing $13M/year at Greg Jennings. Now he is resorting to the extreme of what maybe even has never been done in the NFL... Ridiculous. If they found LT to be that important (as they should) then they should have gone out and made it a priority in the off-season to score someone who can play it, eh?

I understand what you're saying, HD. However, your beef should be with TT not MM. It was the general manager who failed to fill the LT spot appropriately and all the coach is trying to do is make the best of his existing players.

Yet your post is entitled "Start Looking for a New Coach."

I guess the reasoning is that if one side of the line must absolutely suck, it might as well be the side that Rodgers can see.

Aside from Sitton, the TT/MM regime hasn't produced a truly good offensive lineman. I don't know if it's because TT isn't getting good talent, or MM/Campen and their stupid zone blocking scheme (can they please just ditch that bullshit already- it doesn't work) failing to develop talent, but this whole thing is just absurd.

I thought we were moving in a good direction with DeJuan Harris. When you bust one for 20 yards and a TD against the 9ers you've done something right. But we have been a passing team for the last 5 years. We stop running the ball even when we do run it with some success. Rodgers even asked last season if we really need to run the ball well. Our line has not been much of a run blocking group for many years. Pass protection has been their no.1 motivation.

Lombardi ran, ran, ran in Starr's early years. He built a line to do just that. But in Starr's later years as Hornung and Taylor were not as swift he moved the offense to just as much passing and play action. Teams had to pick their poison. We need to move our offense into that blend mode just like teams that were in the last SB.

Milani, with your encyclopedia-like memory I'm surprised you didn't flush this out a little bit more. It wasn't so much that Hornung and Taylor had slowed down at the end of the Lombardi era. They were gone. Neither played with the 1967 Packer Super Bowl team. Injuries at running back decimated the ground game that year too, as castoff Chuck Mercein became the go-to guy in the playoffs.

In both the 1966 and 1967 playoffs it was Bart Starr's passing that carried the team -- NOT the running game. I had a long discussion with the Captain about this many years ago. After I pointed out to him that Bart Starr's playoff QB rating of 104.8 dwarfed Joe Montana's 95.6, he countered that the Packers were a primarily running team and the defenses weren't ready for Starr's passing. I tried to explain to him that that may have been true for the first couple of Packer titles but in the later years, the Packers relied on Starr.

Naturally, the stubborn Montana-worshiper wouldn't acknowledged the facts and likewise, most historians continue to suck Montana's dick while minimizing Starr's achievement. However, the truth is that Bart Starr had a playoff QB rating almost ten points higher than "Super" Joe -- and Starr played in an era in which those ratings league-wise were about 20 points lower than they were in Montana's era, after the NFL instituted rules to favor the passing game. Starr, who threw a grand total of three picks in ten playoff games, also made Montana look like an interception machine. Even better, Starr's 9-1 record gives him a .900 winning percentage -- the best in NFL history and way way ahead of "Super" Joe. Starr also tops Montana in 5 NFL titles to 4.

Starr's 104.8 playoff QB rating remains #1 in NFL history, slightly ahead of Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers.

by Sponsored content

Start looking for a new coach...

Start looking for a new coach...

Agreed

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...

Re: Start looking for a new coach...